So I have openly claimed on NASA's Twitter site that they are being frauds, openly inviting a libel lawsuit. NASA is unable to respond, for any deeper examination will expose the false science of manmade Climate Change. I have the science on my side.
NASA is guilty, of extreme ego, of twisted viewpoints supporting strong censorship, of refusing to openly and respectfully own up to mistakes.
However, while the ethics are questionable, is NASA really as dumb as they seem to be, on the science? I think not.
First of all, how dumb do they seem? An awful lot. NASA is saying the sand, the grass, everything on Earth is a perfect Blackbody, with emissivity of 1.0. Now that's pretty, pretty dumb. It's so dumb in science, that I am not even going to cite a single reference to disprove it, I don't need to.
But we thought NASA hired smart scientists? Never mind the ethics, how could they not know the science of Blackbodies?
The answer may turn out to be racism. Not theirs, but of earlier generations of scientists.
Why do I say this? Ok, so there is a field of science involving things called "Blackbodies". I learned Blackbody theory from an old book, when I was a teenager. I enjoyed reading the stories behind the science, so I know the whole early development.
So I have been having discussions with numerous scientists, who obviously knew the equations and all, but were missing the very fundamental understanding of what a Blackbody even was!!
Situation was so bad that people could not understand how dumb an emissivity of 1.0 for grass was! And apparently even the geniuses at NASA had no clue how dumb that was.
So I put my understanding at a Facebook site and invited people to review it. Everybody reviewing it, except for perhaps one or two rather egotistical and dense people - seemed to have the darkness lifted from their eyes.
It's a simple enough explanation. So why didn't all physicists have this very simple explanation in their backgrounds?
Ok, so the traditional explanation basically starts by pointing out that at the same temperature white objects radiate less heat, black objects radiate more. The scientists of the time wanted to calibrate their new science, and sought the "blackest possible" object for maximum radiation. They named this perfectly black object, a "Blackbody." So that's what a "Blackbody" is, a theoretical perfectly black object.
Now this leads to some complicated equations, and this field of science saw a lot of development, so there are a lot of complicated equations.
The scientists I interacted with, knew the complicated equations. But they did NOT know the basics, leading to some very strange positions.
Why would they not know this very fundamental - that white objects radiate less heat, black objects radiate more heat?
The answer likely ties into racism. Because earlier, there was a fiery debate whether black and white people were the result of convergent evolution. Two separate species, who just happened to look the same by accident. This was the racist position. The anti-racist position claimed they were humans who had evolved differently due to geography etc.
The "white objects radiate less, black objects radiate more" turns skin color into a single physical property, and ties it to geography. In warm climates, darker skin radiates more, and is better. In colder climates, lighter skin that radiates less, is better.
This was not palatable to the racists of the time. They must have had a higher representation among Blackbody teachers. So the entire field got twisted. They wanted to retain the science but get rid of the "white objects radiate less, black objects radiate more".
All they succeeded in, was to twist and confuse the entire science of Blackbodies. As a result, we have the false science of manmade Climate Change destroying economies today.