The Good Old Days when we had real scientist at NASA

The Good Old Days when we had real scientist at NASA

Postby dan_s » Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:58 pm

NASA USED TO SAY THIS: “CO2 WOULD HAVE TO INCREASE 10X TO ACHIEVE A 2.5-DEGREE RISE IN TEMPERATURE”

> The chemistry and physics of carbon dioxide DOES NOT support the global warming theory, and NASA was aware of this way-back when the notion of wielding climate science as a controlling weapon was but a twinkle in a young Al Gore’s eye.
> In the early 1970s, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration had a strong and consistent theory regarding the trace gas that is carbon dioxide: “The amount of atmospheric CO2 would have to increase 10 times to achieve a 2.5-degree rise in temperature,” scientists at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies were reported<https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/61879733/> as saying in October, 1972. “More CO2 wouldn’t raise the temperature any further because the gas would have reached its absorption limit,” the researchers added.
> This “absorption limit” is one of the most critical points in the AGW myth.

> Alarmists’ linear thinking tells them the more carbon dioxide you add to the atmosphere the hotter it will get, but this is a scientifically-baseless assumption, a li(n)e that has been amplified by the dippy-eco-journalists (non-scientists) of the world who wouldn’t recognize a nefarious controlling agenda if it kicked them square up the arse.
> A paper published in 1971 by NASA scientists Rasool and Schneider entitled, “Atmospheric carbon dioxide and aerosols: Effects of large increases on global climate” explains why the alarmists’ assumption is fundamentally wrong.
> Below is a key paragraph lifted directly from the study:
> “From our calculations, a doubling of CO2 produces a tropospheric temperature change of 0.8-degree. However, as more CO2 is added to the atmosphere, the rate of temperature increase is proportionally less and less, and the increase levels off. Even for an increase in CO2 by a factor of 10, the temperature increase does not exceed 2.5-degree. Therefore, the runaway greenhouse effect does not occur because the 15-um CO2 band, which is the main source of absorption, “saturates,” and the addition of more CO2 does not substantially increase the infrared opacity of the atmosphere.”
> AGW proponents used to talk their way around this absorption spanner in the works by claiming that the remaining “unsubstantial” CO2-driven temperature increase would cause a chain reaction of other factors resulting in what amounted to runaway warming. However, the clock has long run out on that hokey theory — this prophesied chain reaction has been proven false by observation, and, therefore, it has largely been retired from the discussion.
> To conclude, here is one key final point (and accompanying graph) from the Rasool and Schneider paper: “the rate of temperature increase diminishes with increasing CO2 in the atmosphere.”
> [cid:image001.png@01D8CE55.94521920][cid:image002.png@01D8CE61.204F09F0]<https://i0.wp.com/electroverse.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/9BBtrpPX-2.png?ssl=1>
>
> Ah, the 1970s — a time before TPTB politicized climate science and used it to control an intentionally and increasingly dumbed-down populous–at least climate science of the ‘warming’ variety, that is…
Dan Steffens
Energy Prospectus Group
dan_s
 
Posts: 30119
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:22 am

Return to Other topics of interest

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests