Your statement about "slowing radiational cooling" just doesn't fit the physics. Most of all it implies that Earth still cools, just at a "slower" rate. In contrast Earth isn't cooling, but is in a (quasi) equilibrium between absorbed and emitted radiation. I'd be glad to discuss the physics with you further, but the bit about "slowing radiational cooling" needs to go. Raymond Arritt 03:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- What you said doesn't make a bit of sense. If you want to revert this then discuss it on the talk page more.
Mathchem271828
03:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK, let's move it to the Global Warming talk page where others can join in. Raymond Arritt 03:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, as long as everything is cited correctly that's fine. JoshuaZ 01:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Your statement about "slowing radiational cooling" just doesn't fit the physics. Most of all it implies that Earth still cools, just at a "slower" rate. In contrast Earth isn't cooling, but is in a (quasi) equilibrium between absorbed and emitted radiation. I'd be glad to discuss the physics with you further, but the bit about "slowing radiational cooling" needs to go. Raymond Arritt 03:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- What you said doesn't make a bit of sense. If you want to revert this then discuss it on the talk page more.
Mathchem271828
03:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK, let's move it to the Global Warming talk page where others can join in. Raymond Arritt 03:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, as long as everything is cited correctly that's fine. JoshuaZ 01:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)