GREEN house effect ,( so called) foundation, consensus,🧐😂
1.2 The greenhouse effect hypothesis
Among climatologists, in particular those who are affiliated with the Intergovernmental Panel
of Climate Change (IPCC)3
, there is a “scientific consensus” [22], that the relevant mechanism
is the atmospheric greenhouse effect, a mechanism heavily relying on the assumption that
radiative heat transfer clearly dominates over the other forms of heat transfer such as thermal
conductivity, convection, condensation et cetera [23–30].
In all past IPCC reports and other such scientific summaries the following point evocated
in Ref. [24], p. 5, is central to the discussion:
“One of the most important factors is the greenhouse effect; a simplified ex-
planation of which is as follows. Short-wave solar radiation can pass through the
clear atmosphere relatively unimpeded. But long-wave terrestrial radiation emit-
ted by the warm surface of the Earth is partially absorbed and then re-emitted
by a number of trace gases in the cooler atmosphere above. Since, on average,
the outgoing long-wave radiation balances the incoming solar radiation, both the
atmosphere and the surface will be warmer than they would be without the green-
house gases . . . The greenhouse effect is real; it is a well understood effect, based
on established scientific principles.”
To make things more precise, supposedly, the notion of radiative forcing was introduced by
the IPCC and related to the assumption of radiative equilibrium. In Ref. [27], pp. 7-6, one
finds the statement:
“A change in average net radiation at the top of the troposphere (known as the
tropopause), because of a change in either solar or infrared radiation, is defined for
the purpose of this report as a radiative forcing. A radiative forcing perturbs the
balance between incoming and outgoing radiation. Over time climate responds to
the perturbation to re-establish the radiative balance. A positive radiative forcing
tends on average to warm the surface; a negative radiative forcing on average tends
to cool the surface. As defined here, the incoming solar radiation is not considered
a radiative forcing, but a change in the amount of incoming solar radiation would
be a radiative forcing . . . For example, an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentra-
tion leads to a reduction in outgoing infrared radiation and a positive radiative
forcing.”
However, in general “scientific consensus” is not related whatsoever to scientific truth as
countless examples in history have shown. “Consensus” is a political term, not a scientific
3The IPCC was created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WHO) and the United Nations
-
1:45:53
Robert Gouveia
21 hours agoTrump Offers to SAVE Biden! Donors THREATEN Campaign; BRUTAL Report DESTROYS Joe
141K168 -
1:21:11
Russell Brand
21 hours ago‘THE US IS FALLING APART’ - EXCLUSIVE Colonel Douglas MacGregor Interview (and UK Elections) - 401
331K429 -
51:33
Ben Shapiro
20 hours agoEp. 1998 - Is TONIGHT The Night Biden Drops Out?
165K125 -
19:25
Neil
20 hours agoAs Everyone's Distracted With The NEW UK GOVERNMENT... (A LOT's About To Change...)
106K27 -
1:02:14
Geeks + Gamers
22 hours agoGina Carano DESTROYS Mark Ruffalo And Disney Double Standard, Japan Is FURIOUS Over Assassin's Creed
110K35 -
1:13:29
Steve-O's Wild Ride! Podcast
3 days ago $0.18 earnedPenguinZ0 Has No Respect For Dr. Disrespect! - Wild Ride #222
107K11 -
2:00:57
LFA TV
1 day agoMERRY INDEPENDENCE! | LIVE FROM AMERICA 7.5.24 11am EST
127K60 -
2:07:02
TENET Media
1 day agoWhat Is A Conservative Woman? | The Culture War with Tim Pool w/Lilly Gaddis & Rachel Wilson
87.6K78 -
46:55
Peter Santenello
22 hours agoWhat’s Happening at the Border? 🇺🇸🇲🇽
70K57 -
1:38:55
Real Coffee With Scott Adams
22 hours agoEpisode 2527 CWSA 07/05/24
73.7K99