In article ANAPd.26325$uc.19139@trnddc04,
"Casey Wilson" N2310D @ gmail.com wrote:

Go back and read it in context. I didn't say there was no conduction.
What I said was (in different words) that conduction is not the process of
the wing surface losing thermal energy. Here, I'll put it in another term so
you can do some more nit picking: Because the atomosphere is transparent in
certain important wavelengths, the heat of the wing is being sucked into
outer space.

Well, I'll pick a tiny, purely semantic nit:

The heat of the wing isn't being "sucked" into space; it's being
actively _radiated_ into space -- but space, being cold (3 degrees K in
the limiting case), isn't radiating back.

But this is only to quarrel with your phrasing, not at all with your
basic argument.