I shall attempt to prove once and for all that the theory of manmade global warming is a fraud.
Let's start by proving that (at least in theory), CO2 does cause a greenhouse effect.
A simple physics law is all we need.
It's called
Wien's Law.
What is Wien's Law? It's a formula that relates the temperature of an object to the wavelength of light it emits. Why is it important? Because as you'll see, CO2 only absorbs a few precise wavelengths - corresponding to a small temperature range...
Most objects on Earth emit infrared light (according to Wien's Law). The
greenhouse effect consists of the reflection (absorption & re-emission) of infrared light back to the Earth's surface. So what's important - in order to quantify the greenhouse effect that CO2 has - is to compare the wavelengths emitted by the Earth to the wavelengths absorbed by CO2. Where there is absorption, you have the greenhouse effect. Where there's no absorption, there's no greenhouse effect.
The CO2
absorption spectrum indicates that CO2 absorbs in the range of 15 microns to 25 microns, 4 to 5 microns, and a narrow band around 2.6 to 2.8 microns. The first band corresponds to a temperature of 116*K to 193*K. The second band is 579*K to 724*K (which makes it irrelevant because it's over 300*C), and the third band is totally irrelevant because it's over 800*K (500*C).
So the only relevant band of absorption occurs between -157*C and -80*C, where the absorption done by CO2 is virtually total (i.e. 100%). So we should expect that CO2 prevents temperatures on Earth from falling below -80*C. And that is indeed the case because if you check out Antarctica, the lowest temperature recorded there is -89*C. Or, if you check out Mars whose atmosphere is 100% CO2, the lowest temperature recorded there is -87*C (even higher than on Earth!).
But when it comes to temperatures above -80*C, it gets really interesting. Take a look at Wien's Law again. Notice how the intensity of emission drops off on the right. Basically, if you have a surface at -30*C (average winter temperature in Nunavut), how much will be emitted in the wavelength that CO2 needs in order to produce a greenhouse effect?
After consulting
this handy calculator (scroll down), it turns out that over 30% of the energy emitted by an object at -29*C is absorbed by CO2. I didn't bother to do the exact integration, but a rough visual calculation of the area under the curve gives 67 W/m2 absorbed by CO2, out of 195 W/m2, resulting in a percentage of 34%. Since -29*C is a regular temperature in the arctic in the winter, this means CO2 has a huge impact on temperature up there. The impact is reduced at higher temperatures because the Wien curve shifts toward smaller wavelengths.
The next question is, how much CO2 (what concentration) is necessary to achieve the full absorption potential? The answer is 1 molecule per 15 cubic microns. How much is that? CO2 weighs 7.3e-26 kg. The volume is 1.5e-17 cubic meters. So the answer is 4.9e-9 kg/m3. What is the mass of a cubic metre of air? 1.29 kg/m3. That means we need 3.8e-9 kg CO2/kg air. 1 kg/kg is 1 million ppm. So to find ppm we need to multiply by 1 million. The result: 0.0038 ppm. That's 3.8 ppb!
How much CO2 do we have today? ... 380 ppm! How much did we have before the industrial age? 270 ppm. Keep in mind it only takes 3.8 ppb of CO2 to achieve the full greenhouse effect of CO2.
Conclusion? The CO2 we added to the atmosphere makes no difference, because the greenhouse effect was already 100% before the industrial age.
NOTE: This article may be revised in the future if I come across new information.