Only because science deteriorated could global warming caused by so-called greenhouse gases be contrived. Incompetent scientists were concerned about global warming since 1850, while real scientists saw it as ridiculous. Instead of rationality ending the absurdities, it gave incompetents a reason to exist. Persons who need a fake cause to be somebodies ride on criticism as a source of justification.

The concept of global warming lacks common sense. All of the sun's energy moves into and out of the Earth's environment every day, mostly going through the atmosphere. How it moves is virtually irrelevant. Most of it gets into the atmosphere through conduction, convection and evaporation, where it is radiated into space much easier from a transparent gas than from the opaque solid of the Earth's surface.

Contrivers countered the logic with fakery aligned upon a nonexistent greenhouse effect. The stupidity should have been laughed off the planet, but instead it connected to more incompetents who needed a fake cause to make themselves somebodies.

A greenhouse uses glass or plastic to block wind currents while letting light through. There is nothing blocking wind currents in the atmosphere. Yet the persons who bought into the fakery including many scientists said "heat trapping" "greenhouse gases" are the only source of heat in the atmosphere, which increased the temperature 33°C. Missing the conduction, convection and evaporation says volumes about the state of science.

More basic scientists including the NASA laboratory which has been instrumental in promoting the cause claim 79% of the energy leaving the surface of the earth is radiation. A white hot light bulb could not emit 79% radiation without a vacuum environment. The real amount would be 1-3% radiation. But climatologists had no choice but to use the ridiculously high number, because the Stefan-Boltzmann constant shows about 40 times too much radiation being given off by matter at normal temperatures. The NASA lab tried to whittle the percent down to 41% but failed, as the 79% figure was poured in concrete in the IPCC reports and derived from the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. Reducing the radiation from 79% to 2% would reduce the claimed global warming by a factor of 40, if there were such a thing.

More than a century ago, scientists determined that carbon dioxide saturates in the atmosphere and cannot absorb more radiation. This means CO2 absorbs all radiation available to it, so more CO2 cannot absorb more radiation. Additional CO2 only shortens the distance required for complete absorption. The saturation distance for CO2 in the near-surface atmosphere is 10 meters.

But climatologists erased the whole concept of saturation by supposedly calculating how much radiation gets to the surface of the atmosphere, which would be irrelevant, since radiation leaves from all points in the atmosphere to be emitted into space. The tool for those calculations is called "radiative transfer equations." Doing the calculations requires the world's largest computers, so critics are not going to reproduce the results or produce alternative analyses. There is no explanation of how radiative transfer equations made saturation disappear, which is an impossibility.

Saturation was briefly mentioned in the 2001 IPCC report and then disappeared from the climatology of global warming. Why haven't there been recent measurements of saturation? It can be easily measured in a laboratory. A German physicists, Heinz Hug, measured it and said the distance for saturation is 10 meters. He was not allowed to publish such condemning information, so he put it on the internet.

Any number of scientists have been denied grants and the ability to publish for being critical of the global warming claims. How then can the number of scientists who support the fakery be determined? They were supposedly counted by looking through research publications. Scientists are not allowed to express subjective opinions in research publications. Yet a review of the literature concluded that 97% of the scientists who published on global warming accept the claim.

The claim of 97% of the scientists agreeing is the only argument being made anymore by proponents of human-caused global warming. They used to try to argue issues but fell flat on their faces and gave up. No contradicting of 97% of the scientists is allowed. This means there can be nothing wrong with science, and no criticism of it is allowed. Yet there is little left of real science, as incompetents took over science and used it to monger power. I show simple and unquestionable mathematical proof that 90% of physics is corrupted by an erroneous equation for representing kinetic energy.

What greens are missing is that the persons who are wrong never describe or explain. Just trust us. Those who describe and explain are never wrong, because they are too easy to correct. There is no description or explanation for global warming. Getting Greenhouse Wrong

Similarly, being too superficial guarantees errors, as there is no definable reality with superficiality. The basic, underlying laws of science which evolved over 500 years determine the truth. You can't drive paint without the rest of the automobile.