Why Hasn’t Any Honest Scientist Disproved The Man-Made Greenhouse Effect?

Non-partisan (and some sarcastic souls) have been asking the question: why doesn’t an honest scientist come forward to debunk the man-made greenhouse gas effect (you know, that BS that underpins climate alarm)? Well, believe it or not, he (and others) have.

The ‘he’ in question is Joseph E Postma. He’s what most people would call a proper space scientist. Postma currently works under contract with the Canadian Space Agency doing collaborative work with the Indian Space Research Organization through the University of Calgary in Canada.

He told Principia Scientific International that:

“Two years ago, we launched India’s largest space telescope satellite called ASTROSAT with the Canadian contribution to its UVIT instrument which I helped develop. The instrument data is now currently being processed by the data pipeline which I wrote for the mission.

“I was responsible for helping the aerospace engineers in Ottawa design the UVIT detector system to produce the quality of science data we would need for doing astronomy. I helped test and re-test the system throughout the development phase, and I was in charge of ground-based calibrations for the 3 UVIT detectors, which we performed at the University of Calgary/Canada and in India pre-launch.

“Post-launch, I developed the data pipeline software to reduce the astronomical science data gathered from orbit and I’m now involved with reducing science data for astronomers worldwide and collaborating on various science proposals and research projects for the mission.”

Joe sent us a list of his publications and co-authorships for research, either done himself or that he contributed to:

In-orbit Calibrations of the Ultra-Violet Imaging Telescope


Mapping distortion of detectors in UVIT onboard ASTROSAT observatory (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-data_query?bibcode=2017ExA….43…59G&db_key=AST&link_type=ABSTRACT&high=59428fa03716571)

A Hot Companion to a Blue Straggler in NGC188 as Revealed by the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (UVIT) on ASTROSAT


ASTROSAT mission


Tests and calibration on ultraviolet imaging telescope (UVIT)


Calibration and Performance of the Photon-counting Detectors for the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (UVIT) of the ASTROSAT Observatory


Photon Event Centroiding with UV Photon-counting Detectors


The observation and analysis of the Cepheid SZ Tauri


Line Absorption as a Metallicity Index for Giant Stars


Joe adds:

“I have a Master’s Degree in astrophysics, which requires taking the highest-level courses in thermodynamics that a university has to offer. Being in astrophysics, we also take the highest-level courses available at a university on subjects like spectral absorption of radiation in gases in astronomy and physics, experimental methods in astronomy and physics, classical mechanics, and quantum mechanics, etc.

“Given that the man-made greenhouse effect and alarmist climate science incorporate thermodynamics and spectral absorption, etc…, I am qualified to analyze and write about that effect.”

One of Joe’s papers on the radiative greenhouse effect can be found here:

A Note on Fourier and the Greenhouse Effect


Postma writes:

“In that paper, we established that Joseph Fourier did not discover a radiative greenhouse effect and that his experimental findings actually contradict the claims of modern alarmists and current greenhouse gas theory.

“I currently have a paper in review that extends on a previous paper and so I can’t link you to it yet. However, I produced a few videos which are primarily based on the new paper so that people can immediately find out the results:




“The answer is that the radiative greenhouse effect supported by climate alarmists is, quite literally and sadly, based on flat-Earth physics. It is what happens if you take flat-Earth science and create new laws of physics based on flat-Earth math.

“Quite logically and simply, if you derive something based on flat-Earth science (which doesn’t exist), the results don’t exist in reality either. The radiative greenhouse effect is produced by flat-Earth physics, and since the Earth isn’t flat, the radiative greenhouse effect is wholly fictitious.

“That’s how the alarmist’s logic works, but if you want empirical proof it is provided in the aforementioned videos. In summary, the radiative greenhouse effect claims that it is responsible for the gradient of temperature versus altitude in the atmosphere; however, the temperature versus altitude gradient originates from well-understood mechanical physics with a trivial origin based on fundamental physics, yet has no reference and no dependence upon the radiative behavior of the gas at all.

“The radiative greenhouse effect claims to be responsible for something another physical effect already does and explains and there is no modulation of this physical effect indicating a further effect from radiation.

“The radiative greenhouse effect is refuted with basic thermodynamic theory (not discussed here, but you will see how and why in the videos) and basic physics and logic, and also by the non-existent empirical results it claims should exist from its own effect.

“Climate alarm and even most of the field of climate science itself is based on this (now-known) false concept of a radiative greenhouse effect. By extension, climate alarm and many of climate science’s claims are baseless.

“There is no basis in physics for anthropogenic global warming or climate change due to a radiative greenhouse effect modulated by CO2. In fact, even the concept of a “greenhouse gas” is wrong, and no such-named gases exist, at all. They can’t exist, since the radiative greenhouse effect they’re supposed to produce doesn’t exist in the first place.”

Ref.: http://principia-scientific.org/why-hasnt-any-honest-scientist-disproved-the-man-made-greenhouse-effect/


100% Data Tampering

What kind of a problem would need FAKE and manipulated documentation?

Look at all these “Climate Agreements.” We continue to lose money, prosperity and freedom while the CO2 level continue to increase, when do we say enough??