03-16-2014, 01:56 PM
(03-16-2014, 11:04 AM)Derek Wrote: Greg, regarding your three quotes / points.
1) Yes, you did. Go back and check the first page of this thread.
No, I did not. You said: "You also seem to swop between Celsius and Kelvin too, to get different results?". Different, Derek. I used Kelvin equivalents twice in the post #5 to express the same temperatures, not different ones: "Considering just a black body is nonsense, because the light side would be at +30°C according to the SB equation but the dark side at -273°C (0°K), since the dark side receives nothing. So, the "black body average" would be -121°C (152°K) and not -18°C."
-273°C = 0°K and -121°C = 152°K as you possibly know.
(03-16-2014, 11:04 AM)Derek Wrote: you get 30C purely by insulating the dark side of the planet.....
No, I did not refer to any insulation of the dark side of the planet.
As I said a few times here, the temperature on the dark side would be below +30°C depending on the rate of cooling (that is in absence of sunshine) and so would be the average. This rate of cooling affects the average, of course. +30°C is only the maximum.
(03-16-2014, 11:11 AM)Derek Wrote: Geological timescale is a different matter Greg. Various proxys and human history can give us a rough answer + or - a fair amount....
What the exact GMT in year 666 was is meaningless.
Never heard of any proxy capable of revealing the "global mean temperature" you referred to.
Still, they present diagrams of the "global mean temperature". Note, not being able to scientifically account for any single year.
This goes for the present times as well, despite all those weather stations. The apparently unsolvable problem is how the discrete local measurements represent the real global average.