Questionable Science On James Taranto's 'Best of the Web'
James Taranto, the extreme right-wing Wall Street Journal pundit responsible for the 'Best of the Web' column has a knack for being selective in his commentary if it helps him score quick points with his conservative readers. In an attack yesterday on Al Gore, Taranto made a significant slip-up in his rush to smear Gore's reputation.
In his column, Taranto reproduced this Gore quote:
Consider this tale of two planets. Earth and Venus are almost exactly the same size, and have almost exactly the same amount of carbon. The difference is that most of the carbon on Earth is in the ground--having been deposited there by various forms of life over the last 600 million years--and most of the carbon on Venus is in the atmosphere.
As a result, while the average temperature on Earth is a pleasant 59 degrees, the average temperature on Venus is 867 degrees. True, Venus is closer to the Sun than we are, but the fault is not in our star; Venus is three times hotter on average than Mercury, which is right next to the Sun. It's the carbon dioxide.
Gore was attempting to refute the notion that has become wildly popular amongst Global Warming apologists: Rises in temperature are due to cycles of the sun, and temperatures are rising on all planets in the solar system.
Taranto's disingenuous response:
Can you trust Al Gore's scientific claims in support of global warmism?
[T]he atmosphere on Mars is 95% carbon dioxide, just shy of Venus's 96%. (The Earth's atmosphere, by contrast, is less than 0.04% CO2.) Average temperature on Mars? Eighty-one below zero.
What did James "half-truth" Taranto leave out? Well, how about the fact that Mars has almost no atmosphere compared to Earth and Venus?
Mars may have the same percentage of CO2 as Venus, but that's about all it has. Compared to Earth, Mars has 1/100th the particles in the atmosphere and Earth has 1/90th the particles of Venus. That gives Mars an atmospheric density of 1/9000th that of Venus. The fact that both have about the same fraction of CO2 is a truly selective way to view the problem. Mars' atmosphere simply lacks the particle density to hold the heat that Venus can.
Read More About: Al Gore | Environment | News | Science | World
You're Missing The Point
Gore's point was to disabuse the notion that proximity to the sun does not equate to proportionate surface temperature. Mercury has an average surface temperature of 265f degrees -- significantly less that Venus' 867f degrees despite being almost half the distance and receiving four times the heat. In fact, on the side of mercury that is away from the sun, it is -270f degrees versus 800f degrees facing the sun. You could actually freeze or be incinerated depending on the side of the planet you're on.
Planets with atmospheres tend to even out the temperature differences by both sheilding and trapping heat. If you want an illustration, try comparing the Earth and the Moon. Earth has an average surface temperature of 59f degrees with small variations depending on day/night. The Moon, arguably, on average the same distance from the Sun, has an average daytime temp of 224f degrees and an average nighttime temp of -243f degrees.
In the vacuum of space, temperature can be affected by proximity to the sun. With an atmosphere, those effects are evened out. If Earth had the same temperature extremes as the moon, there would be no life here. Our atmospehere protects us from those extremes. Venus, because it has an atmosphere, doesn't have extremes either.
No, you're missing the
No, you're missing the point. Gore tried to claim that the sole reason Venus was hotter than Mercury was because Venus' atmosphere was primarily carbon dioxide. However, you are right now in claiming that Venus is hotter than Mercury because it has an atmosphere. But that was not Gore's point. "Venus is three times hotter on average than Mercury, which is right next to the Sun. It’s the carbon dioxide."
See? But you and I both agree that Venus is hotter than Mercury because it has a dense atmosphere, one that is roughly 100 times denser than Earth's. We agree on this, but Gore does not. Gore says that Venus is hotter than Mercury because of the carbon dioxide. I don't know how much more plainly I can point out this very obvious fact. You can't use this fact to defend Gore because Gore was claiming just the opposite. Gore was claiming that it was the carbon dioxide. Everyone else is saying that that's ridiculous, and it is.
Now, because Gore was saying that it wasn't the sun, it was the carbon dioxide, everyone else is pointing out the obvious fact that the sun does play a very large role. However, you are also correct in pointing out that atmospheric density plays a very large role too. However, Gore completely overlooked the role of atmospheric density. He said over and over that the sole, or at least major, reason for the temperature difference between Mercury, Venus and Earth was due to the concentration of carbon dioxide.
That is completely false. At least two factors play a more important role, and that is proximity to the sun and atmospheric density.
It Is The CO2
Gore completely overlooked the role of atmospheric density.
Not to belabor the point, but Venus’ dense atmosphere is 96+% CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Is it possible that a dense atmosphere made up of other particles would be just as hot? Unfortunately, we don’t have other examples to work with.
Whether it’s the presence of CO2 that traps the heat in Venus’ atmosphere or the density of CO2 that traps the heat, it’s still CO2.
It's called a greenhouse
You've really gone out of your way to try to defend Gore here. Let's stay on topic. Gore's claim is that it is the CO2 that makes Venus hotter than both the Earth and Mercury. We're talking about whether Gore's claim is valid or not. I totally understand that you're unwilling to admit that Gore may be wrong abut something. It's always difficult to have your fundamentalist beliefs challenged.
Gore claimed that the high concentration of CO2 in Venus' atmosphere is what makes it hotter than both Mercury and Earth. He said that the sun had nothing to do with it. The only facts on which Gore relies are that Venus' atmosphere is composed primarily of CO2, while Mercury's and Earth's are not. This was his entire argument. This claim is easily discredited by using the example of Mars, which has a concentration of CO2 similar to Venus. The concentration of CO2 in Mars' atmosphere is very similar to Venus', but the density of the Martian atmosphere is between Earth's and Mercury's (which is nearly nonexistent). (I know I'm repeating myself, but it seems like you're refusing to acknowledge basic facts.) This introduces a new variable, because Gore's explanation is clearly wrong.
It's obvious that CO2 and other greenhouse gases cause the greenhouse effect, hence the name. We wouldn't call them greenhouse gases if they didn't. It's likewise obvious that if the concentration of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere were similar to Venus', the Earth would be hotter. Exactly how much is open to speculation. The problem is that Gore says the differences in temperature between the three planets are due solely to CO2, which is clearly not true. If Mercury had an atmosphere similar to Earth's, it would be much, much hotter.
Gore was, quite clearly, wrong on this point.
Venus atmosphere, global warming, carbon dioxide
Oh, please. The questionable science is Gore's. Did you not notice how he claimed that Venus was hotter than Mercury due to the carbon dioxide? Mercury practically has no atmosphere. Did Gore mention that? No. Did you? No. You want to talk about selective? You want to talk about "half-truths"?
Hypocrite.
This is why "global warming apologists" don't listen. Gore doesn't engage in honest representations (and many Gore apologists don't either).