Of all these AGW discussions, this one seems to have gotten the most attention. I say "seems to". Fact is, I don't know how accurate these numbers are.
A bit of thought may reveal why Venus may not have a runaway greenhouse. If carbon dioxide reflects heat back at the source, and if the source is coming from the ground, then it will act as a insulator.
Maybe not that much solar energy is reaching the lower levels of atmosphere, near the surface. It has to heat up somewhere in the clouds. The theory has it that the clouds are reflecting it back down, but what if it isn't that way? The sulfuric acid clouds reflect a lot of the light. In addition, a heated gas always wants to rise, not fall. Since the sulfuric acid level ends well below the "top" layer of the atmosphere, the question arises as to how much of that energy that is recorded as heat actually comes from the sun?
1.11.24
This discussion isn't about Earth, but about Venus. Venus is used as an example of the runaway greenhouse effect, and how to scare people into believing that such could happen on Earth. Let's take a look at Venus for a moment.
It seems that Venus has volcanic activity. It may have the most volcanoes than any other planet, including Earth. One number flashed out in bold relief that may give one pause, if one is so inclined. There may be more than a million volcanoes on Venus. What could this mean?
In terms of the runaway greenhouse effect, maybe nothing. Maybe everything. The truth is, there may not be enough information about Venus in order to make an educated guess. Also, the narrative is so well entrenched, that anything that challenges it may get suppressed. It seems that censorship of unapproved ideas has crept into the culture, and so the possibility that the narrative could be wrong is just not going to be accepted.
But this blog is a place where contrary narratives WILL be entertained. As far as I know, I may be the only one putting forth the possibility that Venus may not have a runaway greenhouse effect as is reported. Or that if there is one, it may not be due to the trapping of heat from the sun, but from the planet itself. That would be due to the volcanic activity within the planet. If there is considerable heat coming from inside the planet, its atmosphere may be preventing its release.
This counter narrative has not be encountered in my reading as of yet. So, I'll put it out there myself. If it is true, then what difference would it make?
Perhaps none. Perhaps a lot. There is more than one reason why Venus being used as a model for Earth is not a valid one. One of those reasons is its very thick atmosphere. Nothing like that could ever be duplicated on Earth no matter how hard we try. Humans can make only a tiny difference in the composition of Earth's atmosphere. It's this tiny difference that is what these narratives of theirs puts forth. That these tiny differences we could make can cause such big effects. It is yet another reason, for me at least, to doubt AGW.
Can the thick atmosphere of Venus really be responsible for the intense heat on its surface? Or would be Venus be a hot place even if the atmosphere was exactly like Earth's? For if the heat is really from volcanism, then that would be a fatal blow to the AGW theory. For not only can we not duplicate Venus like conditions due to our own efforts, that even if we could, it wouldn't make any difference anyway. For the carbon dioxide would not be the reason for why Venus is so hot.
No comments:
Post a Comment