By William A. Masters
Independent scientist, William A. Masters, offers evidence to understand man-made global warming fraud and the information needed to destroy it:
How do you do Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am William A. Masters; I am a Peer-Review Journal author in Physics, Astrophysics, and Environment Affairs. I authored: “STRETCHED AND NEAR ZERO SPACE -TIME, A NEW MODEL OF GRAVITATION AND BLACK HOLE DYNAMICS; and, INERTIA AS A CHANGE IN ENERGETIC STATES AND ITS EFFECT UPON THE TWIN PARADOX.
I am also the instigator of MASTERS vs OBAMA, in which I allege that the Former President, NASA, EPA and NOAA were committing Constructive Fraud for stating that the Earth was being warmed by the human addition of Carbon-dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.
As the Court has prevented me from destroying AGW by finding that my damages were general, not specific and so I lack standing to file the case, I wish to give you the evidence to understand AGW and the information needed to destroy it.
Of important note is the claim, often made, that the Nobel Prize-winning paper by Svante Arrhenius:
ON THE INFLUENCE OF CARBONIC ACID IN THE AIR UPON THE TEMPERATURE OF THE GROUND, [April 1896, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, Series 5, Volume 41, pages 237-276], which many have lied about. His Nobel Prize-winning paper did NOT claim that burning of fossil fuels was warming the planet, rather it stated the opposite. On page 240 he wrote:
” The intensity of radiation for any group of rays should always diminish with increasing quantities of aqueous vapor or carbonic acid traversed.”
On page 244-245 he presents his exacting measurements [the first ever done], stating the decline of radiation passing through carbon dioxide and water vapor writing:
” If a ray of heat, corresponding to the angle of deviation 39.45 degrees, passes through the unit of carbonic acid, it decreases in intensity in the proportion 1: 0.934 (log= – 0.0296), the corresponding value for the unit of water vapor is 1: 0.775 (log= -0.1105).”
Thus, he proved that increasing the amount of CO2 in the air will decrease the amount of Sun heat that will be able to pass through the water vapor and carbonic acid and reach the Earth. This decreased Sun heat will cool the Earth not warm it.
So, why did Arrhenius in later papers state that added human CO2 was warming the Planet?
For the answer to that we have to go back to the very first paragraph of his award-winning paper, and to the work of Joseph Fourier, the guy who started all the nonsense about the ‘Greenhouse Effect’ by getting it very wrong.
In the First paragraph Arrhenius writes:
“Another side of the question, that has long attracted the attention of physicists, is this: Is the mean temperature of the ground in any way influenced by the presence of heat-absorbing gases in the atmosphere? Fourier maintained that the atmosphere acts like the glass of a hot-house because it lets through the light rays of the sun but retains the dark rays from the ground.”
Early in the 19th Century, it was discovered that glass blocks infrared heat rays! This raised a question that Fourier thought he’d answered.
As Greenhouses [hot-houses], get warm during the day, and the Sun’s heat [dark rays] can’t penetrate the glass, how does a greenhouse get warm?
Since the visible light rays could penetrate the glass Fourier reasoned that it must be the visible light, not infrared heat, that warmed the earth. It passed through the glass, struck the ground and objects in the greenhouse, warmed them and in return, they gave off infrared heat. That infrared then was trapped inside the greenhouse because infrared can’t penetrate glass!
Simple reasoning, yes? And wrong as we know today.
In 1909 W. O. Wood conducted experiments to test this idea of trapped Infrared. Wood built two greenhouses, one with glass panes, and one with rock-salt panes. Rock-salt is transparent to infrared radiation so any infrared that was given off by the contents inside would be able to escape.
Both greenhouses in the experiment warmed up at the same rate and to the same temperature proving Fourier was wrong. What did he get wrong?
The Sun’s heat was absorbed by the greenhouse itself. Making it warm up. Then, like my wooden garage, it conducted that heat to the inside walls of the greenhouse warming the interior air that was trapped inside.
The air couldn’t rise up in the atmosphere as warm air does, so it just absorbs more and more heat from the walls of the greenhouse until it reached its maximum temperature for the conditions that day.
But this idea that visible light warmed the air continued on in people’s thinking. More so than that, it gave birth to a second horribly wrong idea. Arrhenius speaks of it in the first paragraph on page 239:
“The selective absorption of the atmosphere is, according to the reasearches of Tyndall, Lecher and Pernter, Rontgen, Heine, Langly, Angstrom, Paschen, and others, of a wholly different kind. It is not exerted by the chief mass of the air, but in a high degree by aqueous vapour and carbonic acid, which are present in the air in small quantities. Further, this absorption is not continuous over the whole spectrum, but nearly insensible in the light part of it, and chiefly limited to the long-waved par, where it manifests itself in very well-defined absorption-bands, which fall off rapidly on both sides. The influence of this absorption is comparatively small on the heat from the sun, but must be of great importance in the transmission of rays from the earth.”
It was believed that the infrared portion of the sun’s light must be inconsequential, and the visible must be the majority. Thus, they believed that very little heat is actually blocked out by the CO2 and water vapor, but all that visible light coming in and warming the earth and being sent out as Infrared must be gargantuan!
Remember, their ability to measure light was crude. And they had no satellite data telling them what was actually coming at the earth from the Sun.
Today we know that 52% of the Sun’s radiation is in the Infrared and 52% of the radiation that reaches the Earth is also infrared. This even though most of the infrared that reaches the earth is actually absorbed and blocked out by the atmosphere.
At the top of our atmosphere, NASA satellites measure 265 degrees Fahrenheit of Sun heat arriving. The average daytime temperature of the Earth is only 71.9 degrees F.!
193.1 degrees of sun heat is blocked out by the water vapor and ‘greenhouse gases.’ On the other hand, NASA reports here:
That only 5% of the radiation reaching the earth is radiated out as infrared and returned to the earth by the ‘greenhouse gases’, raising the temperature of the earth only 59 degrees F. So the actual real effect of the ‘greenhouse gases’ is they cool the planet by 134.1 degrees F!!! CO2 doesn’t warm the planet it cools it by 134.1 degrees.
In conversation with other scientists, I have been dumb-struck by how reverent people still hold to Fourier’s and Arrhenius outdated ideas. In a conversing with Dr. Richard Mueller of Berkeley University, I brought up the Stefan-Boltzmann Law making the point that added CO2 would block out more incoming Sun heat cooling the Earth and so reducing the heat radiated off the Earth and so reducing the ‘greenhouse effect’. To which he responded stating that infrared heat was inconsequential to earth heating!!!
Mueller is a Pro-AGW guy so you might think okay that explains why he is a pro-AGW guy, he doesn’t know that the ‘greenhouse gases’ block out three times more heat than they keep in. But in conversations with a leading opponent of AGW, Doctor of Climatology Roy Spencer, he said the same thing, that infrared was inconsequential to earth heating when I brought up the Stefan-Boltzmann Law!!!
To let you know, the Stefan-Boltzmann Law proves that AGW is impossible. It tells us that the amount of radiation a mass will give off will be equal to its absolute temperature [that’s temperature in degrees Kelvin], taken to the FOURTH POWER of the temperature.
This means any change in the temperature will be taken to the Fourth Power of the change in temperature and that will be the change in emitted radiation. In other words, the change in emitted radiation will always LEAD THE CHANGE IN TEMPERATURE.
If we put enough CO2 into the air to make the atmosphere 1% more insulating for example, then 1% less sun heat will get in. As a result the Earth will give off
-4% less heat.
1% more outgoing heat will be reflected back at the Earth offsetting the -4% drop so, the net drop in the greenhouse effect will e -3% rather than -4%.
This is also why Dr. Hawking was lying when he talked about Venus and a runaway greenhouse effect there. It is impossible, as the temperature of the planet increase, it will give off greater and greater amounts of radiant heat making a runaway greenhouse impossible, as NASA says here:
In order to defeat AGW and destroy it you have to prove that the Atmosphere blocks out more incoming Sun heat than it keeps in. NASA’s Department of Infrared Astronomy will do that. This is their website:
It has a chart (shown below) showing the “Opacity” of the Earths atmosphere and states:
“Most of the infrared light coming to us from the Universe is absorbed by water vapor and carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere.”
Also, NASA has a chart showing the incoming and outgoing heat, the chart shows that the outgoing and incoming heat is identical in amplitude and waveband! Proof that visible light is NOT turning into infrared like Fourier and Arrhenius thought, because if visible light was turning into heat then the outgoing heat would be much greater than the incoming as it would be made up of the incoming heat plus all the visible light that turned into heat
” Why doesn’t the natural greenhouse effect cause a runaway increase in surface temperature? Remember that the amount of energy a surface radiates always increases faster than its temperature rises—outgoing energy increases with the fourth power of temperature. As solar heating and “back radiation” from the atmosphere raise the surface temperature, the surface simultaneously releases an increasing amount of heat—equivalent to about 117 percent of incoming solar energy. The net upward heat flow, then, is equivalent to 17 percent of incoming sunlight (117 percent up minus 100 percent down).”
THE OPACITY OF THE EARTH’S ATMOSPHERE
NASA’s own chart (above) shows the Earth’s Atmospheric Opacity. It tells us what wavebands are being blocked out by the atmosphere and by what percentage they are being blocked out. On the Far left of NASA’s chart we see that 100% of the Gamma Rays and X-Rays are blocked out while 70% of the UV wavebands are blocked out.
11% to 7% of the visible light is blocked out by the atmosphere, while to the right of the rainbow of visible light we see that over 60% of the Near Infrared (0.8 microns to 8 microns), are blocked by the atmosphere.
To the right of the Near IR, is the Mid-Infrared (8 microns to 40 microns). Only 1/3rd of this heat is blocked out by the atmosphere, 2/3rds make it to the surface. This Mid-IR range is known as the “Water Vapor Window”.
Water vapor, is the most powerful of the insulating “greenhouse gases” but is very poor at absorbing IR radiation of this Mid-IR waveband range. Given the Water Vapor Window, the Earth primarily radiates in the Mid IR wavebands with its heat emissions peaking at 12 microns. This peak is very important due to the fact that Carbon-dioxide’s peak absorption is at 12 to 15 microns! Right where water vapor is the leased effective Carbon-dioxide is the Most effective at absorbing Infrared photons.
NASA charts show the outgoing Earth emitted heat in blue above the corresponding incoming Sun heat reaching the Earth’s surface as registered by NASA ground stations. As can be seen the outgoing heat is identical in waveband and amplitude to the incoming Sun heat. Proving once again, the Law of Conservation of Energy is at work.
What comes in, goes out, all energy is Conserved.
No visible light is coming in, and turning into invisible infrared heat as presumed by Fourier and Arrhenius and others. If that were true, then the exiting heat would be greater than the incoming, yet they are identical. By evidence of their own chart over 90% of this is blocked out by the atmosphere, as well as most of the Microwave radiation to its right.
CLOUDS, THEY ARE INSULATORS TOO YOU KNOW
The most obvious example of this cooling effect brought on by the Stefan-Boltzmann Law are Clouds! Clouds are made of the most powerful insulating gas of them all, water vapor. When Nature naturally increases the amount of water vapor in the air it doesn’t get warmer does it?
It is true, Clouds are 100,000 times more insulating than carbon-dioxide gas, but that means clouds block out 100,000 times more Sun heat than carbon-dioxide gas. If the Sun’s heat never reaches the Earth’s surface, the Earth cannot warm up. If the Earth doesn’t get warm it won’t give off IR radiation for the Greenhouse Effect to trap in, ergo no Greenhouse Effect!
Ok, that is a lot of theory. So what does the reality suggest? And what reality does the real world, empirical data support?
The Flat Earth Society Of Climate Experts
By Tony Heller
Climate experts believe that the Arctic will become ice-free because they don’t understand that the Earth is round.
They look at two-dimensional maps like this one from September 1 last year and imagine that the ice is going to keep melting back towards the pole.
What they don’t understand is that the Earth is round, and that by September, the North Pole is receiving almost no sunlight. Thus there is no energy source to melt the ice.
By the end of August, temperatures north of 80N have dropped below freezing.
The only time the pole can melt is a 70-day window in June, July, and August, when the Northern Hemisphere is tipped towards the Sun.
Another important corollary of this is that the Arctic sea ice minimum and maximum are nearly irrelevant to climate, because they both occur near the equinox when no sunlight is reaching the pole.
This time of year is important, because there is lots of sunlight, and the bright white ice reflects the Sun’s rays and cools the Earth. The whole concept of Arctic albedo feedback is based on junk science.
Sea ice extent, thickness and volume are all normal, yet the Flat Earth Society of climate scientists drones on endlessly about an ice-free Arctic – which they will never live to see.
Climate experts don’t seem to understand any of the fundamentals of chemistry, physics or geology – which is why are perfectly suited heroes for graduates of Common Core education.
Read more at Real Climate Science