Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics · HackerPapers discussions

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics — HN submission

Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:24:19 GMT

Falsification of the CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within the Frame of Physics (2009)

4 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics — mentioned by lutorm

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:59:33 GMT

The IPCC reports are thousands of pages, so it's not surprising that there are errors. You can find errors in a large fraction of scientific papers if you look hard enough. The relevant question is whether there are more errors in the papers that support the idea of global warming than those that don't. Just judging from what I've seen, the complete crackpot papers (like this one: http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161v4) are in the second category.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics — mentioned by joe_the_user

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:27:12 GMT

Actually, I think you are talking about http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161v4 - It's referenced by Alexander Cockburn in his most recent nation article. It's arxiv with no journal listed as publishing it. You do correctly quote the abstract but the language of this abstract is pretty overwrought - it doesn't read like something that would be published in a serious journal whether it's correct or not. Part of the problem with the language might be a poor translation. Climatology is a complex thing and I'm actually sympathetic to exploring skepticism about global warming. The problem is that the…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.