It’s past time we step up and demand proof of the Left’s premises. They don’t have it, of course, so they’ll resort to their usual tactics: personal attacks and declaring straw-man “victories”.
But rather than bicker over this or that gas, not to mention quantities and concentrations thereof, let’s start with the biggie: You might not know it, given how the topic is always addressed as an assumed fact, but the very concept of the Greenhouse Effect (originally formulated to attempt to explain observed traits in the atmosphere of Venus) and the terrestrial equivalent process supposedly functioning here on Earth, are not established facts. And I’m not resorting to trying to denigrate the issue by calling it “just a theory”, because theories typically have experimental evidence behind them.
No, I’m saying that long before we even get to the topic of whether or not mankind has had an effect on this planet’s climate (or could do anything about it if we have), the left needs to absolutely prove out the validity of the very Greenhouse Effect hypothesis they claim is at work. Simplistic comparisons to actual greenhouse windows need not apply, rather a close (and boring) examination of light’s behavior across the entire applicable spectrum in regards to the absorptive and reflective characteristics of high-atmosphereic gasses needs to be demanded – and then Independently verified. Good luck with that!
The “Greenhouse” analogy only works for systems with impermeable boundaries, like glass panels; not for amorphous ones like our atmosphere. The incredibly thick atmosphere of Venus bears no relation to ours. Atmospheres like ours tend to wobble and balance temperature differences out.
And, the period of time during which “greenhouse gasses” capture and release radiation is on the order of fractions of a second. After which, the whole heat transaction is over.
And, these molecules release the heat in three dimensions. Left, right, and into space. The least possible direction for them to release any heat is in the direction of greater warmth — the Earth’s surface — which would violate Newton’s First Law of Thermodynamics.
All of them? To zero? Have they chosen which 7 billion people are to die and Picked out which tree they are going to live in?
Until they start leading by example, they’re not leading at all.
Well good, they’ve come up with the final solution, I feel so much better now.
Doing their part, they stopped exhaling.
It’s past time we step up and demand proof of the Left’s premises. They don’t have it, of course, so they’ll resort to their usual tactics: personal attacks and declaring straw-man “victories”.
But rather than bicker over this or that gas, not to mention quantities and concentrations thereof, let’s start with the biggie: You might not know it, given how the topic is always addressed as an assumed fact, but the very concept of the Greenhouse Effect (originally formulated to attempt to explain observed traits in the atmosphere of Venus) and the terrestrial equivalent process supposedly functioning here on Earth, are not established facts. And I’m not resorting to trying to denigrate the issue by calling it “just a theory”, because theories typically have experimental evidence behind them.
No, I’m saying that long before we even get to the topic of whether or not mankind has had an effect on this planet’s climate (or could do anything about it if we have), the left needs to absolutely prove out the validity of the very Greenhouse Effect hypothesis they claim is at work. Simplistic comparisons to actual greenhouse windows need not apply, rather a close (and boring) examination of light’s behavior across the entire applicable spectrum in regards to the absorptive and reflective characteristics of high-atmosphereic gasses needs to be demanded – and then Independently verified. Good luck with that!
Hunter is right.
The “Greenhouse” analogy only works for systems with impermeable boundaries, like glass panels; not for amorphous ones like our atmosphere. The incredibly thick atmosphere of Venus bears no relation to ours. Atmospheres like ours tend to wobble and balance temperature differences out.
And, the period of time during which “greenhouse gasses” capture and release radiation is on the order of fractions of a second. After which, the whole heat transaction is over.
And, these molecules release the heat in three dimensions. Left, right, and into space. The least possible direction for them to release any heat is in the direction of greater warmth — the Earth’s surface — which would violate Newton’s First Law of Thermodynamics.
(Heat does not flow from a colder body to a warmer one.)
Would campfires on Everest heat the planet?
“Wa-a-a-a-ah. There’s a greenhouse effect.”
“Is there? And if so, can the human contribution of.0.04% — which can be rounded to 0.00% — actually be to blame — or to be fixed?”