It was my understanding that greenhouse gases are only those
which have the
particular characteristic of absorbing the wavelengths of reflected
radiation. It was told to me that only specific gasses, not
water vapor,
have this characteristic. Comments? Disagreements?
I don't believe that
Nick,
Ad hominem arguments = A technique used to when the facts don't say what
you want them to.
National Center for Public Policy Research
probably sings this Talking Heads song:
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts
red, emitted including at night when there is no incident radiation to
reflect). Steve I am afraid your description needs revising.
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: global
The importance of infra-red to the greenhouse effect can be seen in
the following table.
Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude:
Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range
0 - 10 *** less than 0.00044 percent***
10 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV
400 - 700 46.879
-Original Message-
From: RC Macaulay
Do I believe these greenhouse gasses are warming the planet.. perhaps
CO2 is causing some.. but.. there is so much shrill and so much money
made off shrill, the facts are skewed. NASA has some good readings but
who can believe anything coming out
On Mar 2, 2006, at 7:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All the planets are warming:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html
A model that fits the data has three layers near the surface, said
William Boynton of the University of Arizona, Tucson, team leader for
the
Some typos corrected below.
The importance of infra-red to the greenhouse effect can be seen in
the following table.
Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude:
Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range
0 - 10 *** less than 0.00044 percent***
10 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV
put some suspicions to
rest. Of course, it would freeze the yankees and Europe.
- Original Message -
From: Steven Krivit [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: global warming: spin or not spin?
It was my understanding that greenhouse
On Mar 1, 2006, at 3:51 PM, Steven Krivit wrote:
It was my understanding that greenhouse gases are only those which
have the particular characteristic of absorbing the wavelengths of
reflected radiation.
It is not the absorption of *reflected* radiation that is key. It is
the
Nick Palmer posted
under the bed, and that there is no scientific consensus that
climate change is real, is threatening us and action to mitigate the
worst effects must be taken now.
I wish I could slap irresponsible people like this around the face
- very, very hard.
I was listening to
On Mar 1, 2006, at 10:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, if the Warming scenario is happening, there is nothing that
we can do
about it.
Not true. See:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/LastResort.pdf
Horace Heffner
11 matches
Mail list logo
