In equilibrium, the temperature cannot exceed what is determined by energy balance….unless Goddard is also claiming to have circumvented conservation of energy too. As I discussed in the last thread, you can see GHG’s reducing the outgoing radiation from space. This is very basic physics, and if you could show why it is wrong you would invalidate much of what we know about atmospheric physics, satellite retrieval, quantum physics, etc.
Conservation of energy tells us that over time the amount of outgoing radiation must be equal to what is received from the Sun. Unless the oceans are heating (which they haven’t been the last few years) the amount of outgoing LW must be equal to the amount of incoming SW minus the amount of reflected SW.
Let’s assume it is true that you can see GHG’s reducing the outgoing radiation from space.
As shown in threads passim, GHGs have no effect on the adiabatic lapse rate (unless they condense..but then, it’s not their GH properties we’re talking about). Therefore, they have no effect in the troposphere.
The only place where they can effectively act (as in, reducing the outgoing radiation) is in the layers above the troposphere.
Wonder if there’s any study confirming that?
I think GHGs have a strong effect on the troposphere. For instance, a cloudy humid winter night is much warmer than a clear one.
The trouble with water is that it condenses. Are you aware of any non-condensing GHG having any effect on tropospheric temperatures?
If we filled the VAB with CO2 would it be any warmer at the bottom?
H2O is doing its work!
The time of year has nothing to do with your claim. You can leave out Winter and the claim is still true and has been experienced!