Global Warming not caused by humans?

[Future Raptor Ace]

Global Warming not caused by humans? There is global warming happening currently but it is not a result of anything humans have done according to what I have learned today.

Well today in my Heat Transfer class the Professor proposed the above idea as he stated that the Sun goes through natural hot and cold cycles. As for the temperature of the earth, since we are currently studying radiation effects, we derived a formula where one can see the temperature of the Earth depends mostly on the temperature of the Sun. Since the only form of heat energy that can travel through the vacuums of space is radiation; the temperature of the Earth depends mostly on the radiation formula below. Yes there is some conduction and convection effects due to the oceans and weather but the dominant form of heat transfer that the Earth feels is radiation from the Sun. I shall write out the temperature of the Earth formula due to radiation effects below as well as what each of the variables mean.

Temperature of earth TE
TE = [((αE*εs)/(εE))^(1/4)*(Ds/((4*dSE))^(1/2)]*Ts
αE = absorptivity of the earth. This directly means how much radiation (heat energy from the Sun) can the earth absorb. This variable will increase from an increase CO2 emissions from humans.

εs = emissivity of the Sun (how much radiation is emits)
εE = emissivity of the Earth (how much radiation the earth emits) ... which is how much radiation bounces off the earth from the sun. This variable will decrease from an increase in CO2 emissions from humans .... (green house effect)

Ds = diameter of the Sun
dSE = distance between the Sun and Earth

As you can see above; the only variables that is effected by humans (I highlighted in red) is raised to the 1/4th power which is a quad-root (4th root)! This will be a very small number which proves these variables have a negligible effect on the temperature of the Earth. Since Ts (temperature of the Sun) is the only variable not raised to a fractional power, it is the dominant variable by far in the equation.


So according to the math .... we humans contribute an insignificant amount to global warming; interesting huh?

[Toc De Mac]

Hey FRA, I'd be interested to see how that mathematical model was constructed. Do you know if there is any background info online about it?

To me, upon simple observation it seems pretty evident that humans have a potentially large role to play in changing the Earth's climate, when we look at how many billions of people there are on the planet combined with energy usage, especially in industrialized countries... One of the more convincing pieces of information that I've come across in my classes is the data from the Vostok ice cores, seen below:



Yes, correlation does not imply causation, but the trend is pretty well established over the past 400,000 years: increased CO2 levels correspond to increases in temperature. The fact that we seem to understand how CO2 chemically acts to produce the greenhouse effect makes the case more convincing. And all the more frightening, since, according to this data, CO2 has historically cycled between 200-280ppm, and right now we are at a seemingly unprecedented 390ppm.

[Future Raptor Ace]

Originally Posted by Toc De Mac

Hey FRA, I'd be interested to see how that mathematical model was constructed. Do you know if there is any background info online about it?

To me, upon simple observation it seems pretty evident that humans have a potentially large role to play in changing the Earth's climate, when we look at how many billions of people there are on the planet combined with energy usage, especially in industrialized countries... One of the more convincing pieces of information that I've come across in my classes is the data from the Vostok ice cores, seen below:



Yes, correlation does not imply causation, but the trend is pretty well established over the past 400,000 years: increased CO2 levels correspond to increases in temperature. The fact that we seem to understand how CO2 chemically acts to produce the greenhouse effect makes the case more convincing. And all the more frightening, since, according to this data, CO2 has historically cycled between 200-280ppm, and right now we are at a seemingly unprecedented 390ppm.

Well it comes the topic of view factors which involves the most basic radiation formula where energy E
E = ε*σ*(T)^4 where σ = the Stefan–Boltzmann constant which is 5.67E-8 (W*m^-2*K^-4)
The rest of the formula comes from a simple energy balance ... i dont have to formula online since it is not a formula that has a particular name, however I do have it in my notes and I will take a picture of it and its derivation for you.
As for the temperature rise my professor stated it is natural and has no correlation with the rise in CO2. He said that since we just came out of an ice age the temperature cycle is on the increasing side.

Edit:

......................

You will have to excuse my crappy handwriting but here are my notes on the subject





Edit:

Please dont hesitate to ask if you have any questions and I will do my best to explain.

[pepelepew]

Originally Posted by Future Raptor Ace

Well it comes the topic of view factors which involves the most basic radiation formula where energy E
E = ε*σ*(T)^4 where σ = the Stefan–Boltzmann constant which is 5.67E-8 (W*m^-2*K^-4)
The rest of the formula comes from a simple energy balance ... i dont have to formula online since it is not a formula that has a particular name, however I do have it in my notes and I will take a picture of it and its derivation for you.
As for the temperature rise my professor stated it is natural and has no correlation with the rise in CO2. He said that since we just came out of an ice age the temperature cycle is on the increasing side.

Edit:

......................

You will have to excuse my crappy handwriting but here are my notes on the subject





Edit:

Please dont hesitate to ask if you have any questions and I will do my best to explain.

I believe your right FRA. The earth has gone through extreme cycles of temperature for milennia before humans came on the scene. The global warmers have another agenda in mind when they blame it on human causation. I won't go into it here.

[Future Raptor Ace]

Originally Posted by pepelepew

I believe your right FRA. The earth has gone through extreme cycles of temperature for milennia before humans came on the scene. The global warmers have another agenda in mind when they blame it on human causation. I won't go into it here.

Yea man I think you are right, there there is an agenda though I think there are two reasons for it; one sinister and the other just as a result of being human.
The sinister agenda is going "green" is profitable! Think about it, you are paying a company more money for a less quality/quality-made product. At the same time this company gets free press and a positive image for "going green!" On top of that they get compensation from the government for bettering the environment.
The other reason is we humans look for trends to get explanations. This can be very dangerous since the problem with this is people often forget that trends do not always equal correlations and it is only when trends are correlated that one can state cause and effect phenomena. Yes CO2 has been rising since we humans have been here,and yes the temperature is rising as well, these facts are undeniably true, but just stating the above is not proof at all! It would be comparable to me saying, "I have been eating less these past months and Alizee has been more active on twitter these past months therefore the less I eat the more Alizee will post!" As you can see both those facts are true, I eat less because I am on a diet and Alizee posts more for whatever reason. Both are factual trends but are the two correlated like I claimed them to be in my quote? No of course not, one thing has nothing to do with the other and that is my general point on CO2 emissions and global warming.

[alizeefan]

Not interesting at all rather boring flawed math which explains nothing , tell your prof to calculate for ice breakers and the hole in the sky if he can . .

To say humans have no impact on any environment is ridiculous . See CO2 levels and chemical refraction have a definite impact , can't blame the sun on that . See your math above is flawed as its missing so many things . . .

To say there are any green industrialists that compete ( lobbying and so on ) and are out to profit vs the non green industries is ludacris when there is 0 lobbying for green and multi billions for non green polluters . It's pointless to argue about nothing is going to change not your attitude or mine or anyones . Fact of the matter is this , planet warming or cooling all can be overcome with technology to allow humankind to survive . The planet doesn't need saving from us , we need saving from ourselves . Its like saying living next to the factories spewing out poison has no affect on those living there because this math forumula shows the sun is to blame .

By the above equation which is missing about a billion variables thus completely inaccurate then humans have no control yet then why are they doing geo-engineering to reverse temperature rise and combat global warming ? After all its not possible for humans to affect the weather or as the equation above only accounts for its all the blame on the sun .

<object width="853" height="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/s3__ssxTvNc?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/s3__ssxTvNc?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="853" height="480" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

[Future Raptor Ace]

Originally Posted by alizeefan

Not interesting at all rather boring flawed math which explains nothing , tell your prof to calculate for ice breakers and the hole in the sky if he can . .
<object width="853" height="480">


</object>

What you are mentioning is represented in the formula, absorptivity and emissivity!

To say humans have no impact on any environment is ridiculous . See CO2 levels and chemical refraction have a definite impact , can't blame the sun on that . See your math above is flawed as its missing so many things . . .

I said we have an impact but it is negligible. The formula does account for refraction; we accounted for it in our absorptivity (α)
we said everything that goes into the earth is equal to qin (heat in or energy in)
where qin = αE*εs*σ*As*(Ts^4)*FSE
So everything that hits the earth and stays is accounted for by α. If refraction occurs alpha will increase like I said in my first post! However it does not matter if alpha increases since it will eventually be raised to the (1/4)th power! Also there is a limit on how high alpha can be, it has to be less than 1 since the earth is not a black body (which means it absorbs everything) ...... so alpha is fairly negligible!
As for what leaves the earth, the only variable that humans can change is εE and it too will wind up under the (1/4)th power

[mzracing76]

I dont believe in Global Warming, sorry. I am a Conservative Republican. I dont buy all that mumbo jumbo. Save it for the Liberals, lol.

[Future Raptor Ace]

Originally Posted by mzracing76

i dont believe in global warming, sorry. I am a conservative republican. I dont buy all that mumbo jumbo. Save it for the liberals, lol.

lmfao

[Toc De Mac]

Originally Posted by Future Raptor Ace

If refraction occurs alpha will increase like I said in my first post! However it does not matter if alpha increases since it will eventually be raised to the (1/4)th power!

But the question is why it is raised to the fourth power; formulas are not Gods, they are based on observed data.