Who did falsify Scientific Consensus on Climate Change mechanisms?

Recent momentum in Climate Activism, amongst others driven by unsatisfactory progress in so far implemented actions raise questions on the contemporary scientific compromise on the perception of CO₂ in an atmospheric heat pump. Scientific explanations may be predictive provided the analysis was holistic. Because prediction relies on hypothesis to be made first, consecutively needing to be validated by experimental campaigns. Austrian born Philosopher of science Sir Karl Popper proposed that statements and theories that are not falsifiable would be unscientific hence becoming a pure issue of engineering most excellent solutions.
Science often takes the freedom to keep laymen explanations reductive to take out complexity. So without wanting to oppose against any of the current hypothesis‘ on Climate Change mechanisms I‘d like to summarize my personal perception and observations for my expectations from specifications to solve Climate problems.
What’s called “greenhouse gases” are trace gases making up only a very small part of the atmosphere that are opaque to thermal radiation. Because any substance that absorbs thermal radiation will also emit such, the atmosphere absorbs the main energy radiation from the Sun back-radiating in total actually more to the surface of the Earth than direct irradiation from the Sun can arrive there. As a simple consequence of the second law of thermodynamics the net flow of radiant heat is still upwards from the surface to the atmosphere, because the upwards thermal emission is greater than the downwards atmospheric back-radiation. It needs to be understood the atmosphere’s capacity to interact with thermal radiation helps maintain the Earth’s surface temperature at a livable level. If the atmosphere was simply a dry mix of its major constituents, Oxygen and Nitrogen, the Earth would freeze over completely.
Carbon- or Nitrogen-Dioxide as well as Ozone have ~2.5 times the molar mass of water. As can be concluded from the foregoing it‘s a combination of opaqueness to thermal radiation and mass that enable absorption of solar irradiated heat energy and back-radiation from earth surface. An unsatisfactorily explored issue is the impact of Methane emissions being an as elementary Natural cycle constituent as CO₂ is. Nature compounds all organic life from Carbon, Hydrogen and Oxygen, the latter two coinciding as Water (carbohydrates) chemically storing solar energy in terrestrially (photo) synthesized matter able to serve as an energy supply to habitats. What‘s not used by the end of its lifespan Nature decomposes into gases made up from the same three atoms (C-H-O). As a consequence of the first law of thermodynamics energy can‘t get lost, which is why ceasing carbohydrates (or hydrocarbons) bequeath its residual chemical energy left after deducted transformation-anergy needed to drive decomposition under CO₂ generation into CH₄ as a heir. Together with both gases‘ mass/energy product total mass needs to be balanced, which is by water (making the 3 outputs of any landfill complete).
Very little can be found on potential interrelation between Methane emissions and hurricanes. As the lightest greenhouse gas it must rise all the way to stratosphere above and beyond all other „Greenhouse Gases“ becoming the first absorber of solar irradiation. When oxidizing up there if falls into 5 times the ascended mass releasing its energy content to the atmosphere. Consecutively gravity in interaction with Coriolis force will spin down the two decomposition constituencies CO₂ and water, weighing more than the original Methane. Seeing Austrian compatriot Felix Baumgartner‘s issues during his space jump a few years ago made me wonder if this might be where tornados‘ spin comes from?
Another seemingly neglected issue in Climate Change is loss of local surface cooling by vegetation surface evaporation, particularly by deforestation and lining being a main driver of soil erosion, the #1 single CO₂ emitter. For sure it‘s relocating water from land surfaces towards oceans having a smaller evaporation rate per surface than forests. So besides increasing capacities for heat storage by discarding additional non-contemporary fossil Carbon into atmospheric CO₂ warming further accelerates by anthropogenic interference in regional water cycles. Overconsumption of water walks and nobody talks. In contrary totally energy-inefficient (wind and PV) Power-to-X so called Decarbonization concepts are propagated as if water was abundantly manipulable without adverse effects on Climate Change! Therefore populistic political representations of having all solutions ready may help some unscrupulous profiteers but in no way against Climate Change.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s