Why does the temperature drop dramatically during the eclipse of the Sun?
The biased UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) downplays the role of solar radiation as an energy source.
The cornerstone of such consensus climate science is the greenhouse gas theory. This tells us that CO2 and other gases in our atmosphere makes our planet 33 degrees warmer ‘than it would otherwise be.’ The theory tells us it the those ‘heat trapping’ gases in our atmosphere, not the sun that keeps us warm.
Why then does the temperature drop spectacularly during the few minutes of an eclipse of the Sun?
Dirac, the Greenhouse Effect and CO2 are supposed to over power the Sun's TSI, at least that's what you have been defending. You know, trapping the heat and preventing "snowball Earth". The Sun disappears for 6 minutes and the temperature plummets. So much for the "heat trapping" capability of the Radiative Greenhouse Effect.
- Anonymous5 months agoFavorite Answer
There is no evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. The AGW theory is that adding CO2 to the atmosphere causes an increase in its radiant thermal insulation properties causing restrictions in heat flow which in turn cause warming at the Earth’s surface and the lower atmosphere. In itself the effect is small because we are talking about small changes in the CO2 content of the atmosphere and CO2 comprises only about .04 percent of dry atmosphere if it were only dry but that is not the case.
A real greenhouse does not stay warm because of the heat trapping effects of greenhouse gases. A real greenhouse stays warm because the glass reduces cooling by convection. This is a convective greenhouse effect. So too on Earth..The surface of the Earth is 33 degrees C warmer than it would be without an atmosphere because gravity limits cooling by convection. This convective greenhouse effect is observed on all planets in the solar system with thick atmospheres and it has nothing to do with the LWIR absorption properties of greenhouse gases. The convective greenhouse effect is calculated from first principals and it accounts for all 33 degrees C. There is no room for an additional radiant greenhouse effect. Our sister planet Venus with an atmosphere that is more than 90 times more massive then Earth’s and which is more than 96 percent CO2 shows no evidence of an additional radiant greenhouse effect. The high temperatures on the surface of Venus can all be explained by the planet’s proximity to the sun and its very dense atmosphere. The radiant greenhouse effect of the AGW conjecture has never been observed. If CO2 did affect climate then one would expect that the increase in CO2 over the past 30 years would have caused an increase in the natural lapse rate in the troposphere but that has not happened.
- Anonymous5 months ago
Dirac got it right. Read that response.
- zipperLv 65 months ago
No sun light no heat from the sun so the temperature should fall
- jamesLv 75 months ago
Same reason the earth started to heat up when it moved out from behind a dust cloud in space. Less solar radiation use to hit the earth. But it is only 10,000 years before we start to move behind a different dust loud in space. The reason we had a Dark Age was because the sun was behind a thicker part of that dust cloud. It was visably darker.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- 5 months ago
Okay, the question of the hour.
Is this question currently bot tagged?
- JonLv 65 months ago
The theory is that the greenhouse effect keeps the AVERAGE temperature higher than it otherwise would be, not that it maintains a steady temperature every second.
- DiracLv 45 months ago
Why in the world WOULDN'T the temperature go down? You are removing an energy source from the system.
The idea that the IPCC "downplays" the role of solar radiation is complete, utter nonsense. Take away solar radiation and the planet freezes very rapidly.
EDIT: I don't know what you mean when you say that "the Greenhouse Effect and CO2 are supposed to over power the Sun's TSI". When figuring out what the temperature will be at the Earth's surface, you need to consider ALL the factors that contribute: the solar radiation, convection, upward blackbody radiation and downward blackbody radiation. The current forcing from the change in CO2 is about 2 watts per square meter, at the grand solar minimum, the forcing from the change in the solar radiation will be less than 0.5 watts per square meter, so clearly that isn't going to cause any large cooling of the planet.
On the other hand, if it's close to noon during a solar eclipse, you're doing to drop one of the energy sources at that point by HUNDREDS of watts per square meter, so sure it's going to cool down some.
I understand what you're saying when you say that the sun is the only energy source, but it's misleading you. Try this experiment: on a hot summer day, lay your arm on the hood of a car and see how long you can keep it there. I'm guessing not very long. But why? You say that the Sun is the only source of energy and the side of your arm that is on the hood of the car is facing AWAY from the sun. What's happening of course, is that energy is being conducted from the hot metal of the car to your skin. If you left it there long enough, you'd get burned. Ultimately, it was the sun that warmed up the hood of the car, but at that moment it's energy from the hot car that's burning your skin, not energy from the sun. Ultimately, the source of most of the energy in the system is from the sun, but there are energy fluxes that are both upward and downward.
- JimZLv 75 months ago
I drove 16 hours to mountains not far south of Portland Oregon to see the eclipse a year or so ago. It was a long commute but I'm glad I did it. It was cool having a crowd of people spontaneously cheering the moon. It cooled even before the sun was obviously being eclipsed. The actual eclipse was like night and day and it cooled significantly obviously from the sun being shaded by the moon. What I remember most, what really made me gasp in awe, was seeing the sparkles on the sides and I learned later that they were from the sun being exposed in moon valleys which really gives you an idea of just how it appears to have nearly an identical diameter from our perspective.
The temp drop tells me that the sun warms the atmosphere and without it, it would be a totally different planet. Being shielded from the sun would cause less warming from greenhouse gases so for me, it doesn't convince me one way or the other but I admit to not knowing enough of all of different factors involved.
- ZirpLv 75 months ago
because part of the earth is shielded from the sun's rays by the moon, when a solar eclipse happens
- catwhisperer07Lv 65 months ago
I did some reading up on this question. A solar eclipse lasts for about 6 minutes and the temperature does drop significantly. Then rises significantly once the Sun re-appears.
The CO2 trapping BS, in my opinion is debunked by a empirical observation that has probably been over looked by the alarmist propaganda cult. Solar, you've done it again!!