- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The greenhouse hypothesis is just that: a yet to be validated hypothesis or postulation. GCMs (computer climate models) do not validate a hypothesis. It takes physically observed hard data to validate the greenhouse hypothesis, and this is lacking today.
The greenhouse hypothesis, in and of itself, is that gases in the atmosphere trap infrared radiation and thereby heat the planet. That planet could be Venus or Mercury. Wonder why Mercury is cooler than Venus? Check the hard data.
Wonder why Earth isn't an ice ball? Check the hard data.
What would convince you?
We only get to run this experiment once, and I believe the basic and advanced science is sound. Of course not every answer is known yet. Science never knows every answer, never claims to.
You doubt that temperatures have increased? You doubt that greenhouse gases trap heat? You doubt that we're pumping them out? You think it's OK to just be complacent?
You doubt that this is an issue of national security?
Heads buried deeply in the sand, you run us to ruin.
Seriously, what would convince you?
