Does Carbon Dioxide Really Affect Temperatures?

American Outlook ^ | October 9, 2003 | by Dennis T. Avery

[.cnI redruM]

I've seen the demoonstration where an IR beam gets absorbed by a gas chamber filled with CO2. That's the only link in the entire Greenhouse Hypothesis that I've ever seen demonstrated to be an actual effect.

[Support Free Republic]

 

	Keep Our Republic Free Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER and say THANKS to Jim Robinson! IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR THANKS!

[Support Free Republic]

 

	Keep Our Republic Free Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER and say THANKS to Jim Robinson! IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR THANKS!

[tm22721]

The scientific community is turning red in the face from the realization that most long term global temperature cycles are really caused by sunspots.

BUMP

[farmfriend]

Rights, farms, environment ping.

Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.

Special ping to Risk.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

I just finished this good article.
Are You back posting to FR?

[saminfl]

Don't tell cogitator about this.

[farmfriend]

Maybe. I'm still angry. I hate the way people complain and the complaints are just dismissed instead of investigated.

[E.G.C.]

Hey, Farmfriend. Great to hear from you again. Thanks for the bump and the article.

[CJ Wolf]

Darn ice-core researchers, don't they know that drilling in the fragile ice ecosystem causes global warming.

[farmfriend]

I think it is going to be interesting to see what kind of response I get from being gone so long. Thanks for all the bumps you have given me.

[.cnI redruM]

I don't know how it effects temperatures, but it's sure bound to cause some global whinning over at the IPCC.

[Final Authority]

I replied on this topic several months ago. I wrote the following:

The author has an interesting thesis. I have written in the past a similar argument with respect to CO2 having an absorbing function for incoming radiation (sun light) but not a radiation blocking function at night because it absorbs and emits preferentially at 4.26um where the earths radiates back to space (cools)preferentially in the range of 8.0 - 12.0um due to the Black Body curve and laws according to Planck. Therefore, CO2 in this simple example would not have a definitive effect. Think of this, because there is strong 4.26um radiation from the sun, CO2 gets hot and the heat is radiated and conducted to all gasses and to the surface. At night the radiating temperature is now 300K degrees and the peak Black Body emission wavelength for that temperature is right at 10.0um. 10.0um light (radiation) goes right through a 4.26um absorber (CO2) but because water has such a broad absorption-emission band then water interferes with the radiation back to space (like on a cloudy night). Other strong green house gasses include methane (natural gas) and would behave similarly. It can't be this simple.

You are correct in that IR is absorbed by CO2 but only in very narrow bands (wavelengths) as I stated. What would be a worst catastrophy for the Earth than excess CO2 is if the frozen methane on the ocean floor becomes free to surface. Methane is even a better green house gas and exhibits this property at more wavelengths.

[borkrules]

Excellent. Another environmentalist myth detonator to share with a friend who is, sadly, a hezbollah environmentalist. Should be fun to watch the steam come out of his ears on this!

[Mike Darancette]

If the warming is natural, we won’t be able to stop it no matter how heavily we tax energy, nor how many lives we sacrifice to..

Considering that Humans from all sources contribute less than 1% to the yearly CO2 production. Cutting all human produced CO2 (including raspiration) would not be significant.

[TrebleRebel]

science ping

[Carry_Okie]

What would be a worst catastrophy for the Earth than excess CO2 is if the frozen methane on the ocean floor becomes free to surface. Methane is even a better green house gas and exhibits this property at more wavelengths.

You will note that the Packard Foundation has given over a hundred million to Stanford to research the mining of methane hydrides. My understanding is that if these structures are disturbed they can release to the surface bubbling methane into the atmosphere. Is it thus plausible that recovering this type of "green energy," looking to reduce the background release of methane in order to sell natural gas and obtain a return on the carbon credits scam, might instead do precisely what you fear? How would the efficacy of such a process be against background levels be verified when the only owners of that data are involved in the mining?

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP - GLOBAL WARMING CORRECTION

[MosesKnows]

The world has had lots of warmings and coolings through its history

That is the only fact that we should all be able to agree on. At any given time the earth is either warming or cooling.

To conclude that man is the cause of the warming or cooling based on what is presently known is folly. However, there are agendas afoot that must be served and there are always a plentiful supply of fools to support most any agenda one would like to promote.

[AdamSelene235]

Excellent. Another environmentalist myth detonator

Plenty more where that came from:

Access to Energy