mmm We have observations. We have data and we have science where...

mmm

We have observations.  We have data and we have science where GRAVITY is king.   No where is greenhouse gases a consideration.

Simple linear relationship with changes in height and changes in temperature.   All that matters is GRAVITY.
We have the use of UNIVERSAL PHYSICAL LAWS in science that prove the assertion put forward by scientist.


We have as per above observations and use of Universal Laws that I was talking of earlier.
We have the IGL that also confirms that ghg back radiation is not a consideration of atmospheric temperatures.  

You guys cannot stick to a consistent story as to whether the Lapse rate is a result of ghgs or in addition to it.  Can their be two types of greenhouse effects?  Well of course not.  You guys have to either accept it or deny it. Can someone have the balls and actually make a stand on this!


Every attempt by tristanc to partially explain his version of the ghe is already explained for by pressure (gravity).  I.e the lapse rate.  Richard Feynman has explained our atmosphere by using gravity as well.


Meteorologist use Gravity to EXPLAIN these "whole series of thin layers" as Tristanc put it.   Yep and scientist call it the lapse rate.  It is totally independent of Greenhouse gases.

I stress again that scientist have empirically shown you that when you standardise the PRESSURE that you only need to know the distance from the SUN in order to compare the average temperatures of a planet.

I have no need to disprove your untested hypothesis that no one can put numbers to let alone actually explain a mechanism or provide the maths as to how your heating occurs?   
I put forward what other scientist have PROVEN and you want me to debate your untested unproven hypothesis.   You guys are all backwards.   You guys do not even hide this fact.