Comment: Your logic is flawed

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: If you agree the planet (see in situ)

Your logic is flawed

It is very similar to how a radiator cools an Engine. The Cooling System has more than one part. I can go into detail if the correlation doesn't make sense to you.

Convection moves energy from the Surface to the highest point possible, then Radiation takes over as the primary means for the planet to cool. That point is dictated when the decrease in temp as altitude rises reaches Zero. Convection requires a cooler region to move towards. We have to recognize that Thermodynamic Systems are not static, and they employ the most efficient means or combination of means to heat and cool different regions. The surface cools by bother Radiation and Convection, but Convection being a more efficient means to transfer energy (in an atmosphere) will carry more energy.

Can you describe where Radiation is more efficient than Convection where Convection is available? This would go a long way in supporting a Green House Effect where no Green House exists.

Re-radiation is flawed concept. If a photon is absorbed and re-emitted back towards earth, it will travel a shorter distance back than it did going out due to the atmosphere being thicker the closer you get to the Earth. We must also recognize that when CO2 at altitude absorbs a photon, it barely raises the temp, so a photon being emitted back towards Earth is at a lower energy than one that entered. Stefan Boltzman shows this quite accurately.

Boltzman's Law is for Black body objects which don't actually exist in nature, save arguably Black Holes. The Law is useful as bodies can be 'near' black body when they are in a vacuum. When an object has an atmosphere, the Black body equations are quite useless. If we add an atmosphere, we essentially add a Dimension to the surface and make it 3 dimensional and give it a volume, where it once only had an 'area'. Using the equation to understand what is going on here on Earth can be useful, but we have to understand that where Convection is available as a means to cool, it will dominate the cooling process.

Are you familiar with PV=nRT? You need to get comfortable using before making statements about the atmosphere having more air at the equator than poles, especially with regards to centrifugal force. Where did you get that? Just because something has a larger volume, does not mean it has a larger mass. Think Hot Air Balloon. A cubic meter of air at 15C with 9.8 m/s force (gravity) placed upon it has a smaller mass that the same cubic meter of air at 0C. The Volume remains the same. Now if you take the same Mass and Increase the Volume, then the altitude must increase if your surface is fixed.

A greenhouse works by preventing CONVECTION. You may have read the article, but you failed to understand it. Not being mean, but the only way to Increase a Green House Effect is to seal an imperfect Green House. The last paragraph is nonsensical.