The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory

American Thinker ^ | February 25, 2010 | Alan Siddons

[neverdem]

NASA is making global warming agitprop with taxes. Who'da thunk it? NASA and the military recently got new missions for addressing global warming. This is the left gone wild.

If teachers can't understand this article, they shouldn't be teaching any science dealing with this subject, IMHO.

[HiTech RedNeck]

You’d think NASA would be a little more careful when talking about infrared light. Even “radiant energy” would give the idea. “Heat” is transfer of thermal energy by any method capable of doing so.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Atmospheres do insulate planetary bodies, and thus contribute to greenhousing. But not in the way this silly NASA “lesson” would have it. Werner von Braun must be spinning supersonically in his grave.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I mean, cause greenhousing.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Because all gases radiate the heat they acquire

Or they can transfer it by conduction...

[Talisker]

Scientifically, AGW is so profoundly stupid that it has taken be an extremely long time to “get” that so many people believe it. To me, the entire AGW argument is like declaring that lightning causes fevers because lighting is hot and fevers are hot, and so we need to stop putting up lighting rods so we stop attracting lightning, and only then can we stop fevers - in other words, stupidity so profound, I can only stare at it with my mouth open.

Sometimes I feel that the last recourse of evil is to literally create mindless zombies in place of life - plastic dolls in place of humans. But I think, how could that ever happen? And then I look around...

[neverdem]

You’d think NASA would be a little more careful when talking about infrared light.

NASA seems like it could care less. Go figure.

[screaminsunshine]

PC Science is devolving in to Alchemy.

[GregoryFul]

So why is the sky blue?

[neverdem]

The Great Recession of 2011-2012 I hope not, but it could be worse than imagined.

Sheriff says he'll undermine gun ban (vote in poll)

Met Office to re-examine 150 years of temperature data in the wake of the Climategate scandal

Alum: Debate for Climategate should be held (AccuWeather's Joe Bastardi)

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[HiTech RedNeck]

diffraction

[dr_lew]

The canonical answer is Rayleigh scattering.

[lewislynn]

Greenhouse-whatever is language of the left with negative connotations whenever it's used.

Greenhouse gas and greenhouse effect became scientific terms when man made global warming became a scientific term.

What was the natural atmospheric order of things called before anyone knew what a greenhouse was?

[Jim Noble]

There’s nothing wrong with the theory.

It’s the data that’s a problem.

[TigersEye]

Here is another article that takes Greenhouse Theory apart. There is no greenhouse effect. Thus, CO2 levels are meaningless. Except to plants.

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics

[101voodoo]

"..is like declaring that lightning causes fevers because lighting is hot and fevers are hot,..."

OMG!! You mean it doesn't.....? :-)

[steelyourfaith]

Thanx !

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[ApplegateRanch]

Interesting.

In the heat of hurrying to bed, I haven’t fully absorbed this yet. Hopefully the full sense of it will radiate more efficiently to a less sleepy mind.

[Right Wing Assault]

That link is not working.

[Publius6961]

That link is not working.

Try this one