From: news@fedfil.UUCP (news)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Pictures of a sea of lava, and where they may be found
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:17:05 GMT
Organization: HTE


From: Benjamin T Dehner, Iowa State University, Ames IA



>1) Ted lies about the surface features of Venus.  He claims that Venus is a
>smooth, lava-covered surface.  The Magellan radar maps of Venus are available
>via anonymous FTP at ames.arc.nasa.gov (I forget where; ask/look for FAQ on
>sci.astro or sci.space.news for more info) which CLEARLY show mountainous
>and rugged terrain.

Dehner lies in claiming that I ever claimed Venus to be smooth or without
features;  as lying goes, putting words in other peoples mouthes is a 
particularly pernicious variety.

That Venus is mostly covered by lava and much of that recent is well known
by now from the probes and may be seen in the Jan. 92 issue of Discover 
magazine which is readily available.  Quotes include "... one of the most
striking characteristics of the Venusian topography is its distinct shortage
of craters..."

That's because the lava flows cover them up.  The article goes on to say:
"The planet's pristine face does not mean that it somehow dodged such bom-
bardment;  rather, it implies that something came along to erase the traces
left behind.  That something, Magellan scientists now think, was probably
lava.  At various points in the planets history, large localized valcanoes
may have spilled lava over hundreds of thousands of miles, in effect
resurfacing much of the planet."


Ever heard the term, "You don't have to be a rocket scientist to ....."

I'm beginning to suspect the phrase should go "You don't WANT to be a
rocket scientist to ..."

I mean, these suckers have been looking at these pictures of a lava-
covered planet for two years now and they're just starting to figure out
that maybe ....


>2) Ted shows total ignorance of radiative transfer and atmospheric modeling.

Again, this is a case in which I can take justifiable pride in my ignorance.

Dehner obviously refers to the sort of radiative transfer which would allow
the surface of Venus, which receives less than 2% of any solar energy which
gets past the cloud tops, which is less than gets past our cloud tops, to
reach temperatures far in excess of those of the middle cloud layer which
absorbs 90% of this energy or more, i.e. to a radiative transfer model which
is in gross violation of the second law of thermodynamics.

I'm PROUD to be ignorant of that sort of physics, Dehner.  I am NOT ignorant
of the basic principal upon which Sagan's super greenhouse theory rests,
however.  P.T. Barnum stated that principal early in this century: "There's
a sucker born every minute...", Mencken illuminated the principal somewhat
further:  "...Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American
public...", and a recent German Reichskanzler formalized the doctrine  
in what came to be known as the principal of the big lie.

>He mistakes measurements of the infra-red (IR) energy flux in the middle 
>atmosphere with IR flux at the top of the atmosphere, does not take into

You're obviously not having much luck reading anything complicated and 
comprehending what's being said, Dehner;  I'd suggest you start with something
simple like Dick and Jane.  I mentioned  IR flux in the low, not the middle
atmosphere, and mentioned that the discrepencies were ballpark for matching
up with what actual data said was happening at the top as far as total
heat loss, which more or less has to balance out.


>5) Ted calls almost all astronomers liars and dogmatics.  Several responses
>suggest themselves, varying from insulting to obscene.  While I don't mind
>so much insults directed at me, as I have little concern for the opinions
>of Ted, he is now attacking the integrity of a professional community of
>which I am a part.  Keep it up Ted; one of these days you will have a chance
>to prove your paranoid rambling in a court for a slander suit.


The guy calls me a liar, ignorant, a creationist, and then talks about
suing me for slander...

I do not ever start these name-calling contests.  I believe in doing
unto others as they do unto others, i.e. in dealing with each in accordance
to his own kind.  The one or two times I've jumped on somebody who was
basically innocent of such behavior here simply due to the confusion caused
by replying to 10 or 15 articles, 9 or 14 of which include name-calling
directed at me, I've apologized for it.

Ted Holden
HTE

-- 
HTE
bear