Evidence

Evidence has not Confirmed the Greenhouse Gas Theory

(in its application to models or climate)

Why?

The prevailing theory is that surface radiation is trapped by “greenhouse gases” disproportionately, but that theory does not stand up. Is radiation from the surface only stored by “greenhouse gas” molecules? The answer is no, both N2 and O2 also absorb and radiate in the infrared spectrum, as NIST (US’s National Institute of Standards and Technology) data shows here, and here, as well as through increased molecular velocities. 

It appears as though many climate scientists subscribe to the Ritz-Carlton theory of conferences, rather than the Rydberg–Ritz combination principle. The latter explains that radiation is absorbed and emitted also by combinations of level energies/wavelengths. 

When we start to ask about thermal energy storage, as in specific heat capacity, we see that CO2 does not actually vibrate to instigate additional storage of thermal energy until it reaches very high pressures, as discussed in this paper, so high that they are not natural on our planet’s atmosphere. Vibrations of molecules as degrees of freedom for energy storage depend upon pressure and temperature, and in general vibrations are not the primary degrees of freedom for energy storage in atmospheric gases at all, as that occurs primarily in translations and rotationsthe velocities of molecules, as per the long-prevailing Kinetic Theory of Gases. 

We should ask, if CO2 is not responsible for warming, what may be the cause. To be frank, that is pretty obvious: the Sun drives the Earth’s climate, not the composition of the atmosphere. 

In addition, there is a means of ascertaining actual changes in the Earth’s absorption, which reflects changes in chemical composition of its surface or atmosphere, without relying upon speculative or subjective computer model predictions. The Earth’s albedo (a measure of the proportion of total radiation reflected by the planet), in all its nuances, can be measured from space to determine the changes in absorption of solar and cosmic radiation (how much the Earth is warming or cooling). An accurate albedo measurement will show if the planet is absorbing more radiation, by whatever means.

Yet NASA has fundamentally corrupted the data from their albedo measuring satellites, providing measurements only of a cloudless Earth (yes, really, by creating a tapestry of a cloudless-only surface, ruining the data and making the satellites basically worthless for what should be their primary purpose). Thus, at this time we do not have access to the relevant scientific data to evaluate the holistic state of our planet, with this quite all-encompassing, precise and obvious measure. 

The Climate Science Journal asked NASA, through JPL, and found they “cannot” provide unadulterated albedo data. Whether they are unable to get the raw data from the satellite because whoever designed the recording of data altered it before it was transmitted to Earth, or they do not have the authority to provide it, makes no difference. 

Please enter your email so that we can update you when the new book is out, and to download the free paper:

Note the outstanding peer reviews below, presented anonymously, which you are also encouraged to do to [email protected] in the present politically-charged “climate” of climate science.

"You have found a promising approach to demonstrate successfully that the long suspected culprits of global warming, e.g. CO2, CH4, are actually not !"

PhD, Physics
Rutgers University, New Jersey
B.A. Cornell University, New York

"…seems to be path-breaking research in the domain. The paper reads nice and the science involved is analogous and clear. This paper is a hallmark and would benefit the advances in science, government planning as well as policy makers for the next course of action. I congratulate you for this great work and thank for giving me an opportunity to read it and enlighten myself."

PhD, Atmospheric Sci and Meteorology, IISc
M.Sc., Geophysics, ISC
BSc., (Hons) Physics, Delhi U

"An alarmist bias in Global Warming Research has corrupted the academic/scientific community"

Dr. Roy W. Spencer
Ph.D. Meteorology
University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Principal Research Scientist at UoA
Former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center

"I have studied your paper during the weekend and I am impressed by your brilliant analysis and convincing argumentation. This looks like a very original thought process and one that does deserve broad dissemination."

B.Sc. (Hons) Mech. Eng.
DTU, Denmark
C.P. Eng. (Chartered Prof. Eng.)
Former Project Manager, CERN
Geneva, Switzerland

previous arrow
next arrow
Slider

You will only receive quality content.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *