3 ms·
You are disputing the most basic fact of CO2 being a greenhouse gas. This is why we say "skeptics" can't be bothered to understand the science. If CO2 isn't a
by telchar 8y ago
You are disputing the most basic fact of CO2 being a greenhouse gas. This is why we say "skeptics" can't be bothered to understand the science.
If CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas then go write a paper about it and claim your Nobel.
Note that we put "skeptics" in quotes because cranks aren't skeptics. A skeptic would consider that the one guy who failed to replicate an experiment may be wrong, as well as the possibility that all the other people who ran the experiment were wrong.
- southern_cross 8y agoNo, I clearly said no such thing! (You're putting words into my mouth, which is a form of lying.) In fact what I said was that a particular experiment - one which was apparently falsely claimed to be easily replicable and had been done successfully dozens of times - was in fact not replicable when done in a careful and public way. This is very different from claiming that CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas. That phrase though - "greenhouse gas" - is a misnomer. Actual greenhouses don't operate the same way that atmospheric greenhouse gases do, but the phrase has stuck so now we have to live with it. And yes, there was much discussion among "skeptics" of the actual experiment and the supposed others like it at the time, and of the fact that problems with it may have traced back to what I just said above. But in the end I don't think anyone was convinced that these experiments necessarily proved or disproved anything, much less that they had been successfully replicated dozens of times.