Can we stop talking about religion?
2013/6/18 Alberto G. Corona <[email protected]> > "Ample physical evidence shows that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the single > most important climate-relevant greenhouse gas in Earth¡¯s atmosphere" > > First phrase, first lie. The single most important climate-relevant blah > blah blah is water vapour, not CO2 by a great margin. It makes about 90% > of the global warming effect. > > I mean that this is a lie because they supposedly are scientists and they > must know it. > > Anyway, this is bad news for those that, like me, receive Exxon checks, > we need more antropogenic alarmists ;)))) > > This list is becoming truly about everything. > > > 2013/6/15 <[email protected]> > > It's amazing how much damage the Anthropogenic CO2 can do to the Solar >> Photosphere. ;-) >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: smitra <[email protected]> >> To: everything-list <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sat, Jun 15, 2013 10:43 am >> Subject: Re: On Global Warming----The sun is getting a little hotter >> >> Not assumed to be caused, but known to be caused. The science is clear, >> it's only that the vast majority of the population is science >> illiterate to the point that many people with university degrees in >> economics, engineering etc. don't know much about physics and are >> susceptible to the same nonsense as most lay persons. >> http://www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6002/356.full >> >> ABSTRACT >> >> Ample physical evidence shows that carbon dioxide (CO2) is the single >> most important climate-relevant greenhouse gas in Earth¡¯s atmosphere. >> This is because CO2, like ozone, N2O, CH4, and chlorofluorocarbons, >> does not condense and precipitate from the atmosphere at current >> climate temperatures, whereas water vapor can and does. Noncondensing >> greenhouse gases, which account for 25% of the total terrestrial >> greenhouse effect, thus serve to provide the stable temperature >> structure that sustains the current levels of atmospheric water vapor >> and clouds via feedback processes that account for the remaining 75% of >> the greenhouse effect. Without the radiative forcing supplied by CO2 >> and the other noncondensing greenhouse gases, the terrestrial >> greenhouse would collapse, plunging the global climate into an icebound >> Earth state. >> >> It often is stated that water vapor is the chief greenhouse gas (GHG) >> in the atmosphere. For example, it has been asserted that ¡°about 98% >> of the natural greenhouse effect is due to water vapour and stratiform >> clouds with CO2 contributing less than 2%¡± (1). If true, this would >> imply that changes in atmospheric CO2 are not important influences on >> the natural greenhouse capacity of Earth, and that the continuing >> increase in CO2 due to human activity is therefore not relevant to >> climate change. This misunderstanding is resolved through simple >> examination of the terrestrial greenhouse. >> >> The difference between the nominal global mean surface temperature (TS >> = 288 K) and the global mean effective temperature (TE = 255 K) is a >> common measure of the terrestrial greenhouse effect (GT = TS ¨C TE = 33 >> K). Assuming global energy balance, TE is also the Planck radiation >> equivalent of the 240 W/m2 of global mean solar radiation absorbed by >> Earth. >> >> The Sun is the source of energy that heats Earth. Besides direct solar >> heating of the ground, there is also indirect longwave (LW) warming >> arising from the thermal radiation that is emitted by the ground, then >> absorbed locally within the atmosphere, from which it is re-emitted in >> both upward and downward directions, further heating the ground and >> maintaining the temperature gradient in the atmosphere. This radiative >> interaction is the greenhouse effect, which was first discovered by >> Joseph Fourier in 1824 (2), experimentally verified by John Tyndall in >> 1863 (3), and quantified by Svante Arrhenius in 1896 (4). These studies >> established long ago that water vapor and CO2 are indeed the principal >> terrestrial GHGs. Now, further consideration shows that CO2 is the one >> that controls climate change. >> >> CO2 is a well-mixed gas that does not condense or precipitate from the >> atmosphere. Water vapor and clouds, on the other hand, are highly >> active components of the climate system that respond rapidly to changes >> in temperature and air pressure by evaporating, condensing, and >> precipitating. This identifies water vapor and clouds as the fast >> feedback processes in the climate system. >> >> Radiative forcing experiments assuming doubled CO2 and a 2% increase in >> solar irradiance (5) show that water vapor provides the strongest >> climate feedback of any of the atmospheric GHGs, but that it is not the >> cause (forcing) of global climate change. The response of the climate >> system to an applied forcing is determined to be the sum of the direct >> (no-feedback) response to the applied forcing and the induced radiative >> response that is attributable to the feedback process contributions. >> The ratio of the total climate response to the no-feedback response is >> commonly known as the feedback factor, which incorporates all the >> complexities of the climate system feedback interactions. For the >> doubled CO2 and the 2% solar irradiance forcings, for which the direct >> no-feedback responses of the global surface temperature are 1.2¡ã and >> 1.3¡ãC, respectively, the ~4¡ãC surface warming implies respective >> feedback factors of 3.3 and 3.0 (5). >> >> Because the solar-thermal energy balance of Earth [at the top of the >> atmosphere (TOA)] is maintained by radiative processes only, and >> because all the global net advective energy transports must equal zero, >> it follows that the global average surface temperature must be >> determined in full by the radiative fluxes arising from the patterns of >> temperature and absorption of radiation. This then is the basic >> underlying physics that explains the close coupling that exists between >> TOA radiative fluxes, the greenhouse effect, and the global mean >> surface temperature. >> >> An improved understanding of the relative importance of the different >> contributors to the greenhouse effect comes from radiative flux >> experiments that we performed using Goddard Institute for Space Studies >> (GISS) ModelE (6). Figure 1 depicts the essence of these calculations, >> including the separation of the greenhouse contributors into feedback >> and forcing categories. >> >> In round numbers, water vapor accounts for about 50% of Earth¡¯s >> greenhouse effect, with clouds contributing 25%, CO2 20%, and the minor >> GHGs and aerosols accounting for the remaining 5%. Because CO2, O3, >> N2O, CH4, and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) do not condense and >> precipitate, noncondensing GHGs constitute the key 25% of the radiative >> forcing that supports and sustains the entire terrestrial greenhouse >> effect, the remaining 75% coming as fast feedback contributions from >> water vapor and clouds. >> >> We used the GISS 4¡ã ¡Á 5¡ã ModelE to calculate changes in >> instantaneous LW TOA flux (annual global averages) in experiments where >> atmospheric constituents (including water vapor, clouds, CO2, O3, N2O, >> CH4, CFCs, and aerosols) were added to or subtracted from an >> equilibrium atmosphere with a given global temperature structure, one >> constituent at a time for a 1-year period. Decreases in outgoing TOA >> flux for each constituent relative to the empty or the full-component >> atmosphere define the bounds for the relative impact on the total >> greenhouse effect. Had the overlapping absorption been negligible, the >> sum of the flux differences would have been equal to the LW flux >> equivalent of the total greenhouse effect (GF = ¦ÒTS^4 ¨C ¦ÒTE^4 = 150 >> W/m2), where ¦Ò is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. We found the >> single-addition flux differences to be overestimated by a factor of >> 1.36, whereas in the single-subtraction cases, the sum of the TOA flux >> differences was underestimated by a factor of 0.734. By normalizing >> these fractional contributions to match the full-atmosphere value of >> GF, we obtained the fractional response contributions shown in Fig. 1. >> >> Because of overlapping absorption, the fractional attribution of the >> greenhouse effect is to some extent qualitative (as shown by the dashed >> and dotted extremum lines in Fig. 1), even though the spectral integral >> is a full and accurate determination of the atmospheric greenhouse >> strength for the specified global temperature structure. Still, the >> fractional attribution is sufficiently precise to clearly differentiate >> the radiative flux contributions due to the noncondensable GHGs from >> those arising from the fast feedback processes. This allows an >> empirical determination of the climate feedback factor as the ratio of >> the total global flux change to the flux change that is attributable to >> the radiative forcing due to the noncondensing GHGs. This empirical >> determination leads then to a climate feedback factor of 4, based on >> the noncondensing GHG forcing accounting for 25% of the outgoing flux >> reduction at the TOA for the full-constituent atmosphere. This implies >> that Earth¡¯s climate system operates with strong positive feedback >> that arises from the forcing-induced changes in the condensable species. >> >> A direct consequence of this combination of feedback by the condensable >> and forcing by the noncondensable constituents of the atmospheric >> greenhouse is that the terrestrial greenhouse effect would collapse >> were it not for the presence of these noncondensing GHGs. If the global >> atmospheric temperatures were to fall to as low as TS = TE, the >> Clausius-Clapeyron relation would imply that the sustainable amount of >> atmospheric water vapor would become less than 10% of the current >> atmospheric value. This would result in (radiative) forcing reduced by >> ~30 W/m2, causing much of the remaining water vapor to precipitate, >> thus enhancing the snow/ice albedo to further diminish the absorbed >> solar radiation. Such a condition would inevitably lead to runaway >> glaciation, producing an ice ball Earth. >> >> Claims that removing all CO2 from the atmosphere ¡°would lead to a 1¡ãC >> decrease in global warming¡± (7), or ¡°by 3.53¡ãC when 40% cloud cover >> is assumed¡± [8] are still being heard. A clear demonstration is needed >> to show that water vapor and clouds do indeed behave as fast feedback >> processes and that their atmospheric distributions are regulated by the >> sustained radiative forcing due to the noncondensing GHGs. To this end, >> we performed a simple climate experiment with the GISS 2¡ã ¡Á 2.5¡ã AR5 >> version of ModelE, using the Q-flux ocean with a mixed-layer depth of >> 250 m, zeroing out all the noncondensing GHGs and aerosols. >> >> The results, summarized in Fig. 2, show unequivocally that the >> radiative forcing by noncondensing GHGs is essential to sustain the >> atmospheric temperatures that are needed for significant levels of >> water vapor and cloud feedback. Without this noncondensable GHG >> forcing, the physics of this model send the climate of Earth plunging >> rapidly and irrevocably to an icebound state, though perhaps not to >> total ocean freezeover. >> >> The scope of the climate impact becomes apparent in just 10 years. >> During the first year alone, global mean surface temperature falls by >> 4.6¡ãC. After 50 years, the global temperature stands at ¨C21¡ãC, a >> decrease of 34.8¡ãC. Atmospheric water vapor is at ~10% of the control >> climate value (22.6 to 2.2 mm). Global cloud cover increases from its >> 58% control value to more than 75%, and the global sea ice fraction >> goes from 4.6% to 46.7%, causing the planetary albedo of Earth to also >> increase from ~29% to 41.8%. This has the effect of reducing the >> absorbed solar energy to further exacerbate the global cooling. >> >> After 50 years, a third of the ocean surface still remains ice-free, >> even though the global surface temperature is colder than ¨C21¡ãC. At >> tropical latitudes, incident solar radiation is sufficient to keep the >> ocean from freezing. Although this thermal oasis within an otherwise >> icebound Earth appears to be stable, further calculations with an >> interactive ocean would be needed to verify the potential for long-term >> stability. The surface temperatures in Fig. 3 are only marginally >> warmer than 1¡ãC within the remaining low-latitude heat island. >> >> From the foregoing, it is clear that CO2 is the key atmospheric gas >> that exerts principal control over the strength of the terrestrial >> greenhouse effect. Water vapor and clouds are fast-acting feedback >> effects, and as such are controlled by the radiative forcings supplied >> by the noncondensing GHGs. There is telling evidence that atmospheric >> CO2 also governs the temperature of Earth on geological time scales, >> suggesting the related question of what the geological processes that >> control atmospheric CO2 are. The geological evidence of glaciation at >> tropical latitudes from 650 to 750 million years ago supports the >> snowball Earth hypothesis (9), and by inference, that escape from the >> snowball Earth condition is also achievable. >> >> On million-year time scales, volcanoes are the principal source of >> atmospheric CO2, and rock weathering is the principal sink, with the >> biosphere acting as both source and sink (10). Because the CO2 sources >> and sinks operate independently, the atmospheric level of CO2 can >> fluctuate. If the atmospheric CO2 level were to fall below its critical >> value, snowball Earth conditions can result. >> >> Antarctic and Greenland ice core data show atmospheric CO2 fluctuations >> between 180 to 300 parts per million (ppm) over the >> glacial-interglacial cycles during the past 650,000 years (11). The >> relevant physical processes that turn the CO2 control knob on >> thousand-year time scales between glacial and interglacial extremes are >> not fully understood, but appear to involve both the biosphere and the >> ocean chemistry, including a significant role for Milankovitch >> variations of the Earth-orbital parameters. >> >> Besides CO2, methane is another potent greenhouse control knob, being >> implicated in the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximummass extinction 55 >> million years ago, when global warming by up to 5¡ãC (12) occurred >> because of a massive release of methane from the disintegration of >> seafloor clathrates (13, 14). Methane is the second most important >> noncondensing GHG after CO2. Of the 2.9 W/m2 of GHG radiative forcing >> from 1750 to 2000, CO2 contributed 1.5 W/m2, methane 0.55 W/m2, and >> CFCs 0.3 W/m2, with the rest coming from N2O and ozone (15). All of >> these increases in noncondensing GHG forcing are attributable to human >> activity (16). >> >> Climate control knobs on the solar side of the energy balance ledger >> include the steady growth in luminosity since the beginning of the >> Solar System (from about 70% of present luminosity, depending on the >> postulated early solar mass loss), as hydrogen is consumed in nuclear >> reactions in the solar interior (17, 18). Milankovitch variations of >> the Earth-orbital parameters, which alter the relative seasonal >> distribution as well as the intensity of incident solar radiation >> within the polar regions, are another important solar energy control >> knob that is intimately associated with glacial-interglacial cycles of >> climate change. For solar irradiance changes over the past several >> centuries, an increase by about 0.1 W/m2 is inferred since the time of >> the Maunder minimum, based on trends in sunspot activity and other >> proxies (19). >> >> Of the climate control knobs relevant to current climate, those on the >> solar side of the energy balance ledger show only negligible impact. >> Several decades of solar irradiance monitoring have not detected any >> long-term trends in solar irradiance beyond the 11-year oscillation >> associated with the solar sunspot cycle. Large volcanic eruptions can >> happen at any time, but no substantial eruptions have occurred since >> the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991. >> >> In a broader perspective, CO2 greenhouses also operate on Mars and >> Venus, because both planets possess atmospheres with substantial >> amounts of CO2. The atmospheric greenhouse effect requires that a >> substantial fraction of the incident solar radiation must be absorbed >> at the ground in order to make the indirect greenhouse heating of the >> ground surface possible. Greenhouse parameters and relative surface >> pressure (PS) for Mars, Earth, and Venus are summarized in Table 1. >> >> Earth is unique among terrestrial planets in having a greenhouse effect >> in which water vapor provides strong amplification of the heat-trapping >> action of the CO2 greenhouse. Also, N2 and O2, although possessing no >> substantial absorption bands of their own, are actually important >> contributors to the total greenhouse effect because of >> pressure-broadening of CO2 absorption lines, as well as by providing >> the physical structure within which the absorbing gases can interact >> with the radiation field. >> >> The anthropogenic radiative forcings that fuel the growing terrestrial >> greenhouse effect continue unabated. The continuing high rate of >> atmospheric CO2 increase is particularly worrisome, because the present >> CO2 level of 390 ppm is far in excess of the 280 ppm that is more >> typical for the interglacial maximum, and still the atmospheric CO2 >> control knob is now being turned faster than at any time in the >> geological record (20). The concern is that we are well past even the >> 300- to 350-ppm target level for atmospheric CO2, beyond which >> dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system would exceed >> the 25% risk tolerance for impending degradation of land and ocean >> ecosystems, sea-level rise, and inevitable disruption of socioeconomic >> and food-producing infrastructure (21, 22). Furthermore, the >> atmospheric residence time of CO2 is exceedingly long, being measured >> in thousands of years (23). This makes the reduction and control of >> atmospheric CO2 a serious and pressing issue, worthy of real-time >> attention. >> >> >> >> Citeren Roger Clough <[email protected]>: >> >> > >> > On Global Warming----The sun is getting a little hotter >> > >> > Up to the present day, studies of global warming were >> > based on CO2 levels in the atmosphere, assumed to be caused by >> > automobiles (the supposed greenhouse effect). >> > But more resent studies show that total solar irradiation (TSI) -- >> > solar radiation coming from outside of the atmosphere- not CO2 levels-- >> > is the driving force: >> > >> > http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/06/soon-and-briggs-global-warming-fanatics-take-note-sunspots-do-impact-climate/ >> > >> > >> > >> > C02 levels are not reliable indicators of what causes surface >> > temperature warming (the supposed greenhouse effect) ? >> > . >> > Why ? Because some of the CO2 in the atmosphere is there because as >> > the earth warms, the >> > oceans warm and CO2 gases sare less soluble in warmer water, so fizle out >> > into the atmosphere. So it is doubtful to say that current levels of CO2 >> > are entirely from automobiles. >> > >> > So current scientific evalutations as in the graph below do not rely on CO2 >> > measurements, they use solar radiation which is not influenced by C02 >> > levels >> > and relate that instead to surface gtemperatures. >> > >> > The total solar radiation (TSI) is not obtained from measurements >> > made on earth, so >> > it isn't supposed to include greenshouse gas effects. It is measured >> > these days by satellite, >> > but is reconconstructed from pre-satellite days (<1979 ) based on a model >> > based on the number of sunspots. >> > >> > http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_article&access=standard&Itemid=129&url=/articles/aa/abs/2007/19/aa6725-06/aa6725-06.html >> > >> > "Reconstruction of solar total irradiance since 1700 from the surface >> > magnetic flux >> > N. A. Krivova, L. Balmaceda, and S. K. Solanki >> > >> > Max-Planck-Institut f? Sonnensystemforschung, Max-Planck-Str. 2, >> > 37191 Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany >> > e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> > (Received 9 November 2006 / Accepted 23 February 2007) >> > >> > Abstract >> > Context.Total solar irradiance changes by about 0.1% between solar >> > activity maximum and minimum. Accurate measurements of this quantity >> > are only available since 1978 and do not provide information on >> > longer-term secular trends. >> > Aims.In order to reliably evaluate the Sun's role in recent global >> > climate change, longer time series are, however, needed. They can >> > only be assessed with the help of suitable models. >> > Methods.The total solar irradiance is reconstructed from the end of >> > the Maunder minimum to the present based on variations of the surface >> > distribution of the solar magnetic field. The latter is calculated >> > from the historical record of the sunspot number using a simple but >> > consistent physical model. >> > Results.Our model successfully reproduces three independent data >> > sets: total solar irradiance measurements available since 1978, total >> > photospheric magnetic flux since 1974 and the open magnetic flux >> > since 1868 empirically reconstructed using the geomagnetic aa-index. >> > The model predicts an increase in the solar total irradiance since >> > the Maunder minimum of $1.3^{\rm +0.2}_{\rm -0.4}$ Wm-2. " >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Roger Clough NIST (ret.) 3/30/2013 >> > "Coincidences are God's way of remaining anonymous." >> > - Albert Einstein >> > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > >> > >> > >> > Dr. Roger Clough NIST (ret.) 6/15/2013 >> > See my Leibniz site at >> > http://team.academia.edu/RogerClough >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________________ >> > DreamMail - The first mail software supporting source tracking >> > www.dreammail.org >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "Everything List" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >> > send an email to [email protected]. >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email >> to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > > > -- > Alberto. > -- Alberto. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
