FerdiEgb wrote:
> The theory behind the program, that more sunlight is reflected, due to
> (sulphate) aerosols is proven false.
>
> As you may know, we have some satellites flowing around out of the
> atmosphere, which measure reflected sunlight (SW reflection) and heat
> (LW emission) from below.
>
> For the (sub)tropics, in the period 1985-2001 the amount of sunlight
> reflected by clouds reduced with ~2 W/m2. (see:
>
http://www.atmos.ucla.edu/csrl/publications/pub_exchange/Wielicki_et_al_2002.pdf
> , confirmed for the 30N-30S (sub)tropics in
> http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/2002/2002_ChenCarlsonD.pdf )
>
> In the same period, there was a loss of cloud cover, both in the
> tropics and sub tropics (and even up to 60N-60S).
>
> If there is global dimming at the surface, the only explanation
> possible is that more sunlight is retained in the atmosphere. Which is
> (only) possible with (dark brown and black) soot particulate.
>
> If soot particulate is to blame, then a reduction of them would have a
> cooling effect, not a warming effect!
>
> See also the amount of reflected sunlight from earth on the moon
> ("eartshine"), which parallels the "global dimming" trend, while it
> should have opposite trends, at:
> http://www.bbso.njit.edu/science_may28.html
>
> Ferdinand
This has already been posted and it has nothing whatsoever to so with
atheism. 100% OT?
Roy
--
Roy Schestowitz
http://schestowitz.com
|
|
