Explanation of "NASA CO2 Cools Earth's Atmosphere," Global warming still happening!

Hello ATSers,

[snipped] denying carbon-dioxide-caused Global Warming. I was initially perplexed by this article because it would represent a HUGE claim negating decades of scientific research involving climate change. However, after reading both the links more closely I came up with a satisfactory explanation which, sad to say, DOES NOT refute the theory of Global Warming.

Here are the links:

"Principia Scientific" - fancy name for a manipulative oil-industry shill

NASA article


This is my explanation.
1) Carbon dioxide has the chemical property of reflecting infrared radiation, like a mirror for heat. 2)Energy from the sun takes the form of A) mass ejections of HOT particles and B) electromagnetic radiation at all wavelengths.

When electromagnetic solar radiation of all wavelengths is absorbed at the earths surface turning it to heat, carbon dioxide in the lower atmosphere reflects the infrared radiation back at the earth. This is called the "Greenhouse Effect." When energetic particles emitted by the sun slam into the thermosphere, carbon dioxide in the lower atmosphere reflects the infrared radiation back into space. This effect which is newly described in the article by NASA, is WAY less significant for the temperature of the biosphere than the Greenhouse Effect.

reply to post by warrenite


A footnote in the NASA article puts it in perspective: energy hitting the upper atmosphere from one day of a large CME solar storm is enough to power New York City for 2 years, but the total energy hitting the earth during one day as electromagnetic radiation can power New York City for 200,000 years. A matter of 5 orders of magnitude.

They'll say and do anything these days to detract from the serious threat we face. Far more dangerous is the trapped heat than the deflected waves. Even more dangerous than the CO2 is CO4 (methane) which is 72 times worse and increasing in our atmosphere every day. The methane is causing global warming to increase more rapidly than CO2 ever did, IMO.

Pro and con arguments are being discussed here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion in the above linked thread.
Thanks

**Thread Closed**