P/4 - Why it is THE issue that destroys GH and AGW.

[Inconvenient_Skeptic]

There are many instances where liberals get something right and also plenty of moments where conservatives get things wrong.

It is similar to:

"The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet."

(07-04-2011 07:26 AM)Richard T. Fowler Wrote:  Hello Darkness, my old friend,
I've come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping,
Left its seeds while I was sleeping,

And the vision
That was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound

Of silence.
.
.
.


IN THE SOUNDS...

of silence."




-- Paul Simon.

February 1964.


(I am not a liberal. But this is a case of a stopped clock being right.)

RTF
Shhhhh!

---

Derek,

Just because you keep repeating the mantra of P/4 does not make it so. Yes it is true that only half of the Earth is getting energy from the Sun at any (and every) moment and the other half is only losing energy.

Your argument seems to be that the 341 W/m2 should be half because of the night portion of the day. The problem with your argument is that the energy balance as a whole is a one day average for a 1m^2 portion of the Earth's surface. Each meter of Earth is not losing energy in the manner described by KT.

The KT model is based on all the energy in the entire system divided by the surface area of the Earth. In fact it could be more accurately described as the average yearly energy over a period of a decade (or two for different energy flows) than then has the time component removed.

I have in painstaking detailed gone over the 1997 and the 2008 versions of the KT energy balance. The overall method is the most practical way to describe the system. Even if the definition were to be changed to describe it the way you want it to be described, it would simply result in changing all the numbers to re-align to the new "day/night" definition.