Here is a new review of the radiosonde data going back to the beginning something like 20 million data sets spanning seventy years and demonstrates clearly and convincingly that any radiative atmospheric effect; call it the greenhouse effect or whatever you like simply does not exist. The video is a bit on the long side, but for anyone interested in seeing the numerous, as of yet, untested paradigms that presently prevail in climate science put to the test, it is very interesting.
Up through about half way through the video the Connolly family develops an interesting perspective on looking at the data concerning the atmospheric height by considering density rather than temperature. This creates very neat piece-wise-linear sections that correspond to the atmospheric strata. A number of things can be inferred from that
However things fall apart with their invention of the concept they call “Pervection”.
At 44:17
The intention is a simple experiment that seems to be an example of pervection by sucking air through long tubing. That is just Avogadro's Law and not something that should have any other name. Any kid who has sucked soda through a straw has done that experiment.
At 47:23
They show the bouncing balls of “Newton' cradle” – an old problem for physics students that illustrate conservation of both momentum and energy. Their balls were supposed to represent atoms, but the balls were constrained to be largely
colinear! Atoms in the atmosphere are chaotic, never colinear! Even then Connolly's first attempt was little chaotic because the balls were moving a bit.
They both think pervection should be used as a replacement for radiation in atmospheric physics. If you want to replace radiation with something else, just don't do it that way.
At 46:00
SUMMARY OF “PERVECTION” EXPERIMENT
Maximum rates of energy transmission by the known mechanisms:
• Conduction = 0.00015 Watts/m²
• Kinetic convection = 0.0000075 Watts/m²
• Enthalpic convection = 0.14 Watts/m²
• Radiation = 0.29 Watts/m²
• Acoustic transmission = 1.37 Watts/m² [Where does this come from?]
He says the Observed rate of energy transmission [Energy sucked through tube.] = 2400± 80 Watts/m
².[That is a gross exaggeration to think that has anything to do with the atmosphere.]
“
In this particular controlled experiment, the energy was not transmitted by conduction, convection, radiation or acoustic. Therefore, there is some other key energy transmission mechanism available for air”
It it should be called Avogadro's Law, not pervection.
However, note that he thinks radiation has a faster rate of transmission than conduction, convection, contrary to what many deniers think .
48:53
He agrees,
“GHG's are IR active.”
“
This means they absorb and emit at fixed wavelengths/frequencies”, (Einstein, 1916)
Rate of absorbtion equals the rate of emission If the atmosphere is in thermodynamic equilibrium you will not get a green house effect the gas will not store energy.
48:20
He says if you increase the CO2 you still won't get a GH effect or store the energy. Because the rate of absorption still equals rate of emission
at equilibrium.
He says the data show the gas is in thermodynamic equilibrium. This is really wrong because during the day the sun is shining. Heat and radiation are flowing through the atmosphere, so it is
not in thermal equilibrium nor radiative equilibrium.
Conclusion: I think their theory fails because they didn't think through that atoms are not colinear and the atmosphere is not in thermal nor radiative equilibrium.
.
