by Vincent Gray

30th MARCH 2013


I have revised my previous paper “The Greenhouse and its effects”, as I find that I wrongly assessed the ideas of Fourier. It can be found at

I now find that Fourier was the originator of the Greenhouse idea, but it was based on his false assessment of the action  of a greenhouse.

He considered that a greenhouse became warm because of the reflection of infra red radiation from the glass top.

He then speculated that moisture in the atmosphere might trap radiation from the earth in a similar way
Pouillet and Tyndall agreed with this idea

Arrhenius measured the effect from Langley’s measurements but mistakenly attributed it to carbon dioxide without realising that Langley could not measure carbon dioxide; so Arrhenius actually measured water vapour  Current climate models perpetuate this error

A real greenhouse protects the interior from the real climate. The air inside cools the daytime heated surface by convection and evaporation of water  and  the warmer air improves plant growth and delays cooling at night.

A similar mechanism happens with the real climate, It  is also cooled by convection and evaporation of water by day and circulation of the air and oceans also delays cooling at night. but the energy involved in the real climate in convection, evaporation, formation of clouds and precipitation involves (at least 97W/sqm} is so much greater than the claimed  1.6W/msq effects of carbon dioxide since 1750, or the projected 6-9W/sqm  by 2100, the claimed effects of greenhouse gases. The “Greenhouse Effect” would be swamped by the  unpredictable chaotic fluctuations  of air and ocean circulation.  On top of this are the unpredictable chaotic fluctuations of the sun and of volcanic events..


Vincent Gray