AGW Explained In Simple Terms Anyone Can Understand

[Jccarlton]

No obfuscation and irrelevancies here. NO BS either.:
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html

[Schneibster]

I'm already doing that.

Assuming it's not another one of your propaganda sites; I'm not giving them any hits to find out.

[Diogenes]

I suspect it wasn't simple enough. Someone seems not to have understood it.

[Jccarlton]

I suspect it wasn't simple enough. Someone seems not to have understood it.

Ok, here's the long version:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/070 ... 1161v4.pdf

[Schneibster]

Maybe if they didn't screw up in the first sentence of the abstract:

The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824), Tyndall (1861), and Arrhenius (1896), and which is still supported in global climatology, essentially describes a fictitious mechanism, in which a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system.

Unfortunately, simple energy conservation shows this must be false. In addition, the physics of heat flow show why: for there ever to be equilibrium heat flow must stop. Please show when this happens. Duh.

The Earth-system is constantly trying to catch up with the increases and decreases in heat flow from the seasons, let alone from the 23 thousand year polar precession.