Tuesday, 1 June 2010

Apollo Mission: A Giant Leap Contradicting Greenhouse Gas Theory

source: Suite101
by: John O'Sullivan

The paper, ‘A Greenhouse Effect on the Moon’ is a cogently-argued scientific refutation of the basic equations used by global warming theorists. Apparently, climate scientists may have incorrectly assumed Earth’s "average" temperature all along.

The study questions the numeric bedrock of the greenhouse gas theory (GHG) by applying data collected by NASA decades ago. It seems during the Apollo Moon landings era NASA devised a whole new set of hitherto unreported equations, more reliable than those relied upon by supporters of the GHG theory, to get Neil Armstrong's carbon boot prints safely planted on that airless Sea of Tranquility.

The paper is co-authored by Martin Hertzberg, PhD, Consultant in Science and Technology, Alan Siddons, a former radiochemist and Hans Schreuder, a retired analytical chemist. The researchers had the bright idea of delving back into NASA’s archives to test the "Stefan-Boltzmann" equations in fine detail. The three men stumbled on the apparent flaws during an online debate on the science behind global warming.

Published online on May 24, 2010, the study argues that the flaw has always lain in Stefan-Boltzmann's equations. The long-trusted formula has been used by climatologists without question - until now. The researchers report that the numbers used in those equations are the “first assumption that climate science makes when predicting the Earth's temperature.”

NASA Abandoned Flawed Climate Calculations in 1960’s
Siddons, Hertzberg and Schreuder were astonished to find that “the principal method for predicting a planet's temperature is surprisingly arbitrary and simplistic.” That was, they believe, why NASA needed to set aside the blackbody equations when doing their own calculations for the Moon landings.

To climate sceptic scientists it seems self-evident that the Earth’s surface should not be treated like a flat, two-dimensional blackbody. It is more properly a complex spinning sphere with large variability in reflectivity and absorption of the Sun’s light and energy. But, despite the U.S. government knowing since the 1960's that the blackbody equations were of no use to real-world science, these facts don't appear to have been passed on to climatologists.

Lunar Temperatures Cast Doubt on Climate Theory
NASA had found that daytime temperatures on the lunar surface were lower than expected because planetary bodies also conduct heat to their inside rather than radiating it all into space - an empirical fact that challenges the GHG theory. Computer models supporting GHG theory had predicted that such heat energy would be ‘blanketed’ above a planet's surface.

In fact, the Apollo data proves the Moon’s surface temperatures throughout its two-week night were higher than predicted by the blackbody equations because the moon "feeds on" the heat it had previously absorbed.

Thus the success of NASA’s moon landings becomes evidence against the unreliability of the Stefan- Boltzmann equations in real world science.

Stefan-Boltzmann Calculations Way Out
The paper tells us how far out Stefan-Boltzmann’s equations could be, “the surface of the real moon is roughly 20° cooler than predicted by day and 60° warmer by night, the net result being a surface that is 40° warmer than predicted.”

But it isn’t just Earth’s Moon that doesn't support the GHG theory. Other planets don’t conform either. As the paper tells us, “The atmosphere of every planet in our solar system is also 'warmer than predicted.’” The three scientists pointedly ask, “Is it any surprise, then, that even a relatively simple body like the moon would refuse to conform to such a method?”

Other scientists have also come out to refute the greenhouse gas theory. Some even go as far as to say the theory actually contravenes the established laws of physics.

The Earth is not “Unusually” Warm
The paper concludes that the Earth is not “unusually” warm. It is the application of the predictive blackbody equation that is faulty and overly simplistic and should not be applied in a real-world context. The proven ability of common substances ( e.g. the Earth’s Moon) to store heat makes all such blackbody estimates questionable.

Along with the Climategate revelations, these new findings contradict the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has placed enormous reliance on catastrophic predictions based on research around greenhouse gas theory that has now been called into question. Even some IPCC scientists have denounced the theory.

Are Climate Equations Mere Junk Science?
Some may be, if this analysis of NASA’s Apollo numbers is correct. The Stefan-Boltzmann blackbody equations failed to give NASA the crucial information it required on the Moon’s day and night temperatures. Thus, NASA scientists had to create their own blackbody sun-angle model to chart the lunar surface temperatures astronauts might encounter.

NASA no longer shows any greenhouse gas "backradiation" in its relevant graphic representation of the energy budget of the Earth.In simple terms, GHG theory may have applied an “average temperature” method of no more use than a rule of thumb calculation.


Dr. Gray, Vincent,‘The Global Warming Scam,’ tech-know.eu (April 2008); accessed online: May 26, 2010.

Hermalyn, Brendan, ‘Radiative Non-Equilibrium at the Lunar Surface,’ Summer Institute on Atmospheric, Biospheric, Hydrospheric, and Solar and Space Plasma Sciences NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, 2006 (accessed online: May 26, 2010).

Hertzberg, Martin ‘Earth's Radiative Equilibrium in the Solar Irradiance,’ Energy and Environment, Vol. 20, No. 1 (2009) pp 83-93.

Dr. Hertzberg, M,, Siddons, A & Schreuder, H.,’ A Greenhouse Effect on the Moon?’ ( May, 24, 2010), accessed online: May 26, 2010.

Short, Nicholas M. ‘Planetary Remote Sensing: The Exploration of Extraterrestrial Bodies’, nasa.gov (accessed online: May 26, 2010).

Dr. Williams, David R.’ Planetary Fact Sheets’, nasa.gov (January, 2005); accessed online: May 26, 2010.

Add To FacebookTwit ThisAdd To RedditDigg ThisStumble ThisFav This With Technorati

No comments:

Post a Comment