Comment Re:Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer. (Score 1) 342
Charming. Do you explain the fact that Venus is hotter than Mercury using basketball player gloves, gray Oreos, or truly original groundbreaking science?
Since it has little to do with arguments I have actually made, I don't try to explain it at all, nor do I have any reasonable obligation to do so. But I will briefly mention refutations by other people anyway, simply because you asked. Isn't that nice of me?
How about this? (This is someone else's work, not my own, so if you don't like it, argue with him.)
Evidence from Mars and Venus suggest that global warming from doubled carbon dioxide in the [Earth] atmosphere is unlikely to exceed 0.5 K. The atmospheres of these planets consist almost exclusively of CO2 (Table 1.2). Venus has an atmosphere containing CO2 at a pressure of 88 bars, i.e. 88 times our atmosphere's total pressure at sea level. Such an amount of CO2 causes greenhouse warming by 500 K there. On the other hand, the mere 0.006 bars of CO2 on Mars cause warming by 5.5K. These figures can be plotted on a graph of the logarithm of the pressure against the logarithm of the warming. The straight line between these two points can be extrapolated to find the warming effect of 600 ppm of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere, i.e. 0.0006 bars. The answer is 0.47 K. This is only one of eight observed relationships between radiation and surface temperatures, each indicating only small effects from doubled CO2.
(From Idso, S.B. 1998: CO2-induced global warming Climate Research, 10, 69-82. K is Kelvin, NOT thousands.)
It took me about 30 seconds to find that. Spending another 30 seconds or so found this. Are you suggesting that if I spent more time I would not find more and better?
Again: if you have problems with their figures, I strongly suggest you argue with THEM. Because arguing with me isn't going to take their pages down. Is this support of Latour's argument? Probably not. But on the other hand it rather invalidates yours.