  It is shown that the notorious claim by Halpern et al. recently repeated in
their comment that the method, logic, and conclusions of our "Falsification Of
The CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics" would be in error has
no foundation. Since Halpern et al. communicate our arguments incorrectly,
their comment is scientifcally vacuous. In particular, it is not true that we
are "trying to apply the Clausius statement of the Second Law of Thermodynamics
to only one side of a heat transfer process rather than the entire process" and
that we are "systematically ignoring most non-radiative heat flows applicable
to Earth's surface and atmosphere". Rather, our falsification paper discusses
the violation of fundamental physical and mathematical principles in 14
examples of common pseudo-derivations of fictitious greenhouse effects that are
all based on simplistic pictures of radiative transfer and their obscure
relation to thermodynamics, including but not limited to those descriptions (a)
that define a "Perpetuum Mobile Of The 2nd Kind", (b) that rely on incorrectly
calculated averages of global temperatures, (c) that refer to incorrectly
normalized spectra of electromagnetic radiation. Halpern et al. completely
missed an exceptional chance to formulate a scientifically well-founded
antithesis. They do not even define a greenhouse effect that they wish to
defend. We take the opportunity to clarify some misunderstandings, which are
communicated in the current discussion on the non-measurable, i.e. physically
non-existing influence of the trace gas CO2 on the climates of the Earth.
