In the year 1956, the perception of a greenhouse effect due to atmospheric carbon-dioxide appeared for the first time in public, namely in a Time Magazin article entitled “One Big Greenhouse”. It referred to a publication in the American Scientist of Gilbert N. Plass [1] and explained the global temperature-enhancement as well as the shrinking of glaciers. Plass adapted IR-measurements to the theory of Sven Arrhenius, published in 1896 [2] , who had used on his part the absorption measurements of John Tyndall, published more than thirty years before [3] , applying them to the Stefan-Boltzmann relation which had meanwhile been published. However, already in the work of Arrhenius some serious errors are latent which will be discussed later.

The alleged proof for the correctness of this theory was delivered 25 years later by an article in the Scientific American of the year 1982 [4] . Therein, the measurements of C.D. Keeling were reported which had been made at two remote locations, namely at the South Pole and in Hawaii, and according to which a continuous rise of the atmospheric CO₂-concentration from 316 to 336 ppm had been detected between the years 1958 and 1978 (cf. Figure 1), suggesting coherence between the CO₂-concentration and the average global temperature.

But apart from the fact that these CO₂-concentrations are quite minor (400 ppm = 0.04%), and that a constant proportion between the atmospheric CO₂-concentration and the average global temperature could not be asserted over a longer period, it should be borne in mind that this conclusion was an analogous one, and not a causal one, since solely a temporal coincidence existed. Rather, other influences could have been effective which happened simultaneously, in particular the increasing urbanisation, influencing the structure and the coloration of large parts of Earth surface.

However, this contingency was, and still is, categorically excluded. Solely the two possibilities are considered as explanation of the climate change: either the anthropogenic influence due to CO₂-production, or a natural one which cannot be influenced. A third influence, the here suggested one, namely the one of colours, is a priori excluded, even though nobody denies the influence of colouring on the surface temperature of Earth and the existence of urban heat islands, and although the increase of winds and storms cannot be explained by the greenhouse theory.

Subsequently, intensive research activities emerged, accompanied by a flood of publications, and culminating in several text books. Several climate models were presented with different scenarios and diverging long-term forecasts. Thereby, the fact was disregarded that indeed no global climate exists but solely a plurality of climates, or rather of micro-climates and at best of climate-zones, and that the Latin word “clima” (as well as the English word “clime”) means “region”. Moreover, an average global temperature is not really defined and thus not measurable because the temperature-differences are immense, for instance with regard to the geographic latitude, the altitude, the distinct conditions over sea and over land, and not least between the seasons and between day and night. Moreover, the term “climate” implicates rain and snow as well as winds and storms which, in the long-term, are not foreseeable. In particular, it should be realized that atmospheric processes are energetically determined, whereto the temperature contributes only a part.

Since around 2005 several books appeared which significantly contributed to establish the greenhouse theory in the public opinion. Thereby the CO₂ got, in a way, the status of a climate standard, i.e. it served as a measure to describe the condition of the climate. Hereto, the book of Tim Flannery entitled “The Weather makers”, published in 2005, has to be mentioned. But in particular, the book and the film of the former US vice president and presidential candidate Al Gore, published in 2006 and entitled “An Inconvenient Truth”, had a striking success. They were awarded by the Nobel Peace Prize and by an Oscar, that which extended the credibility even though it was not scientifically grounded. Since then, the reduction of the anthropogenic CO₂-emission is believed as the only and not disputable method in order to mitigate climate change by replacing the fossil energy sources by renewable energies, preferably into alternative ones such as photovoltaic and wind power.

However, already well in advance institutions were founded which aimed at mitigating climate change through political measures. Thereby, climate change was equated with the industrial CO₂ production, although physical evidence for such a relation was not given. It was just a matter of belief. In this regard, in 1992 the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) was founded, supported by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). In advance, side by the side with the UNO, numerous so-called COPs (Confer­ences on the Parties) were hold: the first one in 1985 in Berlin, the most popular one in 1997 in Kyoto, and the most important one in 2015 in Paris, leading to a climate convention which was signed by representatives of 195 nations. Thereby, numerous documents were compiled, altogether more than 40,000. But actually these documents didn’t fulfil the standards of scientific publications since they were not peer reviewed.

Since the climate convention of Paris in 2015, climate even has deteriorated, in spite of the measures which had been taken. This gave rise to climate protection activists such as Greta Thunberg. The debate became even more emotional and far from any scientific background. Indeed, the greenhouse doctrine had in so far a counterproductive effect on climate as it prohibited effective measures such as brightening urban surfaces.

The scientific literature about the greenhouse theory is so extensive that it is difficult to find a clearly outlined and consistent description. Nevertheless, the publications of James E. Hansen [5] and of V. Ramanathan et al. [6] may be considered as authoritative. Moreover, the textbooks [7] [8] and [9] are worth mentioning. Therein it is assumed that Earth surface, which is heated up by sun irradiation, emits thermal radiation into the atmosphere, warming it up due to heat absorption by “greenhouse gases” such as CO₂ and CH₄. Thereby, counter-radiation occurs which induces a so-called radiative transfer. This aspect involved the rise of numerous theories (e.g. [10] [11] [12] ). But the co-existence of theories is in contrast to the scientific principle that for each phenomenon solely one explanation or theory is admissible.

Already simple thoughts may lead on to question this theory. For instance: Supposing the present CO₂-concentration of approx. 400 ppm (parts per million) = 0.04%, one should wonder how the temperature of the atmosphere can depend on such an extremely low gas amount, and why this component can be the predominant or even the sole cause for the atmospheric temperature. This would actually mean that the temperature would be situated near the absolute zero of −273˚C if the air would contain no CO₂ or other greenhouse gases.

Indeed, no special physical knowledge is needed in order to realize that this theory cannot be correct. However, the fact that it has settled in the public mind, becoming an important political issue, requires a more detailed investigation of the measuring methods and their results which delivered the foundations of this theory, and why misinterpretations arose. Thereto, the two subsequent points have to be particularly considered: The first point concerns the photometrical measurements on gases in the electromagnetic range of thermal radiation which initially Tyndall had carried out in the 1860s [13] , and which had been expanded to IR-measurements evaluated by Plass nineteen years later [14] . The second point concerns the application of the Stefan/Boltzmann-law on the Earth-atmosphere system firstly made by Arrhenius in 1896 [2] , and more or less adopted by modern atmospheric physics. Both approaches are deficient and would question the greenhouse theory without requiring the authors own approaches. Thus it is indicated to outline them at first.

Within the here described and in [20] published lab-like method, not the reflected but the absorbed sun radiation was determined, namely by measuring the temperature courses of coloured quadratic plates (10 × 10 × 2 cm³) when sunlight of known intensity came vertically onto these plates. The temperatures of the plates were determined by mercury thermometers, while the intensity of the sunlight was measured by an electronic “Solarmeter” (KIMO SL 100). The plates were embedded in Styrofoam and covered with a thin transparent foil acting as an outer window in order to minimize erratic cooling by atmospheric turbulence (Figure 5). Their heat capacities were taken from literature values. The colours as well as the plate material were varied. Aluminium was used as a reference material, being favourable due to its high heat capacity which entails a low heating rate and a homogeneous heat distribution. For comparison, additional measurements were made by wooden plates, bricks and natural stones. For enabling a permanent optimal orientation towards the sun, six plate-modules were positioned on an adjustable panel (Figure 6).

Thereby it has to be supposed that the plates emit thermal radiation all the more as its temperature increases, until a limiting equilibrium temperature is attained where the radiation and the emission intensities are equal. However, during the usual irradiation period of 30 minutes this equilibrium temperature was not attained, so that only the heating-up rate could be determined, namely by evaluating the initial slopes of the time/temperature curves.

In Figure 7 such curves are rendered for six typical colours using aluminium plates. At plates with lower heat capacities such as wood, the warming-up proceeded faster involving steeper curves (Figure 8). Obviously, in that case the curves began to decline in the further course since the ratio between the thermal emission intensity and the thermal absorption intensity was greater. However, the proportions of the initial slopes kept constant.

In order to calculate the colour-specific solar absorption-coefficients β_s which depends on the heat capacity of the plate, the following relation for the warming-up rate can be applied. It is determined by the irradiation density of the sunlight, the solar absorption coefficient of the relevant colour, and the thermal admittance of the plate. Within the initial linear range of the curve, the resulting temperature T is given by Equation (5):

T − T 0 t = Φ ⋅ β s C A (5)

T = temperature of the plate [K] or [˚C].

T₀ = starting temperature of the plate [K] or [˚C].

t = time [s].

Φ = irradiation density of the sunlight at the surface [W·m⁻²] where 1 W = 1 J·s⁻¹.

β_s = solar absorption-coefficient.

C_A = thermal admittance of the plate [J·g⁻¹·K⁻¹],

C A = c m ⋅ ρ ⋅ d ⋅ 10 4

c_m = mass specific heat capacity of the plate material [J·g⁻¹·K⁻¹],

ρ = density of the plate material [g·cm⁻³],

d = thickness of the plate [cm].

The evaluation of the curves of Figure 7 yielded the colour specific solar absorption-coefficients β_s rendered in Figure 9. They were independent of the plate material. Remarkably, the value for green was relatively high.

If the sunlight irradiation and thus the warming-up process would be continued, finally constant limiting temperatures are attained. However, when 20 mm thick aluminium plates are used, the hereto needed time would be too long, exceeding the constantly available sunshine period during a day². Instead, separate cooling-down experiments were made, allowing a mathematical modelling of the whole process including the determination of the limiting temperatures.

Those experiments were made in a partly darkened room with a known constant ambient temperature between 20˚C - 25˚C, using the same module (namely a plate embedded in Styrofoam and overlaid with a thin PVC-foil). In contrast to the heat capacity of the material, the colour of the plate was irrelevant. Initially, each plate was heated in an oven on to a temperature above 60˚C. Afterwards, temperature readings were made at regular intervals, for aluminium of 15 minutes, and for wood and brick of 5 minutes (since the latter ones cooled down more rapidly). The results for four different plate types are rendered in Figure 10.

The cooling-down process could be mathematically described by formula (6), implying the solution of a differential equation:

T = T a m + ( T i n − T a m ) ⋅ e − B ⋅ A m ⋅ c m t (6)

T_am = ambient room temperature.

T_in = initial surface temperature of the plate.

B = heat transfer coefficient [W·m⁻²·K⁻¹].

A = surface area of the plate [m²].

m = mass [g].

The size of the heat transfer coefficient B [W·m⁻²·K⁻¹] was determined graphically by a linear plot according to formula (7):

ln ( T i n − T a m T − T a m ) = B ⋅ A m ⋅ c m t (7)

For the four tested materials, the numerical values amounted to

Aluminium 8.8

Stone 9.7

Brick 9.0

Wood 7.4

In spite of a slow variation, it seemed appropriate to assume for B an invariant value of approx. 9 W·m⁻²·K⁻¹. Naturally, this value considerably increases when the PVC-foil is absent.

Using this coefficient B, the equations for the heating-up process and the cooling-down process were combined, delivering formulas for the calculation of the time/temperature course (8) as well for the limiting temperature T_lim (9):

T = T a m + β s ⋅ Φ B ( 1 − e − B ⋅ A m ⋅ c m t ) (8)

T l i m = T a m + β s ⋅ Φ B (9)

These limiting temperature values are in good accordance with the empirical values reported in [24] and with the Stefan/Boltzmann-values. As obvious from the respective diagrams in Figure 11 and Figure 12, the limiting temperatures are independent of the plate-materials, whereas the heating rates strongly depend on them.

In principal, it is also possible to model combined heating-up and cooling-down processes [20] . However, this presumes constant environmental conditions which normally do not exist.

If the warming-up behaviour of gases has to be determined by temperature measurements, interference by the walls of the gas vessel should be regarded since they exhibit a significantly higher heat capacity than the gas does, which implicates a slower warming-up rate. Since solid materials absorb thermal radiation stronger than gases do, the risk exists that the walls of the vessel are directly warmed up by the radiation, and that they subsequently transfer the heat to the gas. And finally, even the thin glass-walls of the thermometers may disturb the measurements by absorbing thermal radiation.

By these reasons, quadratic tubes with a relatively large profile (20 cm) were used which consisted of 3 cm thick plates from Styrofoam, and which were covered at the ends by thin plastic foils. In order to measure the temperature course along the tube, mercury-thermometers were mounted at three positions (beneath, in the middle, and atop) whose tips were covered with aluminium foils. The test gases were supplied from steel cylinders being equipped with reducing valves. They were introduced by a connecter during approx. one hour, because the tube was not gastight and not enough consistent for an evacuation. The filling process was monitored by means of a hygrometer since the air, which had to be replaced, was slightly humid. Afterwards, the tube was optimized by attaching adhesive foils and thin aluminium foils (see Figure 13). The equipment and the results are reported in [21] .

The initial measurements were made outdoor with twin-tubes in the presence of solar light. One tube was filled with air, and the other one with carbon-dioxide. Thereby, the temperature increased within a few minutes by approx. ten degrees till constant limiting temperatures were attained, namely simultaneously at all positions. Surprisingly, this was the case in both tubes, thus also in the tube which was filled with ambient air. Already this result delivered the proof that the greenhouse theory cannot be true. Moreover, it gave rise to investigate the phenomenon more thoroughly by means of artificial, better defined light.

Accordingly, the subsequent experiments were made using IR-spots with wattages of 50 W, 100 W and 150 W which are normally employed for terraria (Figure 14). Particularly the IR-spot with 150 W lead to a considerably higher temperature increase of the included gas than it was the case when sunlight was applied, since its ratio of thermal radiation was higher. Thereby, variable impacts such as the nature of the gas could be evaluated. The disadvantage of this method consisted in the fact that the intensity of artificial light, contrary to the one of sunlight, normally decreases along such a tube. In principal inversely proportional to the square of the distance, which complicated the assessment of the effective local radiation intensity. However, this gradient could be minimized by optimizing the tube-texture.

Due to the results with IR-spots at different gases (air, carbon-dioxide, the noble gases argon, neon and helium), essential knowledge could be gained. In each case, the irradiated gas warmed up until a stable limiting temperature was attained. Analogously to the case of irradiated coloured solid plates, the temperature increased until the equilibrium state was attained where the heat absorption rate was identically equal with the heat emission rate.

As evident from the diagram in Figure 15, the initial observation made with sunlight was approved that pure carbon-dioxide was warmed up almost to the same degree as air does (whereby ambient air only scarcely differed from a 4:1 mixture between nitrogen and oxygen). Moreover, noble gases absorb thermal radiation, too. As subsequently outlined, a theoretical explanation could be found thereto.

Regarding the initial slopes of the time/temperature-curves in the diagram of Figure 15, it becomes evident that the heating rates are identical equal in all cases, i.e. that they are independent of the gas type. However, significant differences arose at the limiting temperatures, which obviously was due to differences in the radiation power. Since then the absorbed radiation power exhibits the same size as the emission power, the latter one (which is not directly measurable) can be determined by the former one (which is directly measurable, namely by determining the light intensity at that position).

According to the kinetic gas theory, the thermic emission power of gases is proportional to the collision frequency F of the gas particles. Thereby, the size of the particles, or rather their cross sectional area σ, is relevant, together with the pressure p and the (absolute) limiting temperature T, corresponding to Equation (10):

F ~ p ⋅ σ ⋅ T / M M = mole mass (10)

Using the limiting temperatures given in Figure 15, and using the literature values for the cross sectional areas of the noble gases helium, neon and argon, formula (1) could be roughly verified since the gas pressure and the radiation power of the IR-spot were constant.

Moreover, comparison of the results obtained by the IR-spots, on the one hand, and those obtained with solar radiation, on the other hand, corroborated the conclusion that comparatively short-wave IR-radiation was involved (namely between 0.9 and 1.9 μm). However, subsequent measurements with a hotplate (<90˚C), placed at the bottom of the heat-radiation tube ( [15] , Figure 16), yielded that long-wave thermal radiation (which is expected at bodies with lower temperatures such as Earth surface) induces also temperature increase of air and of carbon-dioxide, cf. Figure 17.

Thus, the herewith discovered absorption effect at gases proceeds over a relatively wide wave-length range, in contrast to the IR-spectroscopic measurements where only narrow absorption bands appear. This effect is not exceptional, i.e. it occurs at all gases, also at noble gases, and leads to a significant temperature increase, even though it is spectroscopically not detectable. This temperature increase overlays an eventual temperature increase due to the specific IR-absorption since the intensity ratio of the latter one is very small.

This may be explained as follows: In any case, an oscillation of particles, induced by thermal radiation, acts a part. But whereas in the case of the specific IR-absorption the nuclei inside the molecules are oscillating along the chemical bond (which must be polar), in the here relevant case the electronic shell inside the atoms, or rather the electron orbit, is oscillating implicating oscillation energy. Obviously, this oscillation energy can be converted into kinetic translation energy of the entire atoms which correlates to the gas temperature, and vice versa.

In order to explain the oscillation of the electronic shell, quantum mechanics has to be adduced, preferably considering the simplest case, namely helium. The problem seems to be quite intricate; at least it has not been solved so far using the traditional quantum mechanics based on Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle implying electronic probabilities of presence, instead of well-defined electron-trajectories. However, the approach assuming such well-defined electron-trajectories, which has been recently developed by the author [22] , promises to find the solution, but the respective work is still in progress.

Meanwhile, these empirical findings were principally confirmed by the work of Seim and Olsen [23] which had been carried out independently. In that case a quadratic tube from Styrofoam was used, too. However, it was divided in two chambers which were filled with different gases. One cell was filled with air, and the other one with CO₂ or with argon, respectively. A metal plate, which was warmed up by a 500 W halogen-lamp, served as heat source. Even though the theoretic background, based on a radiative transfer model, is questionable, the empiric result is remarkable since it also exhibits limiting temperatures, whereby air behaved similar to CO₂ and to argon.

The statement that it’s colder in the mountains than in the lowlands is trivial. Not trivial is the attempt to explain this phenomenon since the reason is not readily evident. The usual explanation is given by the fact that rising air cools down since it expands due to the decreasing air-pressure. However, this cannot be true in the case of plateaus, far away from hillsides which engender ascending air streams. It appears virtually paradoxical in view of the fact that the intensity of the sun irradiation is much greater in the mountains than in the lowlands, in particular with respect to its UV-amount. Thereby, the intensity decrease is due to the scattering and the absorption of sunlight within the atmosphere, not only within the IR-range but also in the whole remaining spectral area. If such an absorption, named Raleigh-scattering, didn’t occur, the sky would not be blue but black.

However, the direct absorption of sunlight is not the only factor which determines the temperature of the atmosphere. Its warming-up via Earth surface, which is warmed up due to absorbed sun-irradiation, is even more important. Thereby, the heat transfer occurs partly by heat conduction and air convection, and partly by thermal radiation. But there is an additional factor which has to be regarded: namely the thermal radiation of the atmosphere. It runs on the one hand towards Earth (as counter-radiation), and on the other hand towards Space. Thus the situation becomes quite complicated, all the more the formal treatment based on the Stefan/Boltzmann-relation would require limiting equilibrated temperature conditions. But in particular, that relation does not reveal an influence of the atmospheric pressure which obviously acts a considerable part.

In order to explain and to empirically verify the respective correlations, particularly the influence of the atmospheric pressure, both here presented methods [20] and [21] were used, instead of the Stefan/Boltzmann-relation: the thermal radiation law implying the air-pressure, on one hand, and the measuring method with coloured aluminium-plates on the other hand (namely white, light-blue, light green and black ones). However, because it was necessary to attain the limiting temperatures within the available measuring time, thinner plates were used, namely 8 mm (instead of 20 mm) thick ones [24] .

According to the theoretically deduced Equation (11), the thermal emission power Φ of a gas is proportional to the collision frequency of its particles, which depends on the gas pressure and on the cross sectional area σ as well as on the mass of the particles. Since in the case of air both predominant molecules, namely those of nitrogen and of oxygen, are very similar in size and mass, Φ can be expressed by Equation (11):

Φ e m i s s i o n a t m = p a t m ⋅ A ⋅ T a t m (11)

A = atmospheric emission constant.

Therein the constant A is not readily known, but it may be empirically determined at two different positions by varying the atmospheric pressure and detecting the respective limiting temperatures in the presence of sunlight. At each such position, the intensity of the absorbed sunlight is identical equal with the intensity of the emitted radiation of the atmosphere, yielding Equation (12):

Φ s u n l i g h t ⋅ β s = c m ⋅ m p l a t e ⋅ ( T p l a t e , l i m − T a t m ) = p a t m ⋅ A ⋅ T a t m (12)

In order to study the dependency on the atmospheric pressure, it would be desirable solely varying the pressure, whereas the other terms remain constant by varying the altitude of the measuring station above sea level which implicates a variation of the intensity of the sunlight and of the ambient atmosphere temperature, too.

The here reported measurements were made at two locations in Switzerland, namely at Glattbrugg (close to Zürich), 430 m above sea level, and at the top of the Furka pass, 2430 m above sea level. Using the barometric height formula, the respective atmospheric pressures were approx. 0.948 and 0.748 bar.³ At any position, two measurements were made in the same space of time.

Figure 18 renders the data of one measurement pair. Obviously, the limiting temperatures were not ideally attained within 90 minutes. Moreover, the evaluation of the data didn’t provide strictly invariant values for A. But this is reasonable in view of the fact that the sunlight intensity was not entirely constant during that period, and that its spectrum depends on the altitude over sea level. Nevertheless, for the atmospheric emission constant A an approximate value of 22 W·m⁻²·bar⁻¹·K^−0.5 could be found.

These findings indeed confirm that in a way a greenhouse-effect occurs, since the atmosphere thermally radiates back to Earth surface. But this radiation has

nothing to do with trace gases such as CO₂. It rather depends on the atmospheric pressure which diminishes at higher altitudes.

If the oxygen content of the air would be considerably reduced, a general reduction of the atmospheric pressure and, as a consequence, of the temperature would proceed. This may be an explanation for the appearance of glacial periods. However, other explanations are possible, in particular the temporary decrease of the sun activity.

Over all it can be stated that climate change cannot be explained by ominous greenhouse gases such as CO₂, but mainly by artificial alterations of Earth surface, particularly in urban areas by darkening and by enlargement of the surface (so-called roughness). These urban alterations are not least due to the enormous global population growth, but also to the character of modern buildings tending to get higher and higher, and employing alternative materials such as concrete and glass. As a consequence, respective measures have to be focussed, firstly mentioning the previous work, and then applying the here presented method.

In the context of the current climate discussion, local microclimates and the phenomenon of the so-called urban heat islands represent considerable topics implying real chances for improving the micro climatic conditions by artificial measures. Such measures affect pavements, fronts and – in particular – roofs, being customarily called “cool roofs”. However, no significant efforts have been made so far, in spite of the considerable research which had been conducted for a long time, and in spite of the recently made proclamation in Nature by Hannah Huag [25] .

Luke Howard was the first to provide evidence that air temperatures are often higher in the city of London than in its surrounding countryside, namely 190 years ago [26] . But only after the Second World War, this issue was taken up [27] , while a series of investigations followed, sampling the temperature distributions of many cities, and considering different influences such as surface geometry, wind convection and water transfer. In order to be better able explaining the surface boundary effects due to solar radiation particularly in cities, for around the year 2000 several mathematic models were proposed, e.g. by Mills [28] , Grimmond and Oke [29] , Masson [30] , Kusaka et al. [31] , and Erell and Williamson [32] . A review about the application of urban climate research in the design of cities is given by Erell [33] . In particular, the work of H. Akbari and M. Pomerantz et al. from the Lawrence Berkely National Laboratory in California has to be mentioned [34] [35] [36] , as well the one of L. Douros, M. Santamouris and I. Livada from the University of Athens [37] [38] [39] . Further quotations are given at the homepage of the “Heat Island Group” (Berkeley University) [40] .

As evident from paper [36] , these authors were so much engrossed in the greenhouse theory that they considered the influence of the albedo inferior compared to the one of CO₂, solely being able to partly offset it and to save air-conditioning energy. The same objective is found at the “Cool Roof Councils” [41] and [42] . But in particular, a global model simulation was delivered as the alleged proof that the albedo effect would be negligible compared to the CO₂-effect, just by the “Heat Island Group” who was ever engaged in colour-dependent surface effects [43] . According to those, global cooling due to albedo effects ranged from 0.01 to 0.07 K, which corresponds to a CO₂ equivalent emission reduction of 25 - 150 billion tonnes of CO₂, indeed a discouraging result which compromises any efforts to improve the surface albedo, thus being counterproductive. However, both results cannot be maintained if the here described criteria are applied, apart from the finding that global modelling is not feasible.

Besides, these investigations implied several deficiencies with respect to the measurement and the calculation methods, as well to the characterisation feasibilities of the materials. In particular, the albedo values as well as the warming-up and the cooling-down rates were not correct from the already alleged reasons.

In summary, it can be stated that the former knowledge does not contain any significant aspects which exceed the feasibilities being included in method [20] . It enables measures which are more detailed described in the author’s own publication [44] , or which are obvious and generally known. They are briefly described below. However, in view of the complexity of the processes it appears impossible establishing a global climate-model which enables reliable prognoses, even when these novel perceptions are considered.

In urban areas, which are considered as the primary culprit in climate change, and which are the main subject of this treatment, three types of surfaces occur: pavements, facades at buildings, and roofs. Thereto, besides the surface colouring several further criteria have to be considered. They are briefly discussed hereinafter.

The herewith summarized work of the author concerns atmospheric physics with respect to climate change, comprising three specific and interrelated points based on several previous publications: The first one consists in a critical discussion and refutation of the customary greenhouse theory; the second one outlines the method for measuring the thermal-radiative behaviour of gases; and the third one describes a lab-like method for the characterization of the solar-reflective behaviour of solid opaque bodies, in particular for the determination of the colour-specific solar absorption coefficients.

As to the first point, three main flaws were revealed: firstly, the insufficiency of photometric methods in order to determine the heating-up of gases in the presence of thermal radiation; secondly, the lack of a causal relationship between the CO₂-concentration in the atmosphere and the average global temperature, based on the reasoning that the empiric simultaneous increase of its concentration and of the global temperature would prove a causal relationship instead of an analogous one; and thirdly, the inadmissible application of the Stefan/Boltzmann-law to the entire Earth (including the atmosphere) versus Space, instead of the application onto the boundary between the Earth surface and the atmosphere.

As to the second point, the discovery has to be taken into account according to which every gas is warmed up when it is thermally irradiated, even noble gases, attaining a limiting temperature where the absorption of radiation is in equilibrium with the emitted radiation. In particular, pure CO₂ behaves similarly to pure air. Applying kinetic gas theory, a dependency of the emission intensity on the pressure, on the root of the absolute temperature, and on the particle size could be found and theoretically explained by oscillation of the electron shell.

As to the third point not only a lab-like measuring method for the colour dependent solar absorption coefficient β_s was developed, but also a mathematical modelling of the time/temperature-course where coloured opaque plates are irradiated by sunlight. Thereby, the (colour-dependent) warming-up and the (colour-independent) cooling-down are detected separately. Likewise, a limiting temperature occurs where the intensity of the absorbed solar light is identical equal with the intensity of the emitted thermal radiation. In the absence of wind-convection, the so-called heat transfer coefficient B is invariant. Its value was empirically evaluated, amounting to approx. 9 W·m⁻²·K⁻¹. Therewith, the (colour-dependent) limiting temperature can be computed for each β_s-value, whereas the heating-up rate requires the knowledge of β_s and the heat-capacity. The calculated limiting temperatures coincide quite well with the measured ones, as well with those derived by the Stefan/Boltzmann-law. Obviously, such values and model-processes cannot easily be applied to walls and pavements or other material surfaces, since additional factors such as heat-capacity and heat-conductivity act a part, all the more wind convection or rain, or synergetic effects by adjacent buildings. However, they deliver valuable information with respect to measures which may be taken with respect to climate change mitigation.

Finally, the theoretically suggested dependency of the atmospheric thermal radiation intensity on the atmospheric pressure could be empirically verified by measurements at different altitudes, namely in Glattbrugg (430 m above sea level and on the top of the Furka-pass (2430 m above sea level), both in Switzerland, delivering a so-called atmospheric emission constant A ≈ 22 W·m⁻²·bar⁻¹·K^−0.5. It explained the altitude-paradox of the atmospheric temperature and delivered the definitive evidence that the atmospheric behavior, and thus the climate, does not depend on trace gases such as CO₂. However, the atmosphere thermally reradiates indeed, leading to something similar to a Greenhouse effect. But this effect is solely due to the atmospheric pressure.

Therefore, and also considering the results of Seim and Olsen [23] , the customary greenhouse doctrine assuming CO₂ as the culprit in climate change has to be abandoned and instead replaced by the here recommended concept of improving the albedo by brightening parts of the Earth surface, particularly in cities, unless fatal consequences will be hazarded.

It seems evident that the first step should consist in brightening (gable)-roofs by in-situ-painting the bricks, preferably light-brown, since this would be the easiest and cheapest way to achieve progress. Of course, tinting variations should be admissible. Besides, that would beautify the landscape and provide more individual comfort. Certainly, millions of roofs will have to be treated till a global effect will be observable. But somewhere, or better at multiple locations, new grounds has to be broken, which certainly will be copied by others. It must be clear that such a drive of brightening-up the World would be the only chance of mitigating climate change. However, a global climate model with forecasts cannot be aspired to since this problem is too complex, and since several climate zones exist.

The cited work has been carried out independently but not without the professional support of Philipp Hasler, Andreas Rütschi and Harald von Fellenberg, and also with the translation assistance by Verena Ginobbi.

The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Allmendinger, T. (2023) The Real Origin of Climate Change and the Feasibilities of Its Mitigation. Atmospheric and Climate Sciences, 13, 353-384. https://doi.org/10.4236/acs.2023.133020