Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site spp2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwspp!spp2!stassen
From: stassen@spp2.UUCP (Chris Stassen)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Venus' slow rotation
Message-ID: <885@spp2.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 13:04:02 EST
Article-I.D.: spp2.885
Posted: Mon Mar 10 13:04:02 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Mar-86 08:37:29 EST
References: <519@imsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: stassen@spp2.UUCP (Chris Stassen)
Distribution: na
Organization: TRW, Redondo Beach  CA
Lines: 16

In article <519@imsvax.UUCP> ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) writes:
>
>There are two lines of argument, either of which alone would kill
>Sagan's "super-greenhouse" theory concerning Venus stone-dead: the one
>from Firsoff which I have quoted, and the fact that Venus shows no
>difference in temperature between the day and night sides, even though
>it's rotation is very slow (about forty some days if I remember right).

	Venus completes one rotation every 243 Earth days.  However,
its atmosphere is swirling around at 200 miles per hour -- which completes
one rotation in under 5 days.
	Unmanned Venus probes have shown us that almost no heat reaches
the surface directly from the Sun, so the 5-day (atmospheric rotation) 
figure is the one that you must struggle with when trying to disprove Sagan.

				-- Chris