Feb
Former NASA scientist debunks CO2 greenhouse theory
Prominent atmospheric physicist, and former contractor for NASA’s Langley Research Center, Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi, has developed a new theory on CO2 and the “greenhouse” effect, one that is not being received well by warmers. Of course we know why it’s not received well, and that’s because he can prove that pumping CO2 into the atmosphere does not lead to catastrophic climate change.
You see, Dr Miskolczi has discovered that the Earth is a lot smarter and a lot tougher than most give it credit. He says there is a self-regulating mechanism that keeps greenhouse gases in equilibrium, an equilibrium that is unaltered by CO2, methane or other atmospheric increases.
Kirk Meyers at the Examiner.com reports:
In simple terms, Miskolczi has discovered a new law of physics that sets an upper limit to the greenhouse effect. According to this law, the surplus temperature from greenhouse gases is constant and cannot be increased. Why? Because the earth’s greenhouse blanket functions dynamically to maintain equilibrium in response to changes in greenhouse gases such as water vapor, CO2, methane and ozone.
Miskolczi says,
“With relatively simple computations using NOAA’s annual mean temperature, H20 and CO2 time series, I have shown that in the last 61 years, despite a 30 percent increase in the atmospheric CO2 concentration, the cumulative atmospheric absorption of all greenhouse gases has not been changed and has remained constant. There is no runaway greenhouse effect. The anthropogenic global warming theory is a lie, unless somebody proves otherwise”
Miskolczi had submitted his paper to the respected peer-review journal, Applied Optics, but his then employer, NASA contractor Analytical Services and Materials forced him to withdraw it.
Miskolczi comments on this not uncommon problem:
“My idea of freedom of science cannot coexist with the way NASA handles new climate-change-related scientific results.”
There is much more of interest in this story, head over to the Examiner.
This story seemed appropriate on the day the the NOAA opened the Climate Services propaganda site which makes no attempt to hide their belief that the science is settled.
I’m taking bets Dick Morris will either:
a) kill himself
or,
b) continue his lunacy
I’m curious as to why his paper was written over 3 years ago, but doesn’t seem to have received much attention. Similarly a paper written two years ago by Gerlich and Tscheuschner seems to have had very little attention:
http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb/23/2303/S021797920904984X.html
Dave, the latter did, a little bit:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0802/0802.4324v1.pdf
followed by
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0904/0904.2767.pdf
I don’t think either of the two are published
I’ve since been looking for any sites claiming to be debunking Miskolczi. I found this at RC:
http://www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi
but it seems rather vague. Anyone find any more? Just curious as to whether his theories hold water.
http://landshape.org/enm/the-value-of-tau/
There is an attempt to debunk some parts of it, but this is clearly not enough to debunk whole thing.
Response to critics of the paper
http://miskolczi.webs.com/Answers_to_some_criticism.htm
This gives response to some criticism he was aware of.
The theory of Dr. Ferenc Miskolcziis a simplified, minimalistic attempt to summarize the bulk effects of a very complicated interaction.
(1) Kirchoff is enclosed radiation — (by mean free path)
(2) Virial — molecule can emit up or down — take infinite sums
Experiment and computer simulation to verify general principles;
(1) Spin a disk of gases and measure. (map gravityr*ω^2)
(2) Do a computer simulation of imaginary molecules.
Right on Dr Miskolcy, this whole thing was a scam from A-Z to set up a global taxation system based on energy use and the lawyers would be rich and happy ever after. The CO2 content of the air is a fraction of a % today as it was thousands of years ago before Al Gore or Obama climbed off the tree. More CO2 more plant grow, less CO2 less vegetation grow. Any excess of CO2 is absorbed by the trees, vegetation, sea grass and so on. High school biology.