4 ms·

Multiple laboratory experiments have confirmed that atmospheres rich in carbon dioxide retain more heat from radiative sources. Here's one you can do at home: h

Multiple laboratory experiments have confirmed that atmospheres rich in carbon dioxide retain more heat from radiative sources. Here's one you can do at home: https://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/jesei/co2green/home.htm https://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/jesei/co2gr... There's no difference here between arguing against CO2 warming and the Earth being a sphere(oid). Anybody that's still publishing material arguing that the science on this point is in any way unsettled is intentionally ignoring results from the field that disagrees with their ideology.

darawk 7y ago
> Multiple laboratory experiments have confirmed that atmospheres rich in carbon dioxide retain more heat from radiative sources. Here's one you can do at home: https://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/jesei/co2gr.. https://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/jesei/co2gr.... I don't think the book is arguing that CO2 rich atmosphere don't retain more heat. Factors like these don't exist in isolation though. And he seems to be arguing that variations in natural factors explain the global climate history better than CO2 levels. I'm not sure if that's true, but that seems to be the point that needs debunking, if it isn't.