Re: [asa] Trees don't lie

From: John Burgeson (ASA member) <>
Date: Fri Mar 20 2009 - 10:44:49 EDT


BTW, detailed rebuttals to the G&T aricle are being carried on at

Randy's comments on this seem to be on course. The arguments G&T use
are akin to the "evolution could not have happened because of the 2nd
law of thermo."


On 3/20/09, Rich Blinne <> wrote:
> The physics behind global warming is surprisingly simple. Gases absorb
> radiation at different frequencies due to the nature of their chemical
> bonds. It looks like this:
> Both CO2 and water absorb in the infrared. Fortunately for us CO2 can
> only absorb so much before it becomes saturated. Thus, the temperature
> increases are logarithmic. Methane the relationship is roughly the
> square root and for halocarbons the relationship is linear. Each of
> this gases have a unique absorption spectrum which will be used to
> find earth-like planets (
> ).
> What can be done far, far away can also be done up close and personal.
> Namely, we can observe how much infrared absorption is going on and
> thus which GHG is guilty. During the mid-20th Century it wasn't clear
> whether CO2 or H20 was the big culprit in the measured warming. The
> spectrum analysis showed it to be CO2. As Randy alluded to looking
> other planets was helpful in also getting an understanding. Jim
> Hansen's study of Venus in the late 70s really helped. Venus and Earth
> have roughly the same amount of Carbon but Venus has all of its Carbon
> up in the atmosphere in the form of CO2. This is the why behind the
> fact Venus is so much hotter than us even though for the most part our
> planets are twins.
> Another common sense test can be found by considering the following.
> Why doesn't evening temperatures drop like a rock like on the Moon?
> The answer the same greenhouse effect. There is a Goldilocks level for
> the GHGs where liquid water can be around. Venus has too much and Mars
> has too little. By burning fossil fuels we are trying to become like
> our twin sister by taking the Carbon in the ground and throwing it up
> in the atmosphere.
> Finally, a good history of our understanding of GHG physics can be
> found in the following American Institute of Physics publication:
> Rich Blinne
> Member ASA
> On Mar 20, 2009, at 4:35 AM, Randy Isaac wrote:
>> Thanks for the link, Burgy. I don't know that journal or its
>> reputation. I gave the paper a very quick scan and it seems they are
>> saying that the greenhouse effect doesn't exist because it violates
>> some thermodynamic principle. I didn't follow their reasoning so I
>> don't know if and why it is wrong and haven't found the
>> response. But it does seem analogous to the
>> argument that evolution couldn't have happened because it violates
>> the second law of thermodynamics. It's easy to be misled by
>> thermodynamics. If these guys are right, then it seems we would have
>> trouble explaining the temperature difference between Venus and
>> Mars. And isn't the greenhouse effect the very basis of Glenn
>> Morton's calculation that a vapor canopy would lead to the earth's
>> temperature being too hot for life?
>> It just doesn't pass the sniff test for me. You're right that it
>> "looks" authoritative but it certainly doesn't sound authoritative
>> or sensible. Maybe somebody else figured out their reasoning but I
>> don't have time.
>> Randy
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Burgeson (ASA member)"
>> <
>> >
>> To: "George Murphy" <>
>> Cc: "David Clounch" <>; "William Hamilton"
>> <
>> >; "ASA List" <>; "Glenn Morton"
>> > <
>> >
>> Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 5:31 PM
>> Subject: Re: [asa] Trees don't lie
>>> Is an article in the International Journal of Modern Physics, B, Vol.
>>> 23, No. 3 (2009) 275{364 , by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
>>> Tscheuschner
>>> which "absolutely debunks" AGW.
>>> It looks really really really authoritative, and I expect we will be
>>> seeing references to it come along from the anti-AGW crowd.
>>> A refutation of it is now on the site. To the slight
>>> extent that I understand it, it fails to make its case.
>>> jb
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> To unsubscribe, send a message to with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Mar 20 10:45:34 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Mar 20 2009 - 10:45:35 EDT