This is more of the same. He is simply wrong. All his adiabatic lapse rate argument shows is that temperature should decrease with altitude - which is basically correct, as far as it goes. His argument does NOT show that the temperature at the surface of Venus should be 460 C. The simple calculation - by which it is argued that Earth's temperature should be -18 C - simply says that the planet must radiate as if from a surface at -18 C. It does not say whether that surface should be at ground level or high in the atmosphere. There is a free parameter there that he has ignored and is trying to say by fiat that it must be at the top of the atmosphere. That is where he is wrong about Earth, and Venus. If Venus's surface was at 90 bars with an atmosphere of N2 instead of CO2 (or some gas that's completely transparent to IR, not sure about N2 at high density), the surface (ground level) would be at the radiating temperature instead of some pressure level high in the atmosphere. There would still be a lapse rate, the upper atmosphere would be cooler than the surface - but the surface would not be at 460 C. I'm not going to repeat myself on the 2nd law of thermodynamics. See post #990 in this thread or think more deeply about this instead of just posting crackpot papers.