Off Topic — HabitableZone

Off Topic » in reply to Falsification of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect

Gee, that's odd.
ER — (archived)

I first heard about the Greenhouse Effect way before there was a global climate controversy (well, "controversy" is a bit too charitable a term). I was an astronomy student and we learned it was why planets with thick atmospheres didn't have the surface temperature instabilities of planets without them.

"...By showing that (a) there are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects..."

You don't say? You know, it doesn't take a mental giant to figure this out. Even you should be able to get it; so pay attention.

We've always known the "Greenhouse Effect" was a misnomer, just like "tidal waves" don't have anything to do with tides. It never had anything to do with greenhouses because greenhouses keep their interiors warm by limiting convection, whilst the warming of planetary atmospheres is caused by a wavelength-dependent opacity differential. Can you say "opacity"?

Here, I'll repeat it with smaller words to make sure you get it. The glass in a greenhouse keeps the cold air out and the warm air in. A planet's air lets sunlight in easy but makes it hard for heat rays (we call them infrared) to get out. So the planet heats up until it gets so hot that the heat rays leak out anyway.

As for the planetary greenhouse effect violating the Second Law. Yeah, right. And Darwinian natural selection violates the First Law.

You'll have to excuse me if I don't look past that paywall. I'm just closed-minded and set in my ways.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (46 posts)