No criticism is relevant to hard core, global warming alarmists, because the science is supposedly settled. This web page explains the error of the supposed settled science.

Real scientists don't understand what alarmists mean by settled science, because the concept is so preposterous. It takes a lot of deduction to figure out what alarmists mean by settled science, because they don't have the ability to express themselves properly.

The concept traces back to a quote which appeared on the web site of the Union of Concerned Scientists several years ago. They have since removed the quote, probably a reuslt of someone explaining the ridiculousness in terms they could understand. Their statement was this:

The "greenhouse effect" refers to the natural phenomenon that keeps the Earth in a temperature range that allows life to flourish. The sun's enormous energy warms the Earth's surface and its atmosphere. As this energy radiates back toward space as heat, a portion is absorbed by a delicate balance of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere—among them carbon dioxide and methane—which creates an insulating layer. With the temperature control of the greenhouse effect, the Earth has an average surface temperature of 59°F (15°C). Without it, the average surface temperature would be 0°F (-18°C),--- Scientists have concluded that human activities are contributing to global warming by adding large amounts of heat-trapping gases to the atmosphere.---we release carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases into the air.

Embedded in this butchery of science is the assumption that nothing heats the atmosphere but greenhouse gases. They missed the fact that most heat gets into the atmosphere through other means, primarily through conduction (which has convection with it to move heat around). An important perspective is that no real scientists could miss the conduction. Numerous other absurdities are stated, but this one creates the concept of settled science.

Nonscientific alarmists assume that nothing heats the atmosphere but greenhouse gases absorbing radiation. Since there is a lot of heat in the atmosphere, more greenhouse gases must add a lot more heat. And if it is all delicately balanced, any change must be catastrophic.

Real scientists don't know that these assumptions are being made by nonscientist alarmists, because the assumptions are so preposterous. So these points tend to not get discussed. It would be like discussing whether green Martians painted the trees green.

It doesn't matter whether heat leaves the surface of the earth and enters the atmosphere through conduction or radiation. It does the same thing either way. Nothing would be any different if there were not an iota of radiation; and nothing would be any different if there were not an iota of conduction. The resulting temperature is determined by something else, which is equilibrium. An equilibrium temperature is required to control the rate of energy flowing away from the planet at the same rate that it flows into the planet from the sun.

This assumption (that nothing but greenhouse gases heat the atmosphere) appears to be the reason why Al Gore skipped over the science in his movie "An Inconvenient Truth". He apparently assumed that an arrow pointing into the atmosphere for radiation took care of everything.