<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Dependence of Earth's Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2006.03098/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2006.03098/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Dependence of Earth's Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases — mentioned by defrost</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44578571</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2006.03098:44578571</guid><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2025 04:06:39 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;FWiW you appear to basing your take on a reading pushed by Dr. C.A. de Lange of CO2Coalition of an unaccepted paper by William. A. van Wijngaarden and William Happer. Original paper (on arvix, not accepted by any mainstream journal so far): https://arxiv.org/pdf/2006.03098.pdf C.A. de Lange loves it, claims it as game changing etc: https://co2coalition.org/publications/van-wijngaarden-and-ha... There are a number of discussions re: the original paper and why it was not accepted, eg: What is technically wrong with Wijngaarden &amp;amp; Happer&amp;#x27;s paper claiming to show that CO2&amp;#x27;s contribution to surface…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2006.03098/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.ao-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
