Talk:Greenhouse effect
From Conservapedia
I don't think we should use the term "greenhouse effect" for this article. The earth's atmosphere does not work like a greenhouse at all.
Using a misleading term is a mistake. It opens a Pandora's box of deceit. We should only use accurate terms, ones which do not conjure up any misleading notions.
We should tell the truth plainly, in a way which inspires trust. --Ed Poor Talk 06:45, 2 June 2007 (EDT)
I looked at this article because I am a meteorology student (and a Republican yea! red states rule!)
The article has some wrong facts. Saying the gassses emit a different frequency depending on temperature is wrong. The co2 always emits the same frequency but different energy depending on hte temperature. THis has to do with the physics about how the molecules vibrate and give off energy. They vibrate faster when the temperature is hot but the wavelength stays the same. I think there are some more mistakes but I ahve to look them up. I am afraid to edit the article because I am a new person on this cite but the science has to be right so people stop makeing fun of conserapedia. So somebody who has priveledges should fix it. FredGriggs 23:36, 12 June 2007 (EDT)
- You have the privileges. Don't be shy. Be as aggressive as liberals are, but without their deceit. Ha ha ha. Welcome, FredGriggs! Edit the entry as you think it should be.--Aschlafly 00:22, 13 June 2007 (EDT)
- Yes, and while you're at it, please help me give the basic physics of the atmosphere. Before we explain any theories about a "problem" (see climate crisis), we should explain the normal operation of system.
- As I understand it, wide temperature swings on the surface of large astromical bodies are normal - if they don't have an atmosphere. The Moon is a case in point.
- But having an atmosphere keeps temperature fairly constant between day and night. Deserts have the widest variation, but areas with vegetation and/or clouds have less of a daily variation.
Narrow scope of this page
On this page, the term "greenhouse effect" isn't used with its wide, inductive meaning, which is that of the effect that works like in a greenhouse. In other words, the term "greenhouse effect" has a much wider meaning than what this page here portrays it to be. The term "greenhouse effect" is not only used in meteorology. The problem is that on this page the term is used the way the environmetalists use it, and that is so narrow and incomplete. Please put some emphasis on the meaning of the term itself, not just the way some enviromentalists with political agendas use it. Precise use of terms is important. --Pepsi-Cola 13:56, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
- That is my plan. In fact, I would like to use this page only to explain how an actual greenhouse works (primarily by trapping warm air). I would like to use another page, such as Atmosphere, to explain how and why the average temperature of the earth's surface is fit for human life (most of the time, in most places).
- I don't like the use of the metaphor of a greenhouse in the "global warming" debate. It starts with a misconception, and there are too many misconceptions already in the global warming controversy.
- Science should dispel confusion, no matter how much politics creates it. --Ed Poor Talk 14:03, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
"Disproving global warming" source is a complete joke
PortlyMort, did you read the source from the front page? I've looked into it, and the source is complete junk. I don't think "it was on the front page" is a great defence, especially since you yourself have questioned the validity of front page sources. Please defend the source better or I will remove it again. Jazzman831 13:50, 9 August 2007 (EDT)
