Kevin Kilty's comment

[Sunsettommy]

From HERE

Here I was referring to the lab model of Seim and Olson. Their apparatus atmosphere was so transparent to CO2 that most of what they measured came from the apparatus structure itself. But the lesson from this work shows that transport is largely a function of the temperature and composition of the atmosphere which changes substantially over the troposphere on Earth, but not at all in the lab apparatus.

[Sunsettommy]

From HERE

1) Several people have posted here in the past few years with claims suggesting that the IPCC commits a physical inconsistency between the TOA “forcing” they posit and an ultimate surface temperature they state will result. They base this on results as calculated with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. I hope that the MODTRAN caculations here show there is not necessarily an inconsistency. That these values are consistent with one another when there is a radiating atmosphere involved.

2) Some other people, like Seim and Olson, claim to have proved the greenhouse effect of CO2 is miscalculated, or that observations are counter to the theory of how the greenhouse theory involving CO2 is supposed to work. The results here should show that the effect of CO2 increase from preindustrial to present times is too small for measurements and planetary noise to have any say in the matter and that laboratory scale models don’t apply to the greenhouse effect as it occurs on Earth.

3) I don’t see these results as advancing either side in this debate for two reasons: first, there are too many other influences besides CO2 that are truly unknown; and, second many important issues aren’t addressed at all by the radiation properties of CO2, like is it better to adapt that to mitigate. All I intended here is to straighten out some claims about CO2 and LWIR.