The Comment Dr. Roy Spencer Wouldn't Publish

There has been quite a flurry of activity over the past two days between the small band of "true skeptics" [Gerlich, Tscheuschner, Kramm, Chilingar, Sorotkin, Thieme, Siddons, Schroeder, Hertzberg, Johnson, etc] and the more numerous "lukewarm skeptics" [Spencer, Lindzen, Monckton, Watts, Pielke, etc.], perhaps triggered by Kirk Myers' newspaper article: Global warming alarmists in full retreat as skeptics attack greenhouse theory, with WUWT publishing Explaining misconceptions on the "greenhouse effect," which apparently accomplished nothing of the sort judging from the over 200 mostly critical replies. Shortly thereafter, Dr. Roy Spencer posted Yes, Virginia, Cooler Objects Can Make Warmer Objects Even Warmer Still, which also generated several negative comments. I took 10 minutes to prepare my comment below on Dr. Spencer's post, but am sad to report that after more than 8 hours, my former hero has not published my comment, despite publishing no less than 30 additional comments by himself and others timestamped AFTER my comment was sent in:







Since I took the time to carefully prepare this and didn't want the 10 minutes to go to waste, I post the comment below for anyone interested who wants to show me why it was not worthy of publication on Dr. Spencer's site:



Hockey Schtick says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

July 24, 2010 at 8:03 AM





Dr. Spencer,





Love your site and most of your skeptical approach, but have to agree with several other comments that AGW violates not only the 2nd law, but the 1st law as well. Here’s why:



Violation of the 1st law:

Assumes that GHGs can perpetually recycle IR from the earth’s surface and thereby ADD energy or work input to the system. Take a look at this University course diagram showing 239.7 W/m2 solar input, but somehow the GHGs are then capable of radiating 239.7 W/m2 BOTH UP AND DOWN FOR A TOTAL OF 479.4 W/m2!!!

http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2002Q4/211/notes_greenhouse.html





(other similar diagrams (e.g. K-T) show a TRIPLING of energy by the atmosphere!)



or look at this online “greenhouse effect” calculator from another University climatology course for another flagrant violation of the 1st law:

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/07/u-mass-hasnt-heard-of-1st-law-of.html



Violation of the 2nd Law:

Clausius formulation: “Heat DOESN’T flow from cold to hot (WITHOUT WORK INPUT)” AND “total entropy always increases until equilibrium”



AGW assumes the perpetual heat pump created by the violation of the 1st law DOES THE WORK INPUT TO MAKE HEAT FLOW FROM COLD TO HOT.



AGW also incorrectly assumes the total entropy of the system can DECREASE because from the mathematical description of entropy, if heat flows from cold to hot, entropy must locally DECREASE while the total entropy must INCREASE. Therefore, the AGW “hotspot” hasn’t happened, and won’t happen, and heat will not flow from cold to hot because the atmosphere cannot ADD WORK INPUT.

http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/07/why-agw-hot-spot-wont-happen.html



GHGs only slow the rate of cooling of the earth, but they cannot make the warm earth warmer.





I do hope you take a look at the posts from Professor Johnson (author of several textbooks on thermodynamics):

http://claesjohnson.blogspot.com/2010/07/roy-spencers-greenhouse-effect.html





all the best!