Comprehensive Refutation of the Radiative Forcing Greenhouse Hypothesis

Abstract

The author's 2013 paper Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures presented what amounts to a totally new paradigm in climate change science. The hypothesis can be used to explain all temperatures and the main heat transfer mechanism in all planets. Only one hypothesis can be the correct one, and the issue as to which it is can be resolved using standard laws of physics. The study of heat transfer mechanisms lies wholly within the discipline of physics, and yet it appears that few, if any, physicists have been asked to review the physics that is being presented by climatologists, whose papers are referred to by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and many scientific authorities, including NASA. It appears that most physicists have avoided the debate, although some are now looking into it and finding false physics being used.In physics it has been explained in the 19th century that force fields like gravity will establish a situation in which temperatures do not level out as they would in a horizontal plane. Instead a stable non-zero temperature gradient is formed and this is a state of equilibrium. Because it is such a state, it was shown in the above 2013 paper that we cannot assume that heat transfers by non-radiative molecular collision processes need always to be from a warmer object to a cooler one. Imagine what must happen when the Sun rises and starts to warm the tops of clouds, thus disturbing the state of equilibrium that was closely the case the night before. There is now more energy but the temperature gradient will tend to restore its previous value. This means that the whole thermal profile (graph) will rise to a higher (but parallel) position with downward heat transfer being necessary towards warmer regions. Climatologists have completely overlooked this process and wrongly assumed the required energy came from atmospheric radiation that caused a heat transfer into the warmer surface.Because of this assumption, there is now an implication in energy diagrams, such as those from NASA, that the Earth's surface temperature is determined primarily by the assumed combined effect of solar radiation and about twice as much radiation from the colder atmosphere. This assumption is shown to be contrary to standard physics, and empirical evidence is presented that proves their assumption to be incorrect. Climate change is shown to follow natural cycles that are probably regulated by the Sun and planetary orbits. A possible mechanism for this regulating is suggested.