18 May 2011

CO2 Greenhouse Effect, proven wrong?

I've been doing a tremendous self-study and research regarding my presentation on Physics 502 when I've encountered a paper contradicting our prior knowledge regarding Global Warming. What if up to this time we are pointing to something which is not really the culprit? What if our prior beliefs were just been politically motivated? What if the theory of Greenhouse Effect is not scientifically correct?

Physicist Dr. Gerhard Gerlich, of the Institute of Mathematical Physics at the Technical University Carolo-Wilhelmina in Braunschweig in Germany, and Dr. Ralf D. Tscheuschner co-authored a paper entitled, "Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics"  published in the International Journal of Modern Physics state the following statements in the Abstract of their paper:

(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 C 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.

From the Conclusions: “The derivation of statements on the CO2 induced anthropogenic global warming out of the computer simulations lies outside any science.”

Confusing...

Whether the theory of Greenhouse Effect is true or not... the fact still remains that there's a GLOBAL WARMING happening as observed in our environment. But it is also a fact that in order for us to deal with the problem, we should know the real cause of it.


Sources:
G. Gerlich, R. D. Tscheuschner (2009) Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics. International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No. 3 (30 January 2009), 275-364 (World Scientific Publishing Co.)

Image Source:
noaanews.noaa.gov (thru Google Image)

Prev: to the new superheroes...

1 comment: