The above video, by two scientists, echoes what I’ve found myself in looking at balloon data, and it also explains what the scientific method is and how we always must confirm our ideas against real-world data. Real-world data refutes the idea that CO2 is doing anything at all; in fact, real-world data refutes the idea that radiative physics dominants in our atmosphere.
Radiative physics is of course true, but to make it the all-powerful force in climate is just a paradigm that has to be confirmed. But, it hasn’t been confirmed; it’s been refuted. Many people can’t believe this is the real state of things, but it is.
Lots of scientists circle the wagons and defend the paradigm anyhow. This is groupthink in action, which is something altogether different than real science.
Balloon data constitutes real evidence, real observations. It’s not theory; it’s facts.
Lately when I look up in the sky and see the clouds, I think of how beautiful things are and I know that the atmosphere really is cooling the earth according to well-known and established formulas that have no terms for radiative effects. This is exactly what we see in real-world data.
As for the mystery of why the earth is so warm, the answer seems simple: the mass of the atmosphere necessarily holds heat, and this mass is concentrated at the surface (pressure increases logarithmically as we get closer to the surface.) That’s why atmospheric pressure is equal to 3-1/2 pianos on us when we’re standing up, and yes, it really does have something to do with gravitational acceleration: mass x gravity = weight, thus the atmosphere has weight. Key term in the lapse rates that describe atmospheric cooling? You guessed it: gravitational acceleration. Not radiation!
It sounds crazy at first because it’s not what we’re told. But, it’s confirmed in real-world data. Many scientists are now on to this theory but so far the radiative paradigm is dominant, even if wrong.
You don't need to apologize to me; maybe I wasn't one of the intended audience but I thoroughly enjoyed the the presentations and the science behind the methodology.
My apologies ... this post was supposed to be sent out to a select audience in another, related substack I set up. I don't know why this was sent out to more people.