Palerider. Wow. You apparently think you know more than NASA. Impressive. I take it you have an Ph.D. in atmospheric science, yes? What institution granted you that degree, just out of curiosity? Should we call you Doctor Palerider? Or Professor Palerider?
Have you written a scientific paper explaining why the widely-accepted theory about the surface temperature of Venus is wrong, and why you are right? I assume you have a Ph.D. in planetary physics too?
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2002/02_60AR.html
As for your experiment, it is a little flawed. Here's why:
The greenhouse effect holds that greenhouse gases reflect infared radiation back towards the Earth, trapping it in rather than letting it escape back into space. The effect is simulated in an actual greenhouse or in a closed automobile because infared radiation passes through the glass into the enclosure, but doesn't escape as readily.
The mix of gasses that the enclosure is filled with, regular atmosphere, pure CO2, etc., is immaterial. That's because it's the glass in the greenhouse or auto that simulates the effect that the atmosphere has on the infared radiation. Your experiment tweaks the wrong element and ignores the critical one.
Let me see...Palerider or NASA? Palerider or the National Academy of Sciences?
Not exactly a tough call (for me, anyway, but then I'm just a liberal).
