- #1
Andre
- 4,311
- 74
http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-39973-113.html
Also notice the stubborn misunderstanding:
Run http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~archer/cgimodels/radiation.html with the basic inputs to get an output radiation of 287.844 W/m2. Now put zero in the CO2 box to get 318.396 W/m2, then restore 375 ppmv for CO2 and run with CH4 put at zero: 289.696. So that's rather more than 30 W/m2 versus less than 2 W/m2, demonstrating that it's rather irrelevant, assuming that the MODTRAN algoritm is correct.
Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man's contributions.
Also notice the stubborn misunderstanding:
Methane accounts for roughly one-fifth of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, though its effect is 25x greater than that of carbon dioxide.
Run http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~archer/cgimodels/radiation.html with the basic inputs to get an output radiation of 287.844 W/m2. Now put zero in the CO2 box to get 318.396 W/m2, then restore 375 ppmv for CO2 and run with CH4 put at zero: 289.696. So that's rather more than 30 W/m2 versus less than 2 W/m2, demonstrating that it's rather irrelevant, assuming that the MODTRAN algoritm is correct.
Last edited by a moderator: