Greenhouse theory smashed by biggest stone [meteorite, not human emissions]

PhysOrg.com ^ | 13 March 2006 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

This -- if it proves out -- should throw the environmentalists into a tizzy.

[PatrickHenry]

SciencePing

An elite subset of the Evolution list. See the list's explanation at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped.

[cvq3842]

Interesting . . .

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[The_Victor]

So, in other words, "It's not the heat, it's the humidity."

[gondramB]

I don't have an opinion on whether or not the greenhouse effect is contributing to global warming - the evidence is not clear enough for me as a physicist who does not specialize in the area.

But I am convinced that greenhouse is not the whole story because it doesn't explain global warming stopping between 1945 and 1976 nor does it explain global cooling in the 1800's.

That said, this headline is terribly misleading. The introduction of a new theory does not smash the old one.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

So, in other words, "It's not the heat, it's the humidity."

{groan...} :o)

[isthisnickcool]

If we just closed all the Taco Bells down we could fix this "human emissions" problem.

[PatrickHenry]

... this headline is terribly misleading. The introduction of a new theory does not smash the old one.

I agree, the headline is silly. But we're not supposed to change headlines. The part in brackets is my own attempt to make it comprehensible.

[Izzy Dunne]

Al Gore must be spinning in his grave.

Oh, wait...

[gondramB]

"I agree, the headline is silly. But we're not supposed to change headlines. The part in brackets is my own attempt to make it comprehensible."

I should have been more clear - that was not complaint about correctly posting the headline here - it is worthy article. I was mainly pointing out that Physorg.com put a sloppy headline on a interesting article.

[Old Professer]

It would only serve to encourage them as the argument could be then made that, since the water vapor is all but impossible to control that mankind's efforts to control the remaining gases need be increased to buy a few more generations a little more time.

[05 Mustang GT Rocks]

Now I finally understand why it is so hot in Houston...;)

[beezdotcom]

Which reminds me - whatever happened to the "small comets" hypothesis? I thought there was an argument over whether or not it was due to sensor noise - but I haven't found anything more recent than this. If true, it would also have to be considered in climate models - which is yet again one more variable that environmentalists could be overlooking.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

>i>Now I finally understand why it is so hot in Houston

Visited family there once and could not believe the humidity. I don't mind the heat, have played golf in AZ at 116 degrees (no humidity). My wife and I are thinking of relocating north of Dallas, the weather seems a lot better there. Give me your opinion of that area, if you have been there. I'd love to have some feedback on it.

I look forward to any info when I get back tonight.

K4

[Sundog]

Nonsense... It would only give junk science a new avenue to explore -- It is really all the contrails of high alititude airliners injecting water vapor at a critical altitude, where it accumulates and retains more heat for the earth...

[DJtex]

Al Gore must be spinning in his grave.

Exactly--to Gore, etal, this is a religious movement now. It's not about the science, it's about their collective guilt about our being the most-productive, most-efficient, most wealthy, and most-energy-hungry society on Earth.

[Poincare]

The CO_2 greenhouse effect is good established science--it is reproducible in a laboratory. It's connection to "global warming" is speculative at best and not good science. The word "global" is so misused. (They mean "planetary", "global" warming would mean that the warming was distributed over each and every point of the domain.) Also the connection between the burning of carbon fuels and the atmospheric level of CO_2 is fanciful in view of the magnitude of other sources.

The article is correct though that there are other potent factors that act like greenhouse or anti-greenhouse.

[aruanan]

This -- if it proves out -- should throw the environmentalists into a tizzy.

Maybe, though, they'll just switch to advocating even tighter controls over water.