Monckton
“Is the criticism of John Clauser's presentation at the EIKE climate conference correct?”
By Terigi Ciccone
August 16, 2024
See article: https://www.climategate.nl/2024/08/is-de-kritiet-op-de-voordracht-vandr-clausers-op-de-klimaatconferentie-van-eike-correct/
TC: Comments below are offered observations on selected items of the C Monckton article. In summary, I wholeheartedly support Clauser and C Monckton's assertion that most of the alarmist assumptions and premises must be challenged.
2. There is no simple relationship between radiation imbalance and warming.
The relationship is simple, but deriving the relevant quantities is difficult. Dr. Clauser drew up the equations on which he relied with some care. She didn't mention the Influenzerin.
TC Comment. We must start with the fact that the Earth is not a balanced, rotating sphere with a perfect axis of rotation and spinning at a constant RPM. Those familiar with 100-ton rotors spinning at 3,600 RPM know that even the slightest imbalance can lead to catastrophic results. The Earth is spinning with a tangential speed of 1,000 MPH at sea level at the equator, and the Earth is not a balanced sphere, not even its solid outer crust. It’s not even a solid sphere with oceans sloshing on its outer skin, dynamically bulging on the surface by the tides of the moon and sun, and at times by other planets. Then think of the differential tidal forces and angular moments of the rips and currents of the subsurface liquid metal outer core with a temperature equal to the surface of the sun. A colleague wrote an excellent paper to explain/quantify the
many forces involved and their complexities. See the article https://www.academia.edu/44104127/What_forces_move_tectonic_plates_By_recog nizing_the_Earths_accelerations_we_can_identify_forces? auto=download&email_work_card=download-paper. The image shows an unbalanced Earth, 10,000X exaggerated, but it’s a spinning potato. Now imagine the heat and dynamic forces generated by friction as its liquid outer core pulls and shoves continents around and huge slabs of the crust are pushed up and pushed down. It is also capable of causing quick/temporary shifts in the axis of rotation, increasing/decreasing the insulation captured by the land masses in the northern hemisphere. See NASA doing real climate change science for a change, NASA Details Earthquake Effects on the Earth. Quote: “NASA scientists using data from the Indonesian earthquake calculated it affected Earth's rotation, decreased the length of day, slightly changed the planet's shape, and shifted the North Pole by centimeters. The earthquake that created the huge tsunami also changed the Earth's rotation.”
8. Dr. Clauser did not realize that measurements of the ocean's heat content, with their very small uncertainty, constrain the three variables that determine Earth's energy imbalance.
Given the known and substantial uncertainties in the measurements of the ARGO buoys, and given the fact that climatologists do not dare to express ocean warming as temperature, but rather as zettajoules of energy (because the temperature change in the oceans is minuscule and would not scare anyone), and given that none of the 3,500,000 submarine volcanoes that are known confounders of ocean temperature measurement are routinely measured by humans, and given that Dr. Clauser showed in his presentation that the estimates of Earth's energy imbalance, whether correlated with the measurements of the ocean's heat content, were the same, the Influenzerin has completely missed the point.
TC: Note the Reference that there are an estimated 3.5 million submarine volcanoes at the bottom of the oceans, where the crust is the thinnest. Who knows how many are active, including fissures, gas vents, and shield volcanoes? Satellites are very limited in what they can detect. Who measures the amount of heat they release in these CO2-rich cold waters and when?
9. Dr. Clauser said the energy that climatologists say disappeared in 20082009 may have contributed to the change in Earth's rotation speed. “He really wants to have an original take on everything, doesn't he? You need
angular momentum, and where would that come from?” was the Influenzerin's signature sarcastic remark.
TC: see note 8 above. Why are so many $billions spent each year on chasing the CO2/radiative nonsense instead of this real and unknown science?
11. Dr. Clauser's estimate that clouds will reflect 145 watts per square meter of radiation is incorrect because the measured total reflected shortwave radiation is only 100 watts per square meter. The standard albedo is about half of what Dr. Clauser suggests.
“The Stefan-Boltzmann constant σ (Rybicki 1979), origin….”
TC: Unlike the Sun and stars the Earth is not a blackbody, it's never in thermal equilibrium, it has no radiating surface, and does not radiate over a broad spectrum of frequencies.
Secondly, clouds and air will radiate heat from all altitudes in the troposphere, and even from the stratosphere when the water vapor condenses to liquid/solid water. This latent heat is more than half o3 the heat absorbed by the surface and that may take days, even weeks before it’s released as radiation. Clouds also temporarily block convection heat radiation like water vapor. The bottom line is that NASA's use of the Boltzmann Constant and immensity estimates are suspect.