HackerPapers

arXiv:0707.1161physics.ao-ph

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics

Gerhard Gerlich, Ralf D. Tscheuschner

Abstract

The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system. According to the second law of thermodynamics such a planetary machine can never exist. Nevertheless, in almost all texts of global climatology and in a widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation. In this paper the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified. By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects, (b) there are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet, (c) the frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly, (d) the formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately, (e) the assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical, (f) thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero, the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.

arXiv comments
115 pages, 32 figures, 13 tables (some typos corrected)
Journal reference
Int.J.Mod.Phys.B23:275-364,2009
DOI
doi:10.1142/S021797920904984X
Subjects
physics.ao-phAtmospheric and Oceanic Physics

On Hacker News

Linked by 2 identifiable commenters in 2 comments across 2 threads, from Dec 2009 to Jan 2010. Found in 1 HN submission from Feb 2024 to Feb 2024. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments2 threads

    • The IPCC reports are thousands of pages, so it's not surprising that there are errors. You can find errors in a large fraction of scientific papers if you look hard enough. The relevant question is whether there are more errors in the papers that support the idea of global…

      lutormView on HNParent context

    • Actually, I think you are talking about http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161v4 - It's referenced by Alexander Cockburn in his most recent nation article. It's arxiv with no journal listed as publishing it. You do correctly quote the abstract but the language of this abstract is pretty…

      joe_the_userView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.