An Error In The 2007 IPCC Statement For Policymakers On The 2005 Global-Average Radiative Forcing

Climate Science ^ | 3/5/07 | Roger Pielke Sr.

[steveab]

PPM
If the size of a particle of CO2 was 1/4" cube, there would only be 8.3 ft of 1/4" cubes in ppm,. One million 1/4" cubes laid side by side would equal 20,833 ft. That puts a carbon particle ever 2510 ft apart. There would be a water vapor particle ever 25 ft. Now, if the carbon particle was a burning candle, how well do you think it could warm up a water vapor particle 25 ft away?
Think about it. The CO2 theory wants you to believe that CO2 particle can retain its heat long after the other particles have started cooling down and that it would keep the other particles from staying in balance the earth's heat energy.

[edsheppa]

The CO2 theory wants you to believe that CO2 particle can retain its heat ...

No, you're wrong. CO2 captures radiation that would otherwise escape into space and is heated but quickly passes that heat along to the other atmospheric gasses. Being a trace gas, the CO2 itself retains very little of the extra heat.

[AaronInCarolina]

It looks like the climatesci.colorado.edu site is back up.

Here is a link to one of Roger's threads where he bases some conclusions on Lyman's paper regarding 2003-2005 sea surface temperature (SST) cooling. Read comment 2, which points out the Argo problem. In comment 3, Mr Pielke thanks the commenter for the information. Also, notice comment #8 where another poster points out that Lyman paper acknowledged the possible problem and that even without the Argo data, that a cooling trend is supported by other data, just not as dramatic.

The Net Climate Feedbacks Must Be A Negative Effect On The Global Average Radiative Imbalance If The IPCCC Conclusion Of Net Anthropogenic Radiative Forcings Is Correct

Here is a direct link to the Argo site announcing the possible problem with their floats:

Argo Information Centre

[Matchett-PI]

Thanks for the ping! Have you posted any of your thoughts on the subject at Roger's web site?

[AaronInCarolina]

Thanks for the ping! Have you posted any of your thoughts on the subject at Roger's web site?

Actually, I have posted there a few times. Once, with regards to a climate model source code package, whose zipped size was only 7 MB in size, and I commented that it seemed awfully small to be able to be sophisticated enough to make multi-decadal predictions. I also posted a couple of days ago on a thread that talks about extreme temperature records (or lack thereof) during the past decade. Bruce Hall (who runs another blog, Hall of Record, has been analyzing the temperature extremes in the form of record highs in the U.S. and has shown that there has not been an out-of-proportion spate of record highs during this so-called global warming period. (In fact, the decade that still possesses the most record high's is the 1930's). In my post to that thread on Pielke's blog, I quoted the IPCC's SPM 4th Assessment Report where it said that global warming would cause more extreme high temperatures. That clearly has not happened.

[Matchett-PI]

Thank you. Very interesting -- I'll check out the link.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Nice link. I argued for about a half hour with one of Algore's believers this past Wednesday evening. I'm going to send him a link to this video and invite him to send it to Algore along with a nice big cup of STFU.

[steveab]

The other gases receive the same amount of long wave radiation from the same source as CO2. So, if you say other gases are cooler, there for, CO2 must retain heat to re radiate long wave radiation to other gases to warm up.

[edsheppa]

The other gases receive the same amount of long wave radiation from the same source as CO2.

You do know each gas has its own unique absorption spectrum, right?

So, if you say other gases are cooler

Well, no, I said (indirectly) that they're pretty much in equilibrium. Whatever extra heat is absorbed by the CO2 is distributed pretty much immediately to the other gasses.

This is all so elementary, why is so difficult for you to understand?

[steveab]

Yes, each gas has is own unique absorption spectrum and all spectrum are contained in that long radiation wave. The other gases are not waiting for CO2 to warm up first so they can receive their unique absorption spectrum from CO2. They are absorbing their unique spectrum from the same long radiation wave as the CO2 at the same time.

[edsheppa]

Do you think that the different gasses stay in equilibrium by the exchange of radiation?