Roko’s Basilisk: The most terrifying thought experiment …

Here is another “thought experiment” for you. You have a 10 Watt energy source surrounded by a perfect water sphere. The sphere is drifting in space/vacuum with no surrounding objects. The surface of the sphere will lose 10 W to space by emitting radiation. Correct? What happens when you put insulation around that sphere? What will the surface of that insulation emit to space? The same 10 W. But, what happened to the temperature inside? Did it increase? If so, how can that possibly happen? Do you consider this also impossible?

“Kenneth – I assume you also reject Einstein’s thought experiments as well.” – Jack Dale

Simplistically, the globally averaged surface temperature is assumed to be 288 K. In the “thought experiment”, an imaginary Earth that has no atmosphere (or greenhouse gases to absorb and re-emit the surface heat) would have a temperature of 255 K. The difference between the real and imagined Earth with no atmosphere is 33 K, meaning that the Earth would be much colder (and uninhabitable) without the presence of greenhouse gases. Of that 33 K, it is assumed that CO2 concentrations in range of 200 – 280 ppm (the pre-industrial ranges for the last 800,000 years) contribute 7.2 K (~20%), while water vapor concentrations (ranging between about 1,000 to 40,000 ppm for the globe) contribute 20.6 K to the 33 K greenhouse effect.


Six Famous Thought Experiments, Animated in 60 …

[…] Source: Another New Paper Dismantles The CO2 Greenhouse Effect ‘Thought Experiment’ […]


A planetary “greenhouse” is a curiosity, a trick of nature. It works solely because although a sphere only has one side, a shell has two sides. The trick has nothing to do with greenhouse gases. It does not require an atmosphere. In fact, a greenhouse can be built entirely of steel. A thought experiment shows how a steel greenhouse would work. … So that’s the trick of the greenhouse. It has nothing to do with blankets, or mirrors, or greenhouse gases. Now, it is tempting to think that we could model the Earth in this manner, as a sphere surrounded by a single shell. This is called a “two-layer” model, with the two layers being the surface and the atmospheric shell. And in fact, a number of simplified climate models have been built in this way. Un-noticed by their programmers, however, is that it is not physically possible to model the Earth as a two-layer system.


Thought Experiments: Deep Thought Provoking …

Perhaps the most fundamental equation in climate science is the “thought experiment” that envisions what the temperature of the Earth would be if it had no atmosphere (or greenhouse gases).

Does Article 50 require an Act of Parliament

This is crucial. Not only is the heating contribution of the water vapor-and-CO2 greenhouse effect viewed as a “thought experiment” because it uses an imaginary world without an atmosphere as its premise, the 288 K – 255 K = 33 K greenhouse effect equation only considers a radiation budget analysis that pertains to atmospheric heating, not ocean heating. This is theoretical negligence, as it is tantamount to claiming that we should measure the temperature of a person’s spit to accurately determine his overall body temperature.

The Logic-Defying Double-Slit Experiment Is Even …

Do you believe in the 33 K imaginary-world thought experiment, Jack? Assuming you do, explain why you do, and why the critiques of this conceptualization found in this paper published by 3 Ph.D. climate scientists are wrong. That would be substantive. Your SJW “predatory journal” tactics are logically fallacious.

Another New Paper Dismantles The CO2 Greenhouse …

Do you believe in the 288 K – 255 K = 33 K greenhouse effect “thought experiment” of an imaginary world with no atmosphere, as Gavin Schmidt himself calls it? Of course you do. If Gavin agrees, it must be right. So why do you believe in the accuracy of this “thought experiment”, Jack? Defend your beliefs against the 5-point critique offered in the Kramm et al. (2017) paper.