FINALE


97% of the scientists, including the authors of the following publications below, who produced (collected, processed, adjusted, optimized and second-optimized) data for the global energy budgets seem to agree that these relationships are valid within 0.1, 0.6 or 1 W/m2:

Stephens et. al. 2012 Nature Geoscience:





*

NASA LaRC Energy Budget Poster, 2014:








*
NASA CERES EBAF Ed2.8 data, 2015:


SURFACE ENERGY BUDGET:




*
Wild et al. 2016:



TOA and SFC flux data come from different independent sources, and still:
solar absorbed surface + thermal down surface = 2 thermal outgoing TOA




*
NASA CERES EBAF Ed2.8 data:


ULW + G(clear) = 2OLR(clear)
Net STF(clear) = G(clear)


*
Stephens and L'Ecuyer 2015:

difference: 0.05 W/m2

*
NASA CERES EBAF Ed2.8 data:




E(surface, all-sky) = SW net + LW down = 2OLR(all) + LWCRE

*
NASA CERES EBAF Ed2.8 data:



planetary emissivity (transfer function) f(all) = OLR(all)/ULW = 0.6016
Theorerical: f(all) = 9/15 = 0.6
g(all) = 0.4

*
NASA CERES EBAF Ed2.8 data:



clear-sky transfer function, f(clear) = OLR(clear)/ULW = 0.66676
Theorerical: f(clear) = 10/15 = 0.66666
g(clear) = 1/3

*
Integer patterns in the fluxes (projected on Loeb et al. 2015):



*

*

Integer patterns in the fluxes (projected on Wild et al. 2015):

*
Integer patterns in the fluxes (projected on Stephens and L'Ecuyer 2015):


*
Integer patterns in the fluxes (projected on Wild 2017):


* * *


This is a structure, a definite pattern, belonging to a specific geometry. There is a direct TOA-surface connection. There is a direct TOA-constraint on the clear-sky surface energy budget, and there is an LWCRE-modulated TOA-constraint on the all-sky surface energy budget. You can find a given integer multiple pattern in the clear-sky fluxes and an LWCRE-modulated integer multiple pattern in the all-sky fluxes. None of them is a function of the atmospheric greenhouse gas content.

*


If this is not enough: there is a definite regulation on the IR-opaque partial cloud 'shell': its area fraction is constrained to the planetary emissivity, each having an equilibrium value of 9/15 = 3/5, as shown below:

*
Effective cloud area fraction = Geometric cloud area fraction x cloud IR emissivity

CERES EBAF TOA Ed4.0, Geometric cloud area fraction:



CERES SYN1deg Ed3A, IR emissivity:


Effective cloud area fraction, observed = 0.68 x 0.86 = 0.585.

*
And if this is still not enough, there is a constraint on the albedo at α = 1 - sin 45 = 1 - √2/2 = 0.292893


This is a completely different paradigm from the accepted theory; the probability that these patterns, together, appear solely by chance is practically zero.
*


The direct connection between the energy flows at the lower and the upper boundary puts the influence of the composition of the intermediate atmosphere into parentheses:



*

 Schematic, simplified concept of the all-sky fluxes in equilibrium
LWCRE = OLR(all)/9 = 26.6 W/m2 = 1 unit:




*


*

*
CLOSED SHELL MODEL:
S = 2A
Surface = 2Atmosphere





*
Complete solution:



* * *
The new picture can be expressed most easily by the closed shell - Marble Earth analogy:


The theoretical g(all) = 2/5 = 0.4 is the strength of the greenhouse effect in the Blue Marble.

You may wish to know how much is it in reality.

CERES observations for years 2001 - 2015:

g


The end.