Talk:Greenhouse effect: Difference between revisions
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
<ref>Tinker, F.A. (2020). Air of Doubt: Exposing the largest and most costly scientific error in history, ISBN: 979-8697917329.</ref> [[User:AoDFT|AoDFT]] ([[User talk:AoDFT|talk]]) 17:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC) |
<ref>Tinker, F.A. (2020). Air of Doubt: Exposing the largest and most costly scientific error in history, ISBN: 979-8697917329.</ref> [[User:AoDFT|AoDFT]] ([[User talk:AoDFT|talk]]) 17:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC) |
||
: {{not done}} the book is [[WP:self-published]], which makes it an unreliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. The author is not an expert in climate science. Furthermore, it adheres to a [[WP:FRINGE]] perspective, which we typically don't cover in the scientific article. Not only does it denying climate science, it also contradicts general relativity and Kepler's laws, other well-established scientific fields. [[User:Femkemilene|Femke Nijsse]] ([[User talk:Femkemilene|talk]]) 17:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC) |
: {{not done}} the book is [[WP:self-published]], which makes it an unreliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. The author is not an expert in climate science. Furthermore, it adheres to a [[WP:FRINGE]] perspective, which we typically don't cover in the scientific article. Not only does it denying climate science, it also contradicts general relativity and Kepler's laws, other well-established scientific fields. [[User:Femkemilene|Femke Nijsse]] ([[User talk:Femkemilene|talk]]) 17:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC) |
||
″it also contradicts general relativity and Kepler's laws″ |
|||
It does? Just how does it do that? Are you a reliable source? [[User:Damorbel|Damorbel]] ([[User talk:Damorbel|talk]]) 09:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2021 == |
== Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2021 == |
Revision as of 09:39, 20 February 2021
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Greenhouse effect article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
A summary of this article appears in global warming. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Greenhouse effect article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Greenhouse effect. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Greenhouse effect at the Reference desk. |
Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2020
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "33C (57F)" to "33C (91F)". Gumbodumbo11 (talk) 22:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Not done: @Gumbodumbo: This appears to not be a direct conversion; but a difference (ex. 33 C is 91 F, but a difference of 33 C is only 59 F; and (since 1 C is 9/5 F, so 33 C = 59.4 F). Why anybody in their sane mind would use Fahrenheit in an article about a scientific topic (where the more usual units, across the globe, are either Celsius or Kelvin) eludes me, but there is no reason to change this particular bit. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk | contribs) 22:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
New Greenhouse Effect Analysis
...snip...
See edit request below.
AoDFT (talk) 00:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2020
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A new book, "Air of Doubt" (ISBN: 979-8697917329) by Dr. Frank A Tinker, offers an argument against the existence of a Greenhouse Effect. It applies the Stefan-Boltzmann Equation to the 65mW/m^2 geothermal flux found over continental crust to resolve the 33K(C) temperature deficit when only solar flux is used. The argument is that steady-state flux, both solar and geothermal, requires the use of the superposition principle when analyzing the solution of the heat equation for the column of earth being heated. As such, the sum of the separate solutions (solar and geothermal) is 255K + 33K = 288K. Thus, Earth's global mean surface temperature is fully described by the solar and geothermal flux, leaving no room for a Greenhouse Effect.
For completeness, it appears that reference and argument should be included in this topic. Link: www.airofdoubt.com
[1] AoDFT (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not done the book is WP:self-published, which makes it an unreliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. The author is not an expert in climate science. Furthermore, it adheres to a WP:FRINGE perspective, which we typically don't cover in the scientific article. Not only does it denying climate science, it also contradicts general relativity and Kepler's laws, other well-established scientific fields. Femke Nijsse (talk) 17:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
″it also contradicts general relativity and Kepler's laws″
It does? Just how does it do that? Are you a reliable source? Damorbel (talk) 09:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "in the anti-greenhouse effect, the atmosphere keeps radiation out while letting thermal radiation out" to "in the anti-greenhouse effect, the atmosphere lets radiation out while not letting thermal radiation in" ..Tarun..Khardia.... (talk) 05:21, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Not done. See anti-greenhouse effect. ◢ Ganbaruby! (Say hi!) 06:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- ^ Tinker, F.A. (2020). Air of Doubt: Exposing the largest and most costly scientific error in history, ISBN: 979-8697917329.