Ward is saying that waves only exist in matter and the matter must have bonds between them as we see in solids and liquids. There are no such bonds between molecules of gas and exist only fleetingly as gas molecules pass each other at great speeds. Therefore, according to Ward, it is erroneous to make calculations of energy assuming radiation exists as waves. Ward says radiation exists purely as frequency in free space and within gases and the only correct way to calculate its energy is through Plank's equation. This makes UV radiation much more energetic than infrared. As you pointed out however, for UV to take prominence over infrared in causing global warming, it must be shown that its flux ( quantity per square meter ) is at least close to that of infrared. I have not determined that yet. If it can be shown that mid level UV flux striking earths surface in the late 20 th century was at least on the same order of magnitude as infrared during that time, would you be willing to say your confidence in co2 as the prime cause of global warming is less than 50% ?
It sounds as though Ward has invented his own physics, ad hoc.
I have not determined that yet. If it can be shown that mid level UV flux striking earths surface in the late 20 th century was at least on the same order of magnitude as infrared during that time, would you be willing to say your confidence in co2 as the prime cause of global warming is less than 50% ?
But as NoNukes points out, the greenhouse effect is not about the IR that arrives but the IR that leaves. From WP: "The Earth receives energy from the Sun in the form UV, visible, and near IR radiation, most of which passes through the atmosphere without being absorbed or reflected. Of the total amount of energy available at the top of the atmosphere (TOA), about 26% is reflected back out to space by the atmosphere and clouds and 19% is absorbed by the atmosphere and clouds. Most of the remaining energy is absorbed at the Earth's surface. Because it is warm, the surface radiates far IR thermal radiation that consists of wavelengths that are much longer than the wavelengths that were absorbed".
Foreveryoung, Nothing like having the perspective of the last 600 million years in relation to climate as opposed to looking at the last 150 years with blinders on.
So using the Vostek ice core data no one here can show/prove a relationship between CO2 and the Earth's temperature.
The Earth's main greenhouse gas is water vapor responsible for 97% of the greenhouse gas effect (the EPA says 95%). But there is no easy way to tax water vapor.
That is not the case with CO2, as there are many ways this can be taxed. As Michael Faraday replied to a MP who asked what good is this knowledge, Mike responded "You may be able to figure out a way to tax it" or something along those lines.
This CO2, AGW thing is just a way to tax people..............so loved by the big government types.
Also I heard that paleontologists fake all the dinosaur bones to turn people away from Jesus.
But I didn't believe it, 'cos I'm not a paranoid loony.
He explains why the Arhennius theory of the greenhouse effect is a fiction in that it confuses the cause with the effect where the actual cause is the gravito-thermal greenhouse effect and the actual effect is the IR absorption and emission of IR active greenhouse gases. The gravito-thermal greenhouse effect is described in detail in the peer-reviewed paper (the 33C gravito-thermal greenhouse effect of Maxwell, Clausius, Carnot, Boltzmann, Feynman, US Standard Atmosphere, the HS greenhouse equation, et al). This paper gives the real reason for the 33C difference between an earth with no atmosphere and an earth with its present atmosphere as opposed to the one espoused as "common knowledge".
Look, foreveryoung, you've got to get yourself some more spidey-sense. Greatly to your credit, you have rejected some of the silly ideas you used to have. But you still don't know how to spot a silly idea a mile away.
I've been looking at this guy's stuff and he's a grade-A loony. I'll explain why at length and in detail if you like, but you might want to look it over again yourself and see if you can spot the signs.
One question to start you off. You mention a "peer-reviewed paper". Where is it?
2015 is the warmest year ever recorded. Thirteen of the top 14 warmest years on the books have happened this century. And here in the United States, it has been a hot, strange month. Many cities across the northeast smashed their Christmas and Christmas Eve temperature records not at midday, but at the stroke of midnight. For the hundred-plus years that New York temperatures have been recorded, the city has never been warmer than 63 degrees Fahrenheit on a December 24. Yet at 1 a.m. on Christmas Eve of this year, the thermometer measured 67 degrees.