Greenhouse Effect (Part II) – Earth’s Energy balance.

I want to continue my discussion of the Greenhouse effect started in the Post: Simple proof of the greenhouse effect for a static planet.  Earth is a dynamic planet, but the energy balance is reasonably well understood.  This post is meant to be informative, and hopefully, non-controversial. I will look at a number of energy balance diagrams both pre and post the 1980′s generated  global warming alarmism.

SOPA/PIPA Blackout, Common Law and Common Sense

The Internet today, in all its forms, has largely replaced face to face talking.  Western culture developed around the market square, often part of the village common.  Men and women would take a break from their mundane work and discuss freely any topic under the sun.  Books and newspapers would be shared freely. Knowledge flowed freely.

Strawberries and God

All human knowledge requires a context of prior experience.  You cannot define or describe the taste of strawberries to someone who has never tasted strawberries.  Nor is religious experience definable or provable, yet there exists a community of people who know God, just as there exists a community of people who have tasted strawberries.

Simple proof of the Greenhouse effect for a static planet.

On Earth,  greenhouse gases function inside a very dynamic atmosphere, so it is next to impossible to separate out the effect, and so we have a great deal of argument as to what the effect of adding CO2 to the atmosphere will be.  In addition, some descriptions of the greenhouse effect are thermodynamic nonsense.

I decided to come up with a thought experiment where ONLY the greenhouse effect is in play.  The conclusion is quite clear:  adding greenhouse gases to a static atmosphere MUST increase the surface temperature.  I need not invoke anything other than thermodynamic principles.

Skeptics and Deniers

I am fascinated by ‘belief’, in God, or, indeed, catastrophic human caused climate change. We are all different, but we can divide ourselves into the skeptical and the gulible.

For any ‘belief’ there is a mental energy curve – though it may be steeper for some ideas than others.  If a belief is unimportant to the thinker, then the mental energy to change from one side to the other is low. If the belief is fundamental to the thinker, then the mental energy to change is high.