Greenhouse effect and atmospheric radiation?

Question

How does the Greenhouse effect and atmospheric radiation relate to each other? I am still trying to understand the "chemistry" aspect of the greenhouse effect, not just the simple explanation. My teacher says that the GHG effect isn't really "right" in a way (controversies) ... anyone want to explain this to me? I am confused.

Answer 1

Basically, the Greenhouse effect is when light and heat energy from the sun passes through the atmosphere and can not get out due to the greenhouse gasses, most famously, carbon dioxide. This is what happenes on Venus.

Your teacher is correct in saying that,"the GHG effect isn't really 'right.'" There are a few reasons for this. Consider that the industrial reveloution happened in the 1800's. Since then coal and other fuels have been used with increasing frequency. So one might expect that since using fossil fuels increases the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that the temperture of the earth would also be increasing in relation to the use of fossil fuels, and this is a perfectly fine conclusion to draw if one looks at the temperture graphs between 1920-1940 and 1975-present, in which case the temperture was rising, but now one must ask, "what happened between 1940 and 1975?" Well, the answer to this is that the Earth was COOLING! Which goes contrary to popular conventions that GHG are making the Earth warmer. If you look at records and graphs, you will notice that most enviormentalists don't use data that goes past 1975.

Also right now, there are worries that with the GHG in the atmosphere the ice caps are going to melt, but you want to know something interesting? The temperture over antartica has been FALLING lately, not rising, like one would be led to believe.

Paul B: How does your data account for the urban-heat island effect? Does your data readily incoporate how there have been 50 year periods of heat increase that were much greater than any period in the 20th century? Do your sources show that rising tempertures have been beneficial for civilizations, when they do occur? Do you realize that the magazines you cited are pro-GHG effect, and that they refuse to publish studies that are anti-GHG effect?

I also find it interesting that the consenses you cite is among employed individuals, that require funding for their research projects, and thus must not bite the hand that feeds them so to speak. Whereas, there is a "consenses" among retired professionals, who no longer need funding, that at the present moment it is not possible to determine what effect human activity is having rising atmospheric tempertures.

Also keep in mind that many of the termometers used to measure the temperture is located within urban areas and therefore is subject to the "urban heat island effect."

Answer 2

McCalhoun is WRONG! The most striking greenhouse data do indeed refer to the period since 1975, but this is precisely as expected on GHG theory because of the rate of increase for CO2 and the time lag for it to take effect. There is no doubt that, decade by decade, the Earth is warming more rapidly than the natural cycles can account for, and the best consensus is that there is an at least 90% chance that at least half the warming is due to human activity.

Sunlight falling on Earth is re-emitted as infrared. Some wavelengths are absorbed by greenhouse gases and re-emitted time and time again until you get close enough to the top of the atmosphere that the energy can escape. The more greenhouse gas, the higher up that escape level is, and higher means colder means less energy lost means Earth heating up to compensate until a new steady state is reached at higher surface temperature.

See "Global warming, the complete briefing", by John Houghton, Professor of Atmospheric Science at Oxford University, who probably knows even more about the subject than your science teacher. Also recent papers in Science and Nature which show rapid warming over both polar regions.

Answer 3

it fairly is an extremely thrilling examine. As I comprehend it this paper will strengthen 2 significant themes with ‘the universal form’. a million. the universal form could be high-quality for representing astronomically distant gadgets, whether it assumes that the article is a flat disk, and that the derived floor temperature is persevering with around the exterior of the disc. it fairly is no longer a valid form for the earth. 2. the universal form would not evaluate the dark element of the earth the place the radiative situations (and consequently the corresponding floor temperatures) are fairly distinctive. I’m no longer attentive to how the radiative stability is certainly represented interior the GCM’s, so don’t comprehend if, or to what volume those 2 aspects are seen. yet i could be very interested in reading any responses on the substance of this rfile. Has every person see a reaction to the substance of this paper from every person interior the climate technological know-how community?... something from Trenberth in this?

Answer 4

greenhouse effect meant there are so many gases like CO2 NO2 and the others that can make the earth surface more warm (hot) by reflecting atmospheric radiation. naturally the solar (atmospheric) radiation accepted by earth and several radiation is reflected again into the space, some part of the radiation pass through the atmosphere into the space but the other reflected by greenhouse gases comeback into the earth surface. greenhouse effect gases is useful to keep earth warm but if there is too much gases it makes the earth more hot because the gases reflecting the atmospheric (solar) radiation more intensive.