Ventura Photonics
Non Imaging Optics
Greenhouse Effect
Global Warming
The Dynamic Greenhouse
Effect and the Climate
Averaging Paradox
Roy Clark
This is the first in a series of monographs describing research conducted by Ventura
Photonics on topics of interest in energy and environment.  These monographs are
intended to provide insight into the underlying science and change the way we think
about energy use and our impact on the environment.  The first monograph addresses
climate change.  The observed increase of 100 parts per million in atmospheric carbon
the Earth’s climate.  This follows from an analysis of the time dependence of the climate
energy transfer.  The dynamic nature of the greenhouse effect has been conveniently
ignored and the result has been scientific fraud on an unprecedented scale.  Over a
trillion dollars has been wasted on research to save the planet from a non-existent
problem.  Climate fraud has carried over into alternative energy and the environmental
impact of the use fossil fuels.  These will be the topics of future monographs in this
series.   

VPM 001: The Dynamic Greenhouse Effect and the Climate Averaging Paradox

The global warming ‘debate’ has become detached from its foundations in physical
science and degenerated into an argument over belief in empirical pseudoscience.  
The energy transfer processes that determine the Earth’s surface temperature are
dynamic, not static.  The local surface temperature is always changing on both a daily
and a seasonal time frame.  The Earth’s climate has to be described in terms of at least
6 separate energy transfer processes coupled dynamically to four thermal reservoirs.  
There can be no climate equilibrium on any time scale. It is impossible for the large
scale equilibrium based climate models to predict climate change.  They have been
fraudulently hard wired to produce global warming.  Once this is understood, the whole
pseudoscientific façade of forcings and feedbacks and climate sensitivity factors
collapses.  A doubling of the atmospheric CO
2 concentration can have no effect on the
Earth’s climate.  
The removal of the artificial climate equilibrium concept also introduces a climate
averaging paradox.  Climate is the long term trend in the weather patterns, usually
determined over a minimum of 30 years.  Since there is no equilibrium, climate must be
calculated as it is measured, as a long term average of short term variations.  There is
no simplifying calculation of an equilibrium climate state that can be substituted for the
real long term climate average.  










Ventura Photonics
Thousand Oaks, CA
Ventura Photonics Monographs
In any physical theory one must distinguish the concepts and quantities
that are physically observable from those which are not.  The former
must of necessity play a role in theory, the later can be modified or
abandoned without impairment.
Werner Heisenberg, 1925
The Dynamic Greenhouse Effect and the Climate Averaging
Paradox

Ventura Photonics Monograph VPM 001

Copyright © Roy Clark 2011

All rights reserved

ISBN-13: 978-1466359185

ISBN-10: 1466359188

Ventura Photonics
Thousand Oaks
California
Preface                                                                                                                i
1.0 Introduction                                                                                                   1
2.0 Historical Background                                                                                   5
3.0 Technical Background                                                                                  9
3.1 Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics ...............................................
.........9
3.2 Black Body Radiation and the Kirchoff Exchange Energy .................
.........12
3.3 Atmospheric Attenuation ..................................................................
..........13
3.4 The IR spectra of H
2O and CO2 in the atmosphere ...................................14
3.4.1: Downward LWIR Emission from CO
2 ......................................................17
3.5 The Lapse Rate ...................................................
......................................18
3.6 The Optical Properties of the Ocean .........................................................19
3.7 Surface Heat Transfer and Thermal Hysteresis .........................................23
3.8 The Solar Heating of an Earth without an Atmosphere ..............................27
4.0 Dynamic Energy Transfer                                                                           41
4.1 The Air Land Interface ...............................................................................43
4.1.1 Simulation of the Land Heating ...............................................................47
4.1.2 The Ocean Influence on the Minimum MSAT ..........................................51
4.1.3 The Night Time Air Temperature Transition from Convection .................60
4.2 The Air-Ocean Interface ..................................................................
...........61
4.2.1 Ocean Heating From Argo Float Data .....................................................64
4.2.2 The Simulation of Ocean Solar Heating ...... ....
........................................68
4.2.3 The Pacific Warm Pool ............................................................................73
4.2.4 Ocean Cooling  Energy Balance at the Air-Tropical Ocean Interface ......78
4.2.5 Ocean Cooling at Mid Latitudes ..............................................................83
4.3 The Direct LWIR Emission to Space from the Earth’s surface ....................85
4.4 Energy Transfer between the Surface and the Lower Troposphere ..........87
4.5 Energy transfer to the Middle and Upper Troposphere ..............................89
4.5.1 Latent Heat Release and the Water Vapor Concentration Profile       .....90
4.6 LWIR Emission to Space from the Atmosphere ..........................................91
5.0 The Earth’s Dynamic Radiation Budget                                                      95
References                                                                                                       99
Index                                                                                                               103
CONTENTS
The idea that variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration could cause
changes to the Earth’s climate originated in the middle of the nineteenth century with
the work of John Tyndall.  Based on the limited knowledge at that time it was a
reasonable explanation of the cause of an Ice Age.  This idea became accepted as
dogma over the years and was reinforced a century later by the discovery of
changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration from deep drilled ice core
data.  As the Earth warmed from an Ice Age, the atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentration increased from about 200 to 280 parts per million.  However, we now
know that this was caused by the decrease in the ocean solubility of carbon dioxide
as the oceans warmed up.  The sun had to heat the oceans first.  Climate change is
caused by small fluctuations in the solar constant that accumulate as heat over long
periods in the Earth’s oceans.  The solar constant, the average solar flux reaching
the Earth is 1365 W.m^-2.  This increases by about 1 W.m^-2 when the sun is active
and the sunspot index is near 100.  It changes by a similar amount as the planets,
particularly Jupiter change the ellipticity of the Earth’s orbit over a nominal 100,000
year Ice Age cycle.  Simple heat capacity calculations show that it only requires an
increase of 0.4 W.m^-2 in the solar flux at the surface to warm the Earth out of an Ice
Age, although it requires 10,000 years for the ice to melt.  

Unfortunately, modern academic research is judged, not by its scientific validity, but
by the magnitude of the research funds obtained and the number of papers
published.  Starting in the 1960’s, exaggerated claims of carbon dioxide induced
global warming were used as a funding vehicle for a wide range of research topics.  
First, carbon dioxide induced global warming was used as an excuse by infra-red
spectroscopists and astronomers to fund research on radiative transfer in planetary
atmospheres.  This was an exercise in applied mathematics not physics.  The
dynamic energy transfer processes that determine the Earth’s surface temperature
were ignored.  Simplistic equilibrium assumptions were made that allowed
calculations to be performed using the limited computer capabilities available at the
time.  This was before moon landings and weather satellites.  These researchers
were at least honest and published their assumptions, including a zero heat capacity
for the Earth’s surface.  The ‘equilibrium average surface temperature’ calculated by
these models is not even a physically measurable climate variable.  However, the
mathematical theory had some elegance and allowed some limited predictions to be
made about the effects of carbon dioxide on climate.  The fact that these predictions
were invalid was ignored.  No-one ever bothered to check the models against
physical reality.  However, the idea that the models were calculating some form of
surface temperature was still accepted.  The real interest was in the IR emission
from the top of the planetary atmosphere, not the surface energy transfer.

Starting in the early 1980’s, funding for atomic energy research began to dwindle
and some researchers who were familiar with carbon 13 isotope ratios began to use
carbon dioxide induced global warming as an excuse for research funding.  The
limitations of the existing radiative transfer based climate models were ignored and
the great global warming fraud started to take off.  The fundamental error was the
substitution of the meteorological surface air temperature record for the real surface
temperature.  This is the temperature used in weather forecasting.  It is the air
temperature that is measured in a vented enclosure placed for convenience at eye
level above the ground.  It has nothing to do with the real surface temperature below
the enclosure.  The dominant source of long term variation in the air temperature
record is not the local surface temperature.  It is usually the change in ocean
surface temperatures in the region of origin of the prevailing weather systems
reaching the weather station.  There are natural ocean surface temperature cycles
with a period of about 60 years.  ‘Global warming’ just happened to coincide with the
30 year warming cycle of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.  In the US, this was just a
repeat of the dust bowl temperature peak in the 1930’s.  Furthermore, urban growth
around some of the weather stations introduced additional local heating
measurement biases that added to the real weather temperatures.  These are now
known as urban heat island effects.  Later, since the same climate ‘scientists’
controlled both the model predictions and the climate record, ‘adjustments’ were
made to the weather data to exaggerate the climate change.

The climate models were empirically hard wired using radiative forcing ‘constants’ to
produce global warming whether it existed or not.  The increase in the ‘average
global meteorological surface air temperature’ was used to ‘calibrate’ the increase in
‘surface temperature’ produced by carbon dioxide.  It was simply assumed that
carbon dioxide had to be the cause of the observed temperature change.  The
fictional concept of an average ‘climate sensitivity’ to carbon dioxide was
introduced.  This was extended to other infra red active species in the atmosphere
using the pseudoscience of ‘radiative forcing constants’.  ‘Greenhouse gases’
produced warming and ‘aerosols’ produced cooling.  The two could be empirically
balanced to produce any desired result.  ‘Volcanic aerosols’ were used for fine
tuning.  All of the large scale climate models that use this concept of radiative
forcing are based on pure pseudoscience.  Belief in computer based climate
astrology has replaced climate science.  

The science no longer mattered all the while the money kept on rolling in.  Over a
trillion dollars has been consumed by this climate fraud.  Government agencies were
funded to study global warming.  NASA wanted more satellites and took whatever
climate money it could get.  The satellites of course had to measure ‘global
warming’.  No other interpretation of the data was allowed.  NOAA is still lying about
‘extreme climate events’ caused by global warming.  DOE is still funding carbon
sequestration.  The peer review process in climate science collapsed and was
replaced by flagrant cronyism. Those that had benefited from global warming funds
actively opposed any change in global warming dogma that would threaten their
funding.  The leading climate ‘scientists’ became trapped in a web of their own lies.  
Many other researchers jumped on the global warming gravy train to ‘save the
planet from global warming hell’.  Leading scientific societies, including the Royal
Society of London were fooled into supporting climate astrology.  This has led to the
alternative energy fiasco and carbon taxes that are a recipe for economic disaster.  
Even banks and insurance companies have made large investments based on
fraudulent global warming claims.  

While the global warming fraud has long been known and tolerated in scientific
circles because of the money involved, it has been hidden from wider public view by
a very effective propaganda campaign.  This has been dominated by the UN IPCC,
the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  The fraudulent
claims that led to the Kyoto Treaty were first revealed to a larger audience in
November 2009 when the so called ‘Climategate’ archive of e-mails and other
electronic files was published on the web.  This exposed a systematic pattern of
egregious fraud that is still under investigation.  ‘Amazongate’, ‘Glaciergate’ and
other climate frauds have now been added to the list.  The stranglehold of global
warming on climate research is gradually diminishing.

However, global warming dogma has been successfully perpetuated for over forty
years.  A whole generation of researchers has grown up surrounded by climate
fraud and the culture of lying for money.  In order to return to physical reality it is
necessary to go back to first principles and establish how the Earth’s climate really
works.  This requires a fundamental change in the way we think about climate
energy transfer.  There is no such thing as climate equilibrium on any time scale.  
The energy transfer processes that determine the Earth’s surface temperature are
dynamic, not static.  The simple mathematical elegance of a few fraudulent flux
equations has to be replaced with the more complex description of a dynamic
‘greenhouse effect’.  There are six energy transfer processes that interact
dynamically with four thermal reservoirs to determine the Earth’s climate.  
Temperature is defined in terms of the heat content of these thermal reservoirs and
this is always changing.  

The dynamic energy transfer also leads to a climate averaging paradox.  The Earth’
s climate is the result of a long term accumulation of short term weather changes.  
There is no ‘equilibrium average’ shortcut, so climate change has to be calculated
the way it is measured, as a long term average of short term changes.  The
maximum time step used in the analyses presented in this monograph is one hour.  
Even the ocean heating produced by 450 years of sunspots was calculated as a
series of half hour averages.

It is hoped that the research results presented here will help to guide climate
science back to its foundations in meteorology.  The starting point is the basic laws
of physics, particularly the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics applied to the
measured surface energy transfer.  The Earth’s climate is an open cycle heat
engine, not an infra-red spectrometer.  There is a basic need for more detailed and
widespread measurements of the dynamic surface energy transfer processes.  The
primary function of climate science is to explain existing climate observations.  Only
when this is successful can any attempt at future climate prediction be made using
properly validated climate models.  

The lessons learned from the global warming fraud also have profound implications
in other areas such as alternative energy and environmental science.  The extreme
exaggeration of the problem and use of invalid computer models is not limited to
climate astrology.  How much pseudoscience has already found its way into
alternative energy and environmental science?  Where does the science end and
‘green religion’ begin?  It is time for a thorough investigation into scientific fraud in all
areas of environmental science and alternative energy.  Global warming is not an
isolated case of fraud.
PREFACE
The Earth’s surface is warmer than it should be, based on the average amount of
solar radiation that it absorbs.  However, in order to explain this correctly, we need
to stop thinking in terms of averages and climate equilibrium states.  The energy
transfer processes that determine the Earth’s surface temperature are not static, but
dynamic.  The surface is always heating and cooling on both a daily and a seasonal
time scale.  The sun heats the surface during the day and the temperature depends
on the balance between the heating and cooling fluxes.  There is no such thing as
‘climate equilibrium’.  Because of the heat storage by the surface, there is a delay
between the peak solar flux and the peak temperature.  This is clear evidence that
there is no thermal equilibrium.  The surface cools through a combination of
convection, evaporation and emission of long wave infrared (LWIR) radiation.  The
IR active gases in the atmosphere, mainly water, H
2O and carbon dioxide, CO2, also
emit thermal LWIR radiation.  The downward LWIR flux from the lower troposphere
slows the cooling of the surface through a process of radiation exchange.  However,
this is only one part of a complex dynamic energy transfer process and the dominant
cooling flux from the surface is usually moist convection as the surface is warmed by
the sun during the day.  The downward LWIR flux from the atmosphere does not
determine or control the surface temperature and there is no equilibrium on any time
scale.  

The role of LWIR emission by the atmosphere was described by Joseph Fourier in
1827 and speculation that changes in the atmospheric concentration of CO
2 could
cause the Ice Age cycle dates back to John Tyndall in about 1860.  However, we
now know that climate changes are not caused by CO
2, but by small changes in the
solar energy coupled into the oceans and by changes in ocean circulation.  
Conclusive evidence for the solar origin of Ice Ages has only become available in
recent years.  This is derived from the analysis of ice cores and ocean sediments
and from satellite observations of climate data and solar radiation.  Unfortunately,
the empirical speculation of CO
2 induced climate change - ‘global warming’ - has
become accepted as dogma.  Economic and political factors have made this dogma
rather difficult to change.  A large body of empirical pseudoscience has been
produced using invalid climate simulation techniques based on the concept of
‘radiative forcing’.  Every imaginable form of disaster that can even remotely be
linked to climate change has been attributed to ‘global warming’.  None of this has
any basis in physical reality.  The peer review process in climate science has
collapsed and numerous pseudoscientific papers on climate change have been
published in ‘respected’ scientific journals. Such papers should never have seen the
light of day.  These fraudulent climate models have given the illusion of scientific
respectability to the publications of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, IPCC.  However, it is now clear that the IPCC is a political body and
the IPCC publications are nothing more than propaganda.  Radiative forcing
assumes that long term averages of dynamic climate variables such as surface
temperature somehow describe an ‘equilibrium state’ that can be perturbed by small
changes in atmospheric CO
2 concentration.  This is nothing more than a
mathematical abstraction that was needed to simplify climate analysis in the 1960s.  
In reality, the daily changes in surface flux and surface temperature are so large that
the climate effects of a 100 ppm increase in atmospheric CO
2 concentration are too
small to measure.  The whole issue of CO
2 induced global warming disappears once
the greenhouse effect is considered as a dynamic, time dependent process.  

The greenhouse effect is usually described in terms of a very simplistic equilibrium
energy balance.  The Earth’s ‘average surface temperature’ is 288 K (15 C).  The
average ‘effective atmospheric emission temperature’ is 255 K (-18 C).  This is the
blackbody temperature that produces the long wave infrared (LWIR) emission
needed balance the average solar flux absorbed by the surface.  The temperature
difference, 288 – 255 = 33 K is the surface temperature increase caused by
‘greenhouse gas absorption’.  It is then empirically assumed that small increases in
downward atmospheric LWIR flux from an increase in ‘greenhouse gas
concentration’ will cause an increase in ‘surface temperature’.  However, there is a
fundamental flaw in this argument.  In order for heat to flow, there has to be a
thermal gradient, or temperature difference.  The surface has to be warmer than the
air above.  This is required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  When the sun
heats the surface during the day, the dominant cooling process is usually moist
convection, not the emission of LWIR radiation.  There can be no surface
equilibrium on any time scale.  As the warm air rises through the atmosphere it
expands and cools.  At the standard lapse rate of -6.5 K.km^-1, the air has to rise to
an altitude of 5 km to cool by 33 K.  This is just the ‘average emission height’ for
atmospheric LWIR emission.  The transfer of energy from the surface is controlled
dynamically by moist convection, not by any kind of ‘average equilibrium flux’ or
‘greenhouse gas absorption’.  This surface convection ‘resets’ the local lapse rate
and therefore the local atmospheric temperature and water vapor profiles on a daily
basis.  The atmosphere is warmed by a daily convective ‘pulse’ and cools through
LWIR emission to space produced by the narrowing of the individual molecular lines
with altitude.  The convective heating and the LWIR cooling of the atmosphere are
independent energy transfer processes.  One does not control the other.  The
atmosphere continues to cool until it receives its next convective heating pulse.  
There is a dynamic energy balance and any change in this thermal balance
produces a change in the height of the tropopause.  This daily convective pulse also
determines the downward LWIR emission from the atmosphere to the surface.  Most
of this flux originates from a ‘thermal blanket’ within the first kilometer layer above
the surface.  

The underlying assumption of radiative forcing, that long term averages of surface
temperature are in some kind of equilibrium with the long wave infrared (LWIR)
emission to space has no basis in physical reality.  The tail does not wag the dog.  
There are six distinct physical processes that interact dynamically to determine the
surface temperature and the LWIR radiation to space.  These are:

1) Energy transfer at the air-land interface
2) Energy transfer at the air-ocean interface
3) Direct LWIR emission to space from the surface
4) Energy transfer between the lower troposphere and the surface
5) Upward convective transport to the middle and upper troposphere
6) LWIR emission to space.

However, before these six processes are considered in detail, a brief history of the
greenhouse effect and the basic technical background needed to understand the
energy transfer processes will be presented.
INTRODUCTION
The static, average energy balance diagrams of the Earth’s radiation budget such
as those published by the IPCC conceal the dynamic aspects of the energy transfer
and imply a nonexistent equilibrium climate state.  The sun only heats the surface
during the day.  To illustrate the time dependent, dynamic nature of the energy
transfer, the energy balance has to be separated into an average12 hour
convective cycle and an average 24 hour LWIR emission cycle.  This is shown in
averages.  The net average solar flux reaching the surface is 336 W.m^-2 in 12
hours.  This heats the surface and drives the daytime moist convection.  The
convection then heats the two atmospheric thermal reservoirs.  The lower reservoir,
the first 1 to 2 km layer of the troposphere provides almost all of the downward
LWIR flux at the surface.  It acts as a ‘thermal blanket’ and is not strongly coupled to
the upper atmospheric thermal reservoir.  It is the thermal storage in this layer that
provides the ‘greenhouse effect’.  The surface air temperature of this layer also
controls the end of the daytime convection cycle as discussed above in Section
4.1.3.  This in turn is a dominant factor in setting the night time surface
temperature.  The upper reservoir is cooled by the LWIR emission to space. The
emission to space is dominated by the molecular line narrowing of the water vapor
emission.  The water vapor concentration is controlled by the atmospheric
temperature profile as illustrated above in Figure 4-49.  This is reset each day by
convection and atmospheric transport (weather).  The 24 hour average direct LWIR
window transmission flux to space stays the same as in the static energy balance.  
The primary purpose of this diagram is to change the way we think about climate
energy transfer and show the underlying physics.  The numbers just indicate the
approximate long term dynamic energy balance.  There is no thermal equilibrium on
any time scale.  The energy transfer is determined by the First and Second Laws of
Thermodynamics.  The First Law requires an energy balance.  The Second Law
requires a thermal gradient for heat transfer.  When this type of diagram is used, it
is clear that a doubling of the atmospheric CO
2 concentration can have no effect on
the surface temperature.  Furthermore, there can be no CO
2 ‘signature’ in the
MSAT record.  

The dynamic fluxes for the six energy transfer processes have to be coupled into
four thermal reservoirs: the ocean, the land surface, and the lower and upper
atmospheric thermal reservoirs.  This is illustrated in Figure 5-2.  The long term
changes in the daily and seasonal heat content of these thermal reservoirs
determines the Earth’s climate.  Since the ocean thermal reservoir is approximately
2 orders of magnitude larger than the other reservoirs, it should be clear that
changes in ocean thermal storage are the source of climate change.  The dynamic
approach also introduces another measurable climate variable.  This is the phase
shift or time delay between the peak of the solar flux and the peak temperature.  
This should also be predicted correctly by properly validated climate simulation
models.
5.0 THE EARTH'S DYNAMIC RADIATION BUDGET
Figure 5-1: The Earth’s radiation budget for the dynamic greenhouse effect.  The
surface energy is transported through the troposphere by moist convection shown
as a 12 hour average cycle.  LWIR emission to space occurs all the time and is
shown as a 24 hour average cycle.  The surface temperature is maintained by a
thermal blanket about 2 km thick that is heated from the surface by convection and
excess LWIR absorption.  There is a dynamic energy balance between the two
cycles.  A doubling of the atmospheric CO
2 concentration can have no effect on the
surface temperature.
Figure 5-2: The energy transfer processes and thermal reservoirs required for the dynamic
greenhouse effect (schematic).
The dynamic greenhouse effect also leads to a climate averaging paradox.  All of
the numerical analysis presented in this monograph used time steps from 1 minute
for the land thermal conduction model to 1 hour for the diurnal ocean surface
temperature calculations.  The changes in ocean temperatures over 450 years were
calculated using 30 minute time steps.  Although climate trends are generally
determined over a period of 30 years or longer, this trend is the result of the
accumulation of a long period of short term changes.  In order to produce realistic
results, climate models must simulate the short term changes and then take the long
equilibrium climate state that can be substituted for the real long term climate
average.

The persistence of the cult of global warming comes from economic and political
forces.  The scientific hypothesis of radiative forcing was introduced in the mid 1960’
s as an honest attempt to explain climate change based on pre-satellite data and
very limited computer capabilities.  It should have been rejected as invalid over 30
years ago as a part of the normal process of scientific advancement as new results
become available.  Instead, the MSAT record was substituted for the real surface
temperature and the pseudoscience of the global warming cult was created.  The
independence of the peer review process in climate science has been severely
compromised.  This has impeded progress in climate research for several decades.  
A new set of properly validated climate simulation models are needed that do not
rely on the pseudoscience of radiative forcing.  In order to incorporate the real
physics of the surface energy transfer into these models, additional data are
required.  Meteorological measurements need to be upgraded to include mass and
energy flux and the actual surface temperature.  The Argo Float Program needs to
be expanded to measure the coupling of the solar flux into the oceans. The dynamic
energy transfer processes in the upper troposphere, particularly cloud dissipation
also require further study.  In addition, a better understanding of the variations of
the solar flux itself is needed.  Once the dynamic nature of climate energy transfer is
properly understood, progress in climate science should be quite rapid.  However,
this requires a paradigm shift in the way we perceive climate change.  The concepts
of climate equilibrium and radiative forcing must be firmly rejected as invalid
hypotheses.  The ‘greenhouse effect’ is dynamic, not static.  There is no climate
To buy this on Amazon book click here:
         Kindle version click here:
Pages i to iv
Pages 1 to 3
Pages 95 to 98
Book Preview
Front Cover
Back Cover