Cover a greenhouse with thin glass that represents 0.04% of the entire contents and it is no less effective at warming.
Most greenhouses don't have a much higher ratio of glass to volume regardless.
Because a greenhouse prevents convective cooling, it doesn't magically heat up the inside by retransmitting radiation.
The problem with the NASA agreed 'greenhouse gas' theory that we keep getting rammed down our throats is this - Quote from their website ‘
In the 1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In 1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first predicted that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through the greenhouse effect’
Tyndall was a mountaineer who was searching for a reason why the earth maintained a pretty constant temperature and identified water vapour ( approx. 4%) of the atmosphere to be the main reason that the earth avoided the extremes of temperature seen on bodies such as the moon without an atmosphere. Are we going to try and reduce that 'greenhouse gas'? - the one which is over 100 times more prevalent than CO2?
Arrhenius incorrectly used Fouriers explanation that the atmosphere behaves like a glasshouse because it allows the light rays from the sun in but contains the dark rays from the earth. Fourier never mentioned glasshouses or hothouses and went on to say that for the atmosphere to behave like a hotbox – referring to the experimental apparatus of de Saussure (1779) – it would have to solidify whilst retaining its optical qualities.
I don't dispute the change in climate but how do you explain the variations over many hundreds and thousands of years - look at the temperature in 12-1300 AD for example (industrialisation?????) it was only a tiny bit colder than what we are currently experiencing. Then the mini-ice age in 1500AD from which we are gradually recovering.
Time to open your eyes and ask questions of the science rather than blindly accepting it.