A Challenge to Scientists on Whether Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Causes Global Warming
© O. R. Adams Jr. 2013
BACK TO ARTICLES
For a number of years Scientists have engaged in a useless argument on whether or not CO2 is a substantial cause of global warming. I call it useless, because although it is of extreme importance, I believe the true answer can be very easily proved by simple inexpensive scientific tests.
The proponents of the idea of CO2 causing global warming claim that CO2 reflects back heat coming from the earth, and tends to hold heat to the surface of the earth like clouds do. However, it is now well established that clouds reflect back more heat coming from the sun, and tend to have a net cooling effect. The "pro" scientists claim that CO2 does not reflect the heat coming from the sun, because it is of a different wavelength than the heat coming from the earth, which it does reflect. I have searched at length for actual scientific tests that prove the claim, but have found none. However, I have not found such scientific tests that support the argument of the "cons," either. There is a lot of empirical evidence argued by proponents of both sides of the question. In my opinion, the great preponderance of the empirical evidence, which is primarily statistical and historical, is that CO2 has little, if any, effect on global warming; and that if it has any effect, it is toward cooling.
We have plenty of CO2 available . I continually buy cylinders of it to use in pellet guns that I use for inexpensive target practice in my garage, to save my traveling so much to my gun club to shoot live ammunition.
A circular area could be set up with mechanisms along the edges to shoot out CO2 toward the center, making sure that an amount of CO2 is maintained in the area that is substantially more than the surrounding similar area. Surface temperatures close to the ground could be measured in the area where CO2 is concentrated, and compared to the temperatures around the area outside the concentration. Measurements could also be made at the same place when the concentrated CO2 was present and then after it dissipated – the only disadvantage here being that the times of day would be different. This could be done at various times – both night and day. I believe that such simple tests would give us a simple scientifically proved answer to the question. Why hasn't it already been done?
research project, CLOUD,
is currently being conducted on the causes of cloud formation, and their effect;
and, as previously stated, it seems to be now well established that the net
effect of clouds is global cooling.
simple test I am suggesting, could be far more
important than the expensive CLOUD project, and in comparison, its cost would be
The simple test I am suggesting, could be far more important than the expensive CLOUD project, and in comparison, its cost would be minuscule.
From my studies, I have concluded that the "global warmers" are ruled more by politics and protecting their grant sources, than they are true science. Politics has no place in science – it contaminates and controls it.
If the scientists involved in this global warming
argument are really interested in the truth, rather than politics, why not
conduct the simple experiment suggested, and give us conclusive proof of the
question – once and for all?
If the experiment is done, my prediction is that it will
show that CO2 has a negligible effect on global warming or cooling, because it
has so little substance compared to the water vapor forming clouds; and that any
small effect it may have will be toward cooling rather than warming. This
is the very opposite of what the "global warmers" have been telling us.
This is the very opposite of what the "global warmers" have been telling us.