Berthold Klein is a guest writer and his views are strictly his own and do not reflect those of the Communities @WashingtonTimes.com or The Washington Times.
In this context, a hypothesis is a tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation, either through controlled experiment or statistical tools. A controlled experiment involves holding all variables constant, then looking at the effects of changing variables one at a time in a precise way. If that can't be done (no one can perform controlled experiments on a national economy or a planet's atmosphere), statistical methods can determine whether the results from small-scale experiments can be extrapolated to an entire system based on measurements of that system. A valid scientific hypothesis must be subject to falsification by these methods, or it's no more than a conjecture, a guess thrown out over cocktails before dinner.
Over the years, scientists have learned a great deal about the physical behavior of gases in controlled lab experiments, and physicists have generated further models that have produced testable hypotheses. John Tyndall determined by experiment that certain gases will absorb infrared radiation (IR) in the mid-1800s. What happened to the absorbed IR was explained by the work of Neils Bohr, who won the Nobel prize in physics for his work on the structure of the atom.
Until 1909, the greenhouse effect was thought to be caused by IR radiation being trapped by the greenhouse windows: Glass was transparent to visible light, but opaque to IR. Visible light passed freely through the windows, was absobed by materials in the greenhouse, re-emitted as IR, then reflected back into the greenhouse to cause heat to build up.
In 1909, a professor of physics at John Hopkins University, Robert W. Woods, showed by experiment that the primary cause of greenhouse heat buildup is "confined space heating": Objects heated by sunlight in the greenhouse can not cool down because the glass walls prevent convective cooling.
The classic example of this is cars parked in sunlight. Temperatures in the car can reach 170 degrees Fahrenheit or more. Plastic melts, children and pets are roasted to death in minutes.
If a window is open enough (not just a crack) inside temperatures may only reach a 100 degrees F.
People visualize this real scenario when the environmentalist fear-monger imply that the “greenhouse gas effect” (GHGE) will cause the planet to heat up like Venus. There is absolutely no scientific reason to compare conditions on Earth to conditions on Venus except to induce fear and panic. The real scientific reasons for Venus being so hot [sulfuric acid clouds, volcanic activity, proximity to the sun, as well as a predominantly CO2 atmosphere] does not relate to the imaginary GHGE.
Many physicists have examined what is supposed to happen when the GHGE operates- they find that it violated proven laws of physics and thermodynamic. What the GHGE is supposed to do is be a resonating energy system (a perpetual motion concept) which does not exist.
Having done searches for a credible experiment “ that proves that the “greenhouse gas effect” exists many lines have been examined. The searching included E-mails to the National Academy of Science(NAS), more that 50 major technical universities, many individuals at each of these universities and others , not one has been able to provide a “credible experiment.”
The only reply was from the Manager of the Energy department at NAS which said that they accepted the UN-IPCC reports without examining whether it was mathematically or scientifically correct. This is gross malfeasance. Every other scientific organization that has accepted the “greenhouse gas effect” by “consensus” has done the same thing.
Every projection using Computer Models used by the UN-IPCC have failed . Almost every day new findings are available that shows that the UN-IPCC reports are pure fairly -tales, totally corrupt. Even an entry below from the IPCC 4 edition shows this.
The below information was a foot note in the IPCC 4 edition. It is obvious that there was no evidence to prove that the GHGE exists.
“In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect.”
Every claim of oceans rising, acidification of the oceans , glaciers disappearing, run-away temperature with it never snowing again has been proven by nature & honest scientists and engineers to be false.
The major claim to the existence of the GHGE is the need to justify a temperature difference between an inappropriate used set of equations called the Stefan - Boltzmann equations which are formulated to be used on a “theoretical black body” and the Earth's actual temperatures. Anybody except maybe a blind person can tell that the earth is not a theoretical black body, just look out the window any day of the year, see the green grass and trees in the summer , snow in the winter in the northern and southern hemisphere, jungles in the tropics, and lots of water in lakes and the oceans.
For those that have gotten this far, there are thousands of references that can be found on the internet that give creditable data, experiments and show that the GHGE does not exist.[claims are neither proven nor likely] A good starting points is the web-site http://www.climatedepot.com, www.slayingtheskydragon.com , http://climateclash.com, and many more.
There is an experiment that proves that the Greenhouse gas effect does not exist. This experiment which has been technologically reviewed by Ph.D physicists, Ph.D. Chemical engineers and others Ph. D’s in other fields The experiment is found on the web-site http:// www.slayingtheskydragon.com click on the blog tab then on page 2 of 10.
It is titled "The Experiment that failed which can save the world trillions-Proving the greenhouse gas effect does not exist”.
Another outstanding experiment is above as a YouTube presentation.
The Greenhouse Effect Explored
Written by Carl Brehmer | 26 May 2012
Is “Water Vapor Feedback” Positive or Negative?
Exploiting the medium of You tube Carl Brehmer is drawing wider attention to a fascinating experiment he performed to test the climatic impacts of water in our atmosphere.
Carl explains, “An essential element of the “greenhouse effect” hypothesis is the positive “water vapor feedback” hypothesis. That is, if something causes an increase in the temperature this will cause an increase in the evaporation of water into water vapor.”
A more detailed discussion of what is the “Hypothesis of the greenhouse gas effect”. This will can be found in the "The Experiment that failed which can save the world trillions-Proving the greenhouse gas effect does not exist” and will be presented in a future editorial.