The purpose of this article is not to dispute generally accepted facts or to deny projected effects of Global Warming. The purpose of this article is to examine whether or not evidence that has accumulated is being correctly interpreted. Therefore cumulative evidence is generally presumed to be correct. I have principally relied upon Wikipedia to build up this article.
According to Wikipedia:-
“Global warming is the rise in the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans since the late 19th century and its projected continuation. Since the early 20th century, Earth's mean surface temperature has increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F), with about two-thirds of the increase occurring since 1980. Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and scientists are more than 90% certain that it is primarily caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation."
Wikipedia further states:-
“Global warming controversy
The global warming controversy refers to a variety of disputes, significantly more pronounced in the popular media than in the scientific literature, regarding the nature, causes, and consequences of global warming. The disputed issues include the causes of increased global average air temperature, especially since the mid-20th century, whether this warming trend is unprecedented or within normal climatic variations, whether humankind has contributed significantly to it, and whether the increase is wholly or partially an artifact of poor measurements. Additional disputes concern estimates of climate sensitivity, predictions of additional warming, and what the consequences of global warming will be."
The difficulty with Global Warming is that cause-effect relationship between increased temperature and the alleged causes has never been scientifically established. Only certain associated changes have been alleged to be the cause. We are not certain if these associated changes are indeed the culprit. Moreover even these projections are based on empirically generated climate models. This is presumably because we do not yet understand how Earth keeps its climate/temperature. So literature has plenty of mutually contradictory observations, claims and counterclaims. Plenty of positive feedback and negative feedback cycles are known but all put together do not explain as to how Earth keeps its climate/temperature within a range. Attempts to link Earth’s temperature with solar constant and its variations just don’t meet the eye. Solar constant is highest during winters and lowest during summers. Variations in solar constant do not exceed 0.1%. Wikipedia states about Solar Constant as under:-
“Solar output is nearly, but not quite, constant. Variations in total solar irradiance were too small to detect with technology available before the satellite era. Total solar output is now measured to vary (over the last three 11-year sunspot cycles) by approximately 0.1%; see solar variation for details.
The solar constant includes all types of solar radiation, not just the visible light. It is measured by satellite to be roughly 1.361 kilowatts per square meter (kW/m²) at solar minimum and approximately 0.1% greater (roughly 1.362 kW/m²) at solar maximum. The actual direct solar irradiance at the top of the atmosphere fluctuates by about 6.9% during a year (from 1.412 kW/m² in early January to 1.321 kW/m² in early July) due to the Earth's varying distance from the Sun, and typically by much less than 0.1% from day to day. Thus, for the whole Earth (which has a cross section of 127,400,000 km²), the power is 1.740×1017 W, plus or minus 3.5%. The solar constant does not remain constant over long periods of time (see Solar variation), but over a year varies much less than the variation of direct solar irradiance at the top of the atmosphere arising from the ellipticity of the Earth's orbit. The approximate average value cited,1.361 kW/m², is equivalent to 1.952 calories per minute per square centimeter, or 1.952 langleys (Ly)—or, in SI units— about 81.672 kJ/m² per minute."
The amount of solar energy Earth receives for sun is sufficient to increase surface temperature beyond 100° C in less than one hour. Moreover amount of energy can’t be correlated with observed weather conditions, being the highest in winters and lowest in summers. Even the extent of variation in solar constant can’t be correlated with rise of Earth’s temperature by 0.8° C during the last century. Moreover it is self-evident that Earth was unable to dissipate energy it receives from Sun; it would have been hot enough that no known life forms except (probably) some kind of Extremophiles could have survived. Even depletion of Ozone layer does not correlate with Global Warming.
In 2008, total worldwide energy consumption was 474 exajoules (474×1018 J=132,000 TWh). This is equivalent to an average power use of 15 terawatts (1.504×1013 W). This is 0.009% of the amount of energy Earth receives from Sun during any year. Therefore increased energy consumption due to increased human activity can’t account for increase in mean temperature of Earth from 13.9° C to 14.6° C (approximate increase of 5.4%) during past 100 years.
From the above discussion, it is evident that Earth rigorously keeps its temperature and Earth’s temperature bears no direct correlation to amount of energy it receives from sun or released by burning of fuels to meet demands created by increased human activity. Further no cause-effect relationship with accumulation of so called green house gases and Earth’s temperature has been established. Increased concentration (16% to 167% since 1750) of naturally occurring greenhouse gases does not linearly correlate with extent of reported mean temperature change. Same is the case with increased positive radiative forcing. Increased positive radiative forcing for different naturally occurring greenhouse gases has increased from 0.18 W/square meter to 1.79 W/square meter but bears no correlation with reported temperature increase.
Therefore all that can be said at the moment is that Earth’s surface temperature is the result of dynamic equilibrium which is attained and maintained by a variety of mechanisms having positive and negative feedback loops. So the reported increase in mean temperature of Earth may not be due to alleged accumulation of green house gases or increased human activity but may be the result of shift in dynamic equilibrium. How this dynamic equilibrium is determined, attained and maintained is the key issue to be resolved if we want to understand the reason underlying reported increase in mean temperature of Earth. Empirically worked out climate models are really not of much help because they indicate only association of facts and not the rationale behind those facts. Scientific resolution of problem of Global warming is not possible in the absence of proper understanding of the phenomenon. Last but not the least, nature is self-perpetuating and this invariably is the result of dynamic conservation of status-quo.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor and has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This is the only book which deals with origin of nature and universe from null or Zero or nothing.