From: btd@iastate.edu (Benjamin T Dehner)
Subject: Re: Falsifying Data
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 21:08:07 GMT

In <2726@fedfil.UUCP> news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>By nobody's account does any more than 2% of solar energy get to Venus'
>surface, and since the middle cloud layers absorb the vast bulk of any
>solar energy, any theory (including SGH) trying to explain the heat of
>Venus as an affect of solar energy must predict the middle cloud layer
>to be hotter than the surface, which it is not.  Super Greenhouse is
>thus seen to involve a gross violation of the second law of
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>thermodynamics.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[more stuff deleted]

>The implications of these tenets as regards Venus include the notion
>that Venus should be in thermal equilibrium after all those billions
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>of years.  It isn't.  Emperical data confirms this, both in the low
>atmosphere and in the high.  Both figures have been bent to conform to
>the astronomers dogma.


[rest of article deleted]

[	In the interest of space, I deleted lots of stuff which had to
do with 1) measuring of IR flux from Venus, and 2) historical documents
puporting to refer to Venus.]

	Note the two underlined sentences above, the first one especially.
The problem here is that the second law of thermodynamics has absolutely
NOTHING to do with the validity (or lack thereof) of radiative transfer
models of the atmosphere of Venus.  Whether or not Venus is in radiative
equilibrium with the solar flux has absolutely nothing to do with the 2nd
law of thermodynamics (SLT).  As a matter of fact, the SLT has absolutely
nothing to do with atmospheric modelings or radiative transfer.
	Mr. Holder, you are well know for your criticisms of standard
theories of evolution of the solar system.  The problem here is that you
appear to have no background in the scientific areas you are criticizing.  
Without such background and training, your criticisms have little credibility 
among the established scientific community.  While this may seem close-minded 
to you, let me give you an example:  what if I said "Velikovsky is full of shit,
his theories are wrong and utter nonsense" WITHOUT having read a single word
of Worlds in Collision, or any other of his writings?  Indeed, I have not
read anything by Velikovsky, and so I do not feel qualified to criticize his
theories.  I have merely pointed out problems in YOUR criticisms of the
current theories.
	My point is this:  until you show an UNDERSTANDING of the theories
you are critcizing, your criticisms will not be taken seriously.  Not only
have you shown NOT to understand current theories, but you previously claimed
to be proud of you lack of understanding in these areas.  This will not
go over well with people who have spent a great deal of time and effort
trying to understand and explore these things.
	Furthermore, you have called the scientific community in general
"either liars or propagandists of the worst sort."  You yourself have
endured this type of abuse, and so should realize its ineffectuality in
trying to carry on an intellectual discussion.  Furthermore, when this sort
of accuasation is aimed at a highly respected and generally honest group
of hard working people, without showing any idea of what it is they actually
do, you only lower your own credibillity.
	Finally, lets not start a game of "he started it".  I previously
called you a liar.  (I never called you a creationist :-).  Maybe I was
a bit strong, but I still maintain you have overstated your case the data with
your description of "sea of lava" in describing the images of Venus.

Ben


>Ted Holden
>HTE


>-- 
>HTE
>bear

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin T. Dehner          Department of Physics and Astronomy 
btd@iastate.edu             Iowa State University 
                            Ames, IA 50011

"I know, nobody knows, where it comes and where it goes"
-- Aerosmith