I have done a partial update of the Roadmap section – creating a few sub-pages and listed the relevant articles under the sub-pages.
It is a work in progress, the idea is to make it possible for new visitors to find useful articles. Most blogs have a high bias towards the last few articles.
I have split off:
CO2 – an 8-part series on CO2 as well as a few other related articles
Science Roads Less Traveled – science basics and alternative theories explained
“Back Radiation” – the often misunderstood subject of radiation emitted by the atmosphere
Just a note as well for new visitors. There are many articles explaining some climate science basics. Many people assume from this – and from other simplistic coverage on the internet – that climate science is full of over-simplistic models.
I don’t want to encompass all in a sweeping generalization.. but.. almost all comments I see on this subject are attacking simplistic models aimed at educating rather than models actually used in climate science.
For example, models aiming to give simple education on the radiative effect of CO2 range from:
- ultra-simplistic/misleading – CO2 works like a “greenhouse”
- simplistic – CO2 is an “insulator” trapping heat
- basic radiative model – blackbody radiator of the surface, atmosphere & solar combination
But in a real climate model, there are equations from fundamental physics like:
And in atmospheric radiation textbooks:
Providing a set of equations doesn’t prove anything is right.
But my intent is to highlight that simple models are for illumination. It is easy to prove that simple models are simplistic.
The science of atmospheres and climate is much more sophisticated than these models designed for illumination.