{"id":346850,"date":"2024-10-15T08:38:39","date_gmt":"2024-10-15T06:38:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=346850"},"modified":"2024-10-15T08:38:42","modified_gmt":"2024-10-15T06:38:42","slug":"average-temperatures-and-heat-movement-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=346850","title":{"rendered":"Average Temperatures and Heat Movement (Part 2)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Jennifer Marohasy<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0jennifer<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I should think that when enough time has passed, the current leaders of the free world \u2013 but especially the scientists who advise them \u2013 will be remembered in the history books as rather deceitful.  That after a few hundred years of a period of Enlightenment there was a transition back to a period of ignorance.   This must especially be the case when it comes to how they explain that energy moves in the atmosphere, especially heat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It doesn\u2019t matter whether I am referring to the right or left of politics, they are choosing to be political rather than thoughtful.  Of course there are always exceptions, and I have particularly enjoyed recent email exchanges with Christopher Game.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It doesn\u2019t matter whether they are referring to convection or some other method of energy transfer, the modern scientist, especially the consensus scientist, but also for example, Peter Ridd, usually insist on referring to it as heat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After Will Happer visited Australia last year and gave his lectures about \u2018integrity in science and attacks on carbon dioxide\u2019 at the invitation of the Institute of Public Affairs, I was curious to know where he sourced the key charts that he showed, specifically charts about expected radiant energy loss from Earth at different wavelengths.  There was no attribution, and Happer was vague when I emailed him.  For sure the charts had been redrawn, but from where was he sourcing the essence of this narrative and these numbers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Eventually I found versions of key charts in a book by one of his colleagues from Princeton University, S. George Philander.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a chart on page 113 of this same book (Is the Temperature Rising? The Uncertain Science of Global Warming) that Happer didn\u2019t show in his presentation that purports to show \u2018heat that Earth radiates to space\u2019 as relatively constant never mind the latitude.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have been thinking about this issue of where most radiant energy is lost, from which latitudes and how.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is my understanding that an altitude of about 5 kilometres the concentration of greenhouse gases in the overlying atmosphere is so small that \u2018heat\u2019 can be radiated freely to space irrespective of the latitude.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I also understand that at this altitude the temperature is rather cold, that it will be well below zero degrees Celsius, which begs the question of why it is referred to as heat loss at all.   I guess all of this is in keeping with the underlying paradigm that is about average temperatures and overheating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n