The World’s Smartest Scientist

3 Responses to The World’s Smartest Scientist

1. Gordon Vigurs says:

   January 11, 2024 at 9:28 am

   According to Kirchoff’s Law what is absorbed by a body, whether greenhouse gas or not, is re-radiated. It is absurd to imagine that molecules of carbon dioxide have a sense of direction by which they radiate preferentially downwards, so ‘trapping’ heat is a nonsense, at least under equilibrium conditions. Whatever happens, at equilibrium the outwards irradiance must equal the solar constant modified by the albedo, otherwise power is being generated from nothing. The outgoing irradiance may be distributed differently in wavelength, but the two totals must be the same. Any observed difference arises because we are observing a system which is not in equilibrium, but changing cyclically due to a vast number of potential dynamic modes excited by external influences (a guitar string cannot pluck itself).

   Reply
   • Gordon Vigurs says:

     January 11, 2024 at 9:46 am

     The process of absorption and re-radiation by a greenhouse gas is essentially random, so it destroys the phase coherence of the radiation which is why we cannot see the IR source through a flask filled with CO2 in the bogus bottle trick used to hoodwink the unwary. A community that cannot tell the difference between energy and power can hardly be expected to get to grips with the concept of entropy.

     Reply
2. Ulric Lyons says:

   January 12, 2024 at 9:56 pm

   Global circulation models predict increasingly positive NAO/AO conditions with rising CO2 forcing, which can only drive a colder AMO and Arctic. The models are the basis of the UK Met Office climate projections, which predict warmer drier summers and milder wetter winters for the UK.

   https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html

   Reply