You said “. When the southern hemisphere is tilted towards the sun, we have more direct sunlight and more of it (longer days). When it is tilted away from the sun, we have less direct sunlight and less of it (shorter days).” I hope that some of your colleagues can straighten you out on this, but the length of the days and how much sunlight depends on which hemisphere you are in during which season. Write to me with questions. Gary at geickmei@tampabay.rr.com
297423cookie-checkBad error in article “CO2 can’t cause ocean warming”
By the way, I wrote that article some years ago now. Although it is correct in substance, it is the wrong argument. I no longer care whether the world is warming or not–we know that it has been both colder and hotter in the past than it is today. The real question is, is a warmer world a bad thing? I have asked this question of many people and have yet to receive a reply. We apparently have a”climate emergency” that no one can describe
“length of the days and how much sunlight depends on which hemisphere you are in during which season.”
Correct. That’s what I said
Yes, just like I said
@Graeme Hanigan ummm You obviously have less knowledge than anyone on earth, that’s 27 degrees in the shade. It’s much higher outside on your solar panels. Also if you apply heat that is trapped in a confined space, like a storage hot water heater then it will increase above what the temp is being applied to it. You have no knowledge of kinetic energy (basic high school science).
Graeme Hanigan yes there is magic going on, derrrr.
To anonymous
We have been led to believe that a “run-away” CO2 greenhouse effect is the cause of very high surface temperatures found on Venus, and that unless we curb carbon emissions we risk a similar fate on Earth. I am now convinced that this narrative is complete nonsense because CO2 absorption of IR radiation from the surface of Venus turns out to be tiny, and the reason for this lies with Wien’s displacement law. Only 2% of the 740K Planck spectrum emitted by the surface actually falls within the main CO2 absorption band. While this is indeed absorbed within the first few meters, the rest of the heat radiation (>90% of it) passes straight through. I was myself surprised to discover this after running my simple greenhouse model for Venus (described here). I expected to see huge upward radiative transfer and “back radiation” fluxes. Instead I found very small CO2 induced radiative transfer and almost zero back radiation. Essentially all CO2 sourced IR radiation is absorbed within each layer in the atmosphere, because the optical depth is small for the Venusian troposphere. Wien’s displacement law then governs how much IR is absorbed by the atmosphere at each successive height above the surface. To understand this – just look at Figures 1 and 2.
CO2 is NOT the cause of the “greenhouse effect” on Venus ! Despite the fact that it forms 95% of the atmosphere, CO2 really is an insignificant greenhouse gas on Venus !
Gary, I believe the article is written from the perspective of Australia, so, of course, it is correct.
Hi Gary,
This article (https://principia-scientific.org/chemistry-expert-carbon-dioxide-cant-cause-global-warming/?fbclid=IwAR2r18Vd1-i8b54v1S7merQJver5nQq4KwqEac3ij9vTJGvIjSYXLe8Rny0) dated February 9, 2017, was republished from the original opinion from (https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2009/12/diy-ocean-heating/) dated 7th December 2009.
Hope this helps if Mark neglects to respond.