Quote:

Traditional anthropogenic theory of currently observed global warming states that release of carbon dioxide into atmosphere (partially as a result of utilization of fossil fuels) leads to an increase in atmospheric temperature because the molecules of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorb the infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface. This statement is based on the Arrhenius hypothesis, which was never verified (Arrhenius, 1896). The proponents of this theory take into consideration only one component of heat transfer in atmosphere, i.e., radiation. Yet, in the dense Earth’s troposphere with the pressure pa > 0:2 atm, the heat from the Earth’s surface is mostly transferred by convection (Sorokhtin, 2001a). According to our estimates, convection accounts for 67%, water vapor condensation in troposphere accounts for 25%, and radiation accounts for about 8% of the total heat transfer from the Earth’s surface to troposphere. Thus, convection is the dominant process of heat transfer in troposphere, and all the theories of Earth’s atmospheric heating (or cooling) first of all must consider this process of heat (energy)– mass redistribution in atmosphere (Sorokhtin, 2001a, 2001b; Khilyuk and Chilingar, 2003, 2004). When the temperature of a given mass of air increases, it expands, becomes lighter, and rises. In turn, the denser cooler air of upper layers of troposphere descends and replaces the warmer air of lower layers. This physical system (multiple cells of air convection) acts in the Earth’s troposphere like a continuous surface cooler. The cooling effect by air convection can surpass considerably the  the warming effect of radiation.

https://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/CoolingOfAtmosphere.pdf

For those who think cooling only comes from radiation.

New research -


Quote:

A prevailing theme not only of GEWEX, but one that cuts across WCRP including within its new Lighthouse Activities (LHAs; www.wcrp-climate.org/lha-overview) and beyond, is the emphasis on km-scale modeling called out above. Existing climate models have significant shortcomings in simulating local weather and climate because of a lack of resolution. They cannot resolve the detailed structure and life cycles of systems such as tropical cyclones, depressions, and persistent high pressure systems, which are key in the coupling of the energy and water cycle. These systems also drive many of the more costly impacts of climate change, such as coastal inundation, flooding, droughts, and wildfires. Present-day global models are also unable to resolve ocean currents that are fundamental to climate variability and regional climate change (Marotzke et al. 2017). Recent studies illustrate the potential of the new generation of high-resolution models for revolutionizing the quality of information available for mitigation and adaptation, from global and regional climate impacts, to risks of unprecedented extreme weather and dangerous climate change. A thread common across both GEWEX objectives and these new modeling initiatives is the topic of convection, not only from the context of resolving it with models, but also for its importance to the prediction of precipitation and severe weather. Resolving convection is essential for understanding the future of our water resources and for protection from flash flooding under climate change (Slingo et al. 2022). This comes with the challenge in representing the couplings between the main components of the systems across this range of scales ultimately moving these models to km-scale Earth system models. GEWEX in the decade of km-scale Earth system science As GEWEX moves forward, it does so under a simple vision articulated at the 2018 GEWEX Open Science Conference by Dr. Alan Betts during his keynote address, “Water, energy: Life on Earth,” which underscores the very basic challenge of the next phase of GEWEX and beyond: that humanity is deeply embedded in an interconnected physical Earth system. That the Earth system influences humanity in profound ways is well understood, but an appreciation for the wider and profound influences of humanity on the Earth system, and on the hydrological and climate cycles in particular, continues to be realized. The connections between water, energy, and life become particularly acute as we strive to bring Earth sciences down to the km scale (e.g., Slingo et al. 2022), a point further underscored by reference to Fig. 7 that also hints at why we expect this connection will become increasingly important as GEWEX moves into the next phase. The figure offers a contrast between the natural water cycle, expressed here as a mean discharge of the Amazon (5,000 km3 yr−1), the largest river by volume, compared to the volume of global water withdrawn by different sectors of human society. The modification to the continental water cycle occurring from a continually increasing human withdrawal is now larger than the mean discharge of the Amazon River. The impact is more complex to evaluate as not all water abstracted by humans from the natural system is consumed. Human water management practices impact river discharge, coastal processes and contribute nontrivially to sea level rise (e.g., Reager et al. 2016).

The First 30 Years of GEWEX -Stephens et al 2023

https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/104/1/BAMS-D-22-0061.1.xml

I see nothing from the Climate Cultists.....however such blasphemy as this cannot go unpunished! Lee is to be sacrificed on the altar of the anointed one - saint Greta of the Warming! ;D

I had a laugh.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 8:17pm:

I had a laugh.

Yeah. We know the science isn't your strong suit. ::)

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 8:17pm:

I had a laugh.

Yeah, the hollow laugh of the bozo who discovers that he has been eating a shite sandwich.

LOL!

How can heat be transferred to space from the stratosphere?

What causes convection in the troposphere?

What is the relevant Law of Thermodynamics applying here?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 10:56pm:

LOL! How can heat be transferred to space from the stratosphere? What causes convection in the troposphere? What is the relevant Law of Thermodynamics applying here?

It's explained in the OP if you read it.   ::)

No surprise you have no idea.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 10:59pm:

No surprise you have no idea.

Yet, in the dense Earth’s troposphere with the pressure pa > 0:2 atm,
the heat from the Earth’s surface is mostly transferred by convection (Sorokhtin, 2001a).

Yup, no idea.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed, convection just redistributes heat a bit.

We have been over this before: how can energy be transmitted to space?

Conduction?

Convection?

Radiation?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 11:06pm:

Yup, no idea. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, convection just redistributes heat a bit. We have been over this before: how can energy be transmitted to space? Conduction? Convection? Radiation?

I know   -  it's quantum physics.

No idea? Heat can only be transferred to the vacuum of space by radiation. Guess lee forgot that.

No idea at all. HS dropout.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 5^th, 2023 at 11:18pm:

No idea at all. HS dropout.

Monk,
are you breaking the rules here by abusing the moderator?

Just posting the facts.

https://i.postimg.cc/vZnZnt7L/Credit-Marco-Saporiti-Density-Design-Research-Lab-EN-1.jpg



Full-size image at https://www.aeronomie.be/sites/default/files/inline-images/Credit-MarcoSaporiti_DensityDesign_ResearchLab_EN.jpg

oh look a static world with no convection. ::)

" The atmosphere and ocean work non-stop to even out solar heating imbalances through evaporation of surface water, convection, rainfall, winds, and ocean circulation. This coupled atmosphere and ocean circulation is known as Earth’s heat engine."

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/EnergyBalance

even . . .  out . . . imbalances.

NOT “cool the atmosphere!”

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 3:53pm:

NOT “cool the atmosphere!”

"The first is the transfer of 'thermal' energy (often referred to rather loosely as 'heat') by a combination of conduction and convection. This is essentially the same mechanism that heats a saucepan of water on the stove; see Box 4. The situation in the atmosphere is more complicated, but the basic principle is the same. Warm air, heated by contact with the ground or a warm sea, rises upwards carrying heat transferred from the surface aloft. This allows more cool air to come into contact with the surface and be heated in its turn. Working together, conduction/convection drive a significant flow of heat across the boundary between the surface and the air."

https://www.open.edu/openlearn/nature-environment/climate-change/content-section-1.3.4

Air is a fluid. Convection is merely the movement of the fluid. The lapse rate is proof of this cooling effect.  ;)

Where does the “more cool air” come from?

Transfers within the troposphere do not affect overall heat in atmosphere–surface–ocean.

How do you transfer heat to the vacuum of space, lee? I educated you about this not all that long ago.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 5:37pm:

Where does the “more cool air” come from?

Ah you mean the air temperature is the same winter or summer, high or low latitude? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 5:37pm:

Transfers within the troposphere do not affect overall heat in atmosphere–surface–ocean.

That's not what the purveyors of the mythical tropical hotspot proclaim. ;)


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 5:37pm:

How do you transfer heat to the vacuum of space, lee?

That and only that is by radiation only.

And what actually cools the atmosphere/surface/oceans?

Hint: it is not convection.


You must remember: energy cannot be created or destroyed. Does convection destroy energy, lee?


You REALLY are desperate, aren’t you?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

And what actually cools the atmosphere/surface/oceans?

It is convection..


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Hint: it is not convection.

You are wrong.


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

You must remember: energy cannot be created or destroyed. Does convection destroy energy, lee?

Energy is transformed. By collision of molecules. And because of that collision it dissipates. Otherwise you would have a lossless system. ;)


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

You REALLY are desperate, aren’t you?

Never mind JM. It was good that you came here instead of your echo chamber. But you lose. ;)

Nope, you cannot destroy energy lee.

Energy can only be lost from the atmosphere by radiation to space.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 7:11pm:

Nope, you cannot destroy energy lee.

Energy is not destroyed. When molecules collide there is a change of angular motion and that takes energy. Therefore there is  a lower energy transmitted to the next molecule.


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 7:11pm:

Energy can only be lost from the atmosphere by radiation to space.

Nope. as explained above.

Nope. Energy is still there—you cannot destroy it.

Energy can only be lost by the surface-ocean-atmosphere by radiation to space.

No matter how you try, energy cannot be created or destroyed.

The cooling of the atmosphere takes place in the upper layers of the stratosphere. All the rest is wishful thinking by people who have no notion of science.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

Nope. Energy is still there—you cannot destroy it.

That's what I said. ::)


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

Energy can only be lost by the surface-ocean-atmosphere by radiation to space.

Nope. Collision of molecules reduces energy and changes form.


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

No matter how you try, energy cannot be created or destroyed.

And once again I agree. It can be changed from one form to another. Why is that so hard to understand? It is basic physics. ::)


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

The cooling of the atmosphere takes place in the upper layers of the stratosphere. All the rest is wishful thinking by people who have no notion of science.

So says the person who says it is AGW since the industrial revolution. ;D ;D ;D ;D

I know you take your cues from Dr Strong who uses a climate model to tell him SST. ;)

LOL! lee so hopeful, thought he had found a refutation of AGW  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Collision of molecules would release heat.  ;)

As you know, CO2 has been the main driver of climate since the Cambrian. It can be masked but is still working.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 8:41pm:

lee so hopeful, thought he had found a refutation of AGW

Then perhaps you can cite the paper relied upon by the IPCC that proves the AGW "fingerprint" ;)

Lee has been consistently citing scientific evidence debunking the tendentious agit-prop.

Juvenile Wanker, on the other hand, having no reasoned counter-arguments and being unable to resist the tendentious political agit-prop, cites whatever he can find in support of it.

Lee thinks anthropogenic CO2 does not drive the climate. I agree.

Wankers thinks anthropogenic CO2 is the Lord of Trace Gasses that Rules Them All. Silly. No amount of reasoning or evidence will ever sway a wanker so invested in dogma.

Franko speaks. . .garbage.

HM years physics did you do at Uni, Frank? Any?

lee wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 9:01pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6th, 2023 at 8:41pm: lee so hopeful, thought he had found a refutation of AGW Then perhaps you can cite the paper relied upon by the IPCC that proves the AGW "fingerprint" ;)

Poor lee. Remember the spectrum of far IR at top of atmosphere? LOTS of energy missing at the emission lines of CO2, methane etc wasn’t there?

Poor lee, so eager to think AGW, and the change it would bring, wasn’t real he swallowed nonsense about convection in the troposphere would cool the atmosphere, that molecules colliding together would destroy energy.

Such desperation!

Why not have a look at: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm and learning a bit about AGW science?

As usual, the clown pretending to Mod this board is missing when science is discussed. SIX years university he claimed. Was he a janitor there?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 9:34pm:

Franko speaks. . .garbage. HM years physics did you do at Uni, Frank? Any?

Oh?! The Bbwianesque argument from 'but I went to uni!'

;D ;D ;D


Pal, I KNOW how unis and academia work. I have been an insider for decades.
Most of the climate argument is not about physics but politics. Even you know that.

So you didn’t study physics?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 9:38pm:

Remember the spectrum of far IR at top of atmosphere? LOTS of energy missing at the emission lines of CO2, methane etc wasn’t there?

So tell us exactly when CO2 and methane weren't there. CO2 and methane have always been there. They are naturally occurring compounds. ::)


lee wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 9:01pm:

Then perhaps you can cite the paper relied upon by the IPCC that proves the AGW "fingerprint"

You didn't cite the paper.  ;)


Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 6^th, 2023 at 9:38pm:

Why not have a look at: https://history.aip.org/climate/index.htm

I did at the main page. If you had searched, you would have found papers about convective cooling. ;)