Over the years I have read many very good arguments that go a long way to debunking the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) nonsense.
But they are almost always lacking in that there is rarely (if ever) an understandable discussion of the first principles premise underlying the chemical/physical mechanics of how CO2 is supposed to cause all of this catastrophic warming of earth’s atmosphere in the first place.
The idea that infrared radiation (IR) from lands and oceans being absorbed by a minuscule four parts out of every 10,000 in the atmosphere is responsible for such gargantuan heat transfer (to the other 9,996 non-absorbing parts) is utter nonsense.
But that in essence is the premise of the ever-predicted catastrophic global warming and climate change dogma.
All these photons (unit packets of energy) radiating from the earth’s surface are (by definition) travelling at light speed in a straight line, and when only four out of 10,000 molecules in the atmosphere are capable of absorbing them, or even just redirecting them, the vast majority of these photons will reach the upper limits of the atmosphere unimpeded and very quickly.
So the insulation effect (which is not a “greenhouse” effect) simply cannot be due to an extremely dilute gas like CO2 (4 molecules per 10,000) in the atmosphere.
Even more meaningful than just debunking this loony AGW premise - I would like to suggest that there is a far more plausible rationale that explains how earth’s atmosphere (all of it, not just the so-called greenhouse gases) slows the cooling of earth’s surface as much as it does every day - mostly by way of mass transfer of energy (i.e. 1. molecular collisions between the earth’s surfaces and the atmosphere, 2. evaporative cooling of ocean surfaces, 3. convection of warmed air to the upper region of the troposphere), and finally the energy escapes to the upper reaches of the atmosphere and outer space by radiative heat transfer.
As described, this heat transfer process not only explains the magnitude of the insulation effect that we all experience each and every day after the sun goes down, but it also explains why the nocturnal cooling of the earth does not happen as rapidly as it does on the moon because the moon does not have an insulating atmosphere.
It would be wise for our children to know that Earth’s average global temperature is about 33 degrees warmer than it would be if it did not have an atmosphere and the above reasoning is the logical and scientific rationale for this fact.
And we can thank God and Mother Nature for such elegant and naturally occurring checks and balances to sustain life on earth.
It is certainly not anything that mankind is capable of controlling - with or without burning hydrocarbon fuels.
Russ Babcock
Genelle