Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Greenhouse Gases Disproved
The London Telegraph ^ | 12/3/07 | ReasonMcLucus

Posted on 12/03/2007 11:09:35 AM PST by kathsua

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last
So why do some people still claim there is a greenhouse effect? Maybe they just don't know how to read or are too lazy to do anything except accept whatever they are told by their masters like AlGore.
1 posted on 12/03/2007 11:09:36 AM PST by kathsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kathsua

Here’s an answer:

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071202/COLUMNIST0130/712020382/1007/OPINION


2 posted on 12/03/2007 11:15:19 AM PST by rightinthemiddle (Without the Media, the Left and Islamofacists are Nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

This is ridiculous. The greenhouse effect is a natural atmospheric phenomena recognized for over a century, and it’s as real as gravity. Al Gore didn’t invent it. It’s a vital thing - without it, earth would have an average global temperature of 0 degrees F. It is the reason Venus is a hellish, sweltering place. You can test it with an infrared thermocam and a tube full of CO2 - the CO2 will block out and absorb heat. The politics of global warming are another matter, but don’t try and deny a basic fact of science.


3 posted on 12/03/2007 11:20:04 AM PST by PC99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kathsua

If you want to bring global warming crashing to the ground, disprove the link between greenhouse gases and warming.

I never could see how gas could store that much energy anyway.


4 posted on 12/03/2007 11:21:02 AM PST by Free Vulcan (No prisoners. No mercy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PC99

What are you doing waving your “science” around? Don’t you know physical processes vary according to the political climate?


5 posted on 12/03/2007 11:23:49 AM PST by ahayes ("Impenetrability! That's what I say!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PC99
"......but don’t try and deny a basic fact of science."

That is similar to my reaction, but I disagree that it is a hard fact. It is such a widely accepted phenomenon that I would tend to doubt this guy in 1908 properly simulated earths atmosphere and solar radiation.
HOWEVER, it is NOT hard fact. For it to be hard fact, we would have to be able to directly measure the phenomenon. I would like you to provide information about how this is done. I am not talking about computer models that based their calculations on excepted properties of atmospheric gases. Even satellites that read surface and atmospheric temperatures DO NOT measure the green house effect itself. The greenhouse effect is simply calculated based on accepted scientific properties.
6 posted on 12/03/2007 11:25:20 AM PST by z3n
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

>>I never could see how gas could store that much energy anyway.<<

It doesn’t STORE the energy!


7 posted on 12/03/2007 11:28:25 AM PST by alexander_busek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

exactly.


8 posted on 12/03/2007 11:31:22 AM PST by Free Vulcan (No prisoners. No mercy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek
It doesn’t STORE the energy!

Yes, it does.

9 posted on 12/03/2007 11:32:14 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PC99

Thank you for the voice of reason. I honestly couldn’t believe what I was reading in this article.


10 posted on 12/03/2007 11:36:05 AM PST by SomeReasonableDude (Back it up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PC99

“a tube full of CO2...”

Maybe. But try comparing a tube with a concentration of, say, 250 ppm of C02 with another containing 350 ppm.

That, to me, is the real issue.


11 posted on 12/03/2007 11:36:45 AM PST by Elpasser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PC99
the CO2 will block out and absorb heat

How does it block out and absorb heat at the same time?

12 posted on 12/03/2007 11:37:30 AM PST by SwankyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kathsua
So why do some people still claim there is a greenhouse effect?

Because there is a greenhouse effect.

While the causes of global warming are up for debate, the existence of a greenhouse effect would be pretty hard to disprove, considering the overwhelming evidence in favor of it.
13 posted on 12/03/2007 11:38:38 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SwankyC

Seems like it was a poor choice of words. Trap would be more apt.


14 posted on 12/03/2007 11:44:02 AM PST by SomeReasonableDude (Back it up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SwankyC

[How does it block out and absorb heat at the same time?]

When eneergy impinges on a surface it is either passed, blocked (absorbed) or reflected. Or a combination but all must be accounted for. It is that nasty conservation of energy thingy.


15 posted on 12/03/2007 11:45:52 AM PST by dbacks (Taglines for sale or rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Elpasser; kathsua
Speaking of CO2...

BBC: 50 years on: The Keeling Curve legacy - ( CO2 -- Global Warming?)

16 posted on 12/03/2007 11:48:48 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PC99
It is the reason Venus is a hellish, sweltering place.

I'm sure its proximity to the giant heat radiating fireball in the sky has nothing to do with it.

17 posted on 12/03/2007 11:49:46 AM PST by Perchant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PC99

Remember the DUmmie who did an experiment with a some lighter fluid and steel mesh that “disproved” the “official story” of the 9/11 attacks?


18 posted on 12/03/2007 11:52:12 AM PST by steve-b (Sin lies only in hurting others unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. --RAH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: alexander_busek

Gases are composed of atoms that contain kinetic energy. This energy is not lost, but merely redistributed among other atoms during collisions (law of conservation of energy)... Also, energy exists between electron shell states of the atom (potential energy)...


19 posted on 12/03/2007 11:53:26 AM PST by erikm88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

If you want to live above the CO2 on Venus you’ll have to go up to about 50,000 meters in the sulphur clouds where the pressure is only one bar and the temperature about 70F.

Bring your own ladder and oxygen supply as they have no rentals.


20 posted on 12/03/2007 11:56:28 AM PST by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson