Methane as a potent greenhouse gas is nothing but a boogeyman. The whole concept is scientifically absurd. Power mongers need to be saving mankind from some evil as a self-justification mechanism. So of course they need endless evils on a gradient scale for greenhouse gases.

There is no scientific concept of stronger greenhouse gases. The description of heating potential is ludicrous. Supposedly the main factors are strength of absorption and residence time. There are no relevant variations in strength for so-called greenhouse gases, and there is no residence time to dynamic systems.

Strength of absorption is a hypothetical based on absorption in a cuvette in a laboratory. The radiation is cranked up to see how much is absorbed. But in the atmosphere, there is almost no radiation available to be absorbed at the frequencies which methane or carbon dioxide absorb. Only radiation emitted from cold surfaces, primarily the surface of the Earth, is absorbed by so-called greenhouse gases; and cold surfaces emit almost no radiation. So greenhouse gases absorb all radiation available to them by the time the radiation travels a short distance from the surface of the Earth.

What it means is that strength of a greenhouse gas is an artificial property. All so-called greenhouse gases absorb all radiation available to them at some concentration. All of the claimed greenhouse gases absorb all available radiation after some distance of travel through the atmosphere.

Climatologists will not say what the distance of travel for saturation is for carbon dioxide. So a German physicists, Heinz Hug, did some laboratory testing and said the distance is 10 meters at near-surface conditions. No one in climatology has said otherwise.

If methane absorbs more readily than CO2, it must saturate at less distance than 10 meters. How does shortening the distance make methane stronger? Shortening the distance does not increase the heat.

Residence time is infantile stupidity for dynamic systems. The quantities in dynamic systems are control by rates of entering or leaving, with net effects being exchange rate. Twenty years ago, scientists used to evaluate exchange rates for atmospheric gases. Exchange rates are diametrically opposed to residence times.

To say methane stays in the atmosphere for so many years is to say one methane molecule can be distinguished from another to determine which one has been there longer. The molecules are indistinguishable. So rates of entering and leaving determine the results of dynamic systems, not residence times.

The only purpose of that nonsense is to ratchet up the scare tactics, so frauds can be relentlessly saving humans from themselves as a method of creating worth for worthless power mongers.