Actually, it is the link. I have had it archived on my favorites list for several years. Imagine my surprise to click on the link and find that not only the quote, but the entire FAQ has been removed. Wonder why? I tried the way back machine but the page isn't archived.
There is scattering. The IR absorbed by a CO2 molecule doesn't necessarily exit in the same direction as it entered. There is no absorption of that emission by CO2 molecules resulting in the IR then moving in a different direction
Guess you didn't even bother to read the paper. He gave precise frequencies as well as the method by which they were derived. For example IR absorbed by the CO2 molecule in the 4.30 μm wavelength is emitted at a wavelength of 4.31 μm. Very slightly longer, but enough to render it invisible to the next CO2 molecule. IR in the
It goes to the only place it can go. It goes where the second law of thermodynamics says that it must go. It can not spontaneously move towards a warmer object (the earth) so it goes towards cooler climes wherever they may be.
Of course not. A longer wavelength only means that it can't be reabsorbed by another CO2 molecule and have its exit to the upper atmosphere and space delayed thus causing some warming.
A photon is energy. Energy can't move spontaneously from cool objects towards warmer objects so it goes in the only direction it can....towards a cooler object.
What excess interenal energy? A very small amount is lost causing the vibration within the CO2 molecule which results in the slight shift to a longer wavelength of the emission. All of the energy is accounted for.
Except that I didn't make any such argument based on who he is. His work is either correct or it isn't and that is as far as my argument ever went. Ergo the challenge to prove him wrong.
Well the challenge to prove him wrong is still laying on the table untouched by you. He shows his work in the paper. Where is he in error?
