Why do conservatives say there is no greenhouse effect, when babies die in cars from greenhouse effects?

Answer 1

Because conservatives believe science is just a serious of debateable opinions, not observable facts. Also, they are too dumb to understand the greenhouse effect, too proud to pick up a book and read about it, and to ignorant to believe that it is humans that are causing it.

Answer 2

If there were no greenhouse effect the Earth would have 0 residual heat and would be a rather cold place.. so to say there is no greenhouse effect shows a lack of understanding of basic science (a bit of science that I learned in the 3rd or 4th grade)

Answer 3

Conservative DO NOT say there is no greenhouse effect. Real scientist and real physicist say the atmosphere cannot be a greenhouse.
There CANNOT be a greenhouse effect without a greenhouse!
Any CLOSED enclosure with closed transparent panels or windows is a greenhouse,
like a car with CLOSED windows.
Only a closed chamber or enclosure can TRAP AND KEEP temperature rising.
The problem with the atmosphere is that IT IS OPEN and any hotter air, N2, O2, A, H2O, CO2, CO etc. is force to escape upward to space because of its decreasing density. As gases like N2, O2, A, H2O, CO2, CO rise to space they get cooler.
There are 3 bottom lines:
1)The atmosphere does not boxes to hold hot gases in place and to prevent them from floating upward because higher temperature makes them less dense.
2)The air temperature is determined not by solar radiation only but by radiation, convection and conduction contact with earth, and oceans plus rotational mixing like with Coriolis effect; current computer weather models include all of these --but with fake temperatures, especially for the oceans and urban island effects
3)American computer models are less accurate than British computer models because American models use FEA methods --which are (at this time) less accurate.
--If weathermen and climatologist can't make accurate weather predictions 2 weeks and sometimes 2 days in advance how can you believe their same model predictions 2 years or 20 yrs in advance?
--I don't have space to include all contradictions from a physics point of view.
I specialized in atmospheres as an undergraduate and graduate student --the model equations are very complicated, so I do not want you to think alarmists not scientists.
Keep in mind that Alarmist are scientist that are opportunist for gathering money and saving face. We honest physicists have to pay a price and often keep quiet many times because we don't want to make our fellow scientists look bad or humiliated.

Answer 4

I have never said that there is no such thing as the greenhouse effect.

what is a solid arguement is the influence on man on the greenhouse effect.

Answer 5

EP, enable me verify from the outset that i understand little or no in this subject, so, even with our disagreements interior the previous, I’m *no longer* contradicting you right here – merely attempting to appreciate. I’m additionally puzzled via the section you highlighted. If the planet gained 240 W/m^2 of skill from the sunlight, how can the ambience “radiate 240 W/m^2 into area, [and] additionally radiate 240 W/m^2 lower back in the direction of the floor”? The regulation of conservation of skill states that skill can't be created or destroyed, yet, in accordance on your description, the ambience is receiving 240 W/m^2, yet reradiating a finished of 480 W/m^2. on the commencing up look this seems impossible. What am I lacking that makes this artwork? :::EDIT::: Oh, so the “radiate 240 W/m^2 into area, [and] additionally radiate 240 W/m^2 lower back in the direction of the floor” quote is the situation *after* equilibrium is reached? So it’s the area on the tip factor, no longer the commencing factor?

Answer 6

No, babies die in cars because there parents are incredibly stupid and leave children in locked cars with the windows up in the middle of summer. Has nothing to do with greenhouse gasses.

Answer 7

babies dying in cars has nothing to do with greenhouse effects,its their stupid parents that leave them in a hot car, A child should NEVER be left in a car

A baby will die in a car if the heat is caused by global warming or not, the sun will heat the car regardless

Answer 8

Babies die in cars because of the heat causes a lack of air, and they sufficate. What the heck does Global Warming have to do with that, and what do Conservatives have to do with it either way? The former president of Green Peace is a a very vocal opponent of enviromental hysteria.

Your argument might be valid if you're operating under the assumption that all heat is caused by global warming. The earth's surface temperature has only gone up 1 degree in the last hundred years.

Answer 9

OK to the previous idiots. The greenhouse effect is a magnification of heat through a medium in this case glass. So in essance babies and dogs for that matter are dying from a mini greenhouse effect. also retarted parents who have yet to figure that part out yet.

Answer 10

Global warming threatens their investments, and to a conservative money is more important than the future condition of the earth, once they start investing more in renewable energy they'll be on board too.