Roger Chapman wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

FWIW I don't see "Just how desperate are these people that want to
fake results? " as anything other than the use of **** to smear the
opposition with. The experiment might not be scientifically rigorous
but that is the problem with trying to dumb down the science to make
it understandable to the public at large. That TMH chose to pick up
on my counter rather than the original smear says far more about his
prejudices than it does about mine.

The fact that you think the demonstration actually has *anything* to
do with the greenhouse effect shows just how little you understand.

The fact that Dennis thinks it doesn't shows that he knows even less
about physics than I do and precious little about how to communicate
using the English Language either. The experiment would be a fake only
if CO2 wasn't a greenhouse gas or the greenhouse effect didn't exist at
all. Now both these presumptions exist at significant levels among
deniers so the question arises does either Dennis or TMH actually
subscribe to either lunacy?

What year did this greenhouse gas theory come into the English language.

Dave