Solar Radiation Sufficient! No Greenhouse Effect of Certain Atmospheric Gases!

Written by Dr Jerry L Krause on November 6, 2016. Posted in Current News

Since its inception Principia Scientific International (PSI) has published many articles attempting to discredit, if not refute, the hypothesis termed the greenhouse effect of certain atmospheric gases (GHE).  Recently there has been a fury (too many to cite) of articles which seem to be getting closer to accomplishing this feat.  However, most all these articles are based upon reasoned arguments.  I do not consider the Science founded by Galileo and Newton to have be based upon reasoned argument.  The science founded by Galileo and Newton is based upon scientific laws.

What is a scientific law?  First, before defining a scientific law, it seems useful, no necessary, to consider a bit of confusion which seems to exist as to what Science is, or does.  This confusion possibly exists because Galileo, Newton, and their commentaries were better known to be natural philosophers instead of simply as being scientists.

Since a common definition of a philosopher is one who seeks to learn the Truth, some consider Science to be a method used to discover the Truth.  William M. Briggs, in a recent PSI article—http://principia-scientific.org/no-scientific-method/—stated:  “There is no method particular to Science to discover the Truth.”  Richard Feynman, in an address at the 1955 fall meeting of the National Academy of Sciences reminded his audience that “scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty—some most unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain.

A scientific law is merely a summary of similar observations for which there has never been observed an exception.  It is not a hypothesis, not a theory, not an explanation; it merely predicts what will be observed in specific circumstances.  It cannot be proven by reason and it can only be disproved by an observation that is an exception to the summary.  Hence, as Einstein stated:  “No amount of experimentation can ever prove right, a single experiment can prove me wrong.” So, it seems no amount of observation (experimentation) can ever prove a scientific law, a hypothesis, a theory, an explanation to be the Truth, but a single observation (experimental result) can prove each of them to be False.

Given this input from scientists, Karl Popper, a 20^th Century philosopher of Science, concluded that any proposed Scientific hypothesis has to have a testable prediction (result) to be a viable hypothesis.  The GHE hypothesis has such testable result which is well-accepted by its proponents.  It is that if there were no greenhouse gases capable of absorbing the radiation being emitted by the earth’s surface due to its temperature, the earth’s average temperature would be about 33^oC less than its observed average temperature.  So, all one has to do to prove the GHE hypothesis to be false is to refer to observations of the earth’s natural system which demonstrate that the earth’s average temperature cannot be less that which is observed.

In a previous article—http://principia-scientific.org/new-scientific-law-greenhouse-effect/—I had called attention to a scientific law of meteorology that had not yet recognized as being a scientific law.  It was:  “The surface temperature of an object, at thermal equilibrium with the atmosphere in contact with it, can be no lower than the dewpoint temperature (the temperature at which the atmosphere is saturated with water vapor) of the atmosphere in contact with it.”  Since the average dewpoint temperature of the atmosphere has to be equal to, greater than the average temperature of the earth and this dewpoint temperature had nothing to do with water’s ability to absorb a portion of the radiation being emitted by the earth’s surface, I momentarily considered that is scientific law proved the GHE hypothesis to be false.

However, the proponents of the GHE quickly pointed out that the current dewpoint temperature was only due to the earth’s greater than expected temperature.  Which I had to accept to be valid argument.

Then I discovered that I and many others had overlooked something much more obvious than the scientific law involving the atmosphere’s dewpoint temperature.  Another quote attributed to Einstein is:  “The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.”  I have no desire to hide the fact that Carl Allen Brehmer drew my attention to an observed fact about which Anthony Bright-Paul later wrote:  “Let’s take the Sahara. The Sun shines down and the radiation passes through the Oxygen and Nitrogen that makes up 99{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of the atmosphere and encounters the surface of the Planet – in this case sand. We all know that radiation has to encounter mass to produce heat. So the sands get pretty hot. You can see David Attenborough in one of his films standing there and saying that the temperature of the sand was circa 70ºC and the air above it was 40ºC. Pretty damn hot, eh?” (http://principia-scientific.org/facebook-physics-heat-retention/)

Actually, there are two observed facts which are overlooked; one is commonly known and the other not so commonly known.  The first is the maximum diurnal air temperature of 40ºC (104^oF) which has been observed at many locations as a record temperature for a given day of the year.  But does anyone doubt that it could be common every day maximum temperature for the Sahara Desert?  The second is the maximum temperature, 70ºC (158ºF), of the desert sand.

Carl, an amateur scientist, did an experiment in which he measured the air temperature and the topsoil temperature continuously from mid-June to mid-July in 2012 somewhere in the vicinity of Chino Valley, AZ, USA.  During this period he observed an average maximum diurnal topsoil (surface?) temperature of about 55ºC (131ºF) and an average maximum diurnal air temperature of about 34ºC (93ºF).

There can be little doubt that the maximum temperatures referred to by Anthony and observed by Carl are solely due to the incident solar radiation upon the earth’s surface at these two different locations.  Hence, there can be little doubt that these maximum temperatures could not be 33ºC less if there were no greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.  It seems clear that maximum temperature of a day is due to ‘sunshine’ and the minimum possible temperature of a day is due to the atmosphere’s dewpoint temperature.  Hence, common observations prove the GHE hypothesis to be absolutely false.  And there can be no argument about this.

Trackback from your site.