The global Marxist politician-run U.N. IPCC/WEF octopus of anti-Big Oil leftists is trying to eat the world by weaponizing the fake greenhouse effect. Global warming is good not bad, and more not less CO2 and H20 need to be pumped into the atmosphere to create more living space and food supplies.
For the top-level list of articles go to the Home Page
TLW's Quora Climate Change Articles
TLW's New Real Climate Science Course. Best ever created. Click here to join my students now. Free!
Thursday, February 28, 2019
The Mechanics of Climate Alarm
https://climateofsophistry.com/2019/02/27/the-mechanics-of-climate-alarm/
My reply;
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Monday, February 25, 2019
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Saturday, February 23, 2019
Friday, February 22, 2019
If William Happer thinks CO2 it a good thing, should he lead a presidential committee on climate change?
My reply:
Yes!
The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) religion fanatics attack William “Will” Happer like hunting dogs, because although he hasn’t got one of those phony “climate science” degrees, they know he’s one of the top physicists in the world, and doesn’t have to have atmospheric physics taught to him but can do it himself. All of these attacks are pure ad hominem, trying to make smoke when there’s no fire. So what if he takes a few bucks from fossil fuel companies eager to hear him speak the truth? That’s peanuts compared to his big fat Princeton salary. He values his rep and doesn’t sell his opinions to the higher bidder, else he could make far more by joining the AGW bandwagon, even becoming a budding billionaire like Al Gore.
Listen to his own words:
"I believe that the increase of CO2 is not a cause for alarm and will be good for mankind. I predict that future historians will look back on this period much as we now view the period just before the passage of the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution to prohibit 'the manufacturing, sale or transportation of intoxicating liquors.' At the time, the 18th amendment seemed to be exactly the right thing to do – who wanted to be in league with demon rum? It was the 1917 version of saving the planet. More than half the states enacted prohibition laws before the 18th amendment was ratified. Only one state, Rhode Island, voted against the 18th amendment. Two states, Illinois and Indiana, never got around to voting and all the rest voted for it.
There were many thoughtful people, including a majority of Rhode Islanders, who thought that prohibition might do more harm than good. But they were completely outmatched by the temperance movement, whose motives and methods had much in common with the movement to stop climate change. Deeply sincere people thought they were saving humanity from the evils of alcohol, just as many people now sincerely think they are saving humanity from the evils of CO2. Prohibition was a mistake, and our country has probably still not fully recovered from the damage it did. Institutions like organized crime got their start in that era. Drastic limitations on CO2 are likely to damage our country in analogous ways.”
"The demonized chemical compound is a boon to plant life and has little correlations with global temperature.”
"A thousand parts per million of CO2 would actually help the planet... If you look around the world, many greenhouse operators put several thousand parts per million into their greenhouses.”
"There's a whole area of climate so-called science that is really more like a cult... it's like Hare Krishna or something like that. They're glassy-eyed and they chant. It will potentially harm the image of all science.”
Happer is known for his observation that there is a “CO2 drought”, which makes AGW true believers see red.
If you don’t think the AGW true believers filling the answers space in this article aren’t knowingly misrepresenting him as a “climate denier” in order to keep people from examining his views for themselves, here’s a direct Happer quote:
"CO2 does indeed cause some warming of our planet, and we should thank Providence for that, because without the greenhouse warming of CO2 and its more potent partners, water vapor and clouds, the earth would be too cold to sustain its current abundance of life. Other things being equal, more CO2 will cause more warming. The question is how much warming, and whether the increased CO2 and the warming it causes will be good or bad for the planet."
William Happer - Wikipedia
Meet The Newest Member Of Trump’s National Security Team: Dr. William Happer
Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer: In Defense of Carbon Dioxide
Physicist - CO2 does not cause climate change, it RESPONDS to it - Video
Physicist - CO2 does not cause climate change, it RESPONDS to it - Video
https://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/happer-the_truth_about_greenhouse_gases.pdf
Thursday, February 21, 2019
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Monday, February 18, 2019
Is global warming a verifiable fact or just a highly probable conclusion?
https://www.quora.com/Is-global-warming-a-verifiable-fact-or-just-a-highly-probable-conclusion\
My reply:
This is a loaded question because it doesn’t include the word anthropogenic.
All global warming comes from the Sun. No Sun, the Earth freezes fast.
A blanket around your body at night slows heat created by your metabolism from escaping, but can not warm the body more. But that’s just what the pushers of so-called CO2 greenhouse warming theory claim CO2 does for the Earth’s surface. This is a pure hoax, because it is prohibited by the iron laws of thermodynamics.
What is really happening on a daily basis? The Sun alone heats the Earth’s surface, and if it weren’t for the atmosphere the heat would radiate directly to space at such a high rate that the temperature would swing between unlivable extremes like on the Moon. But the huge atmosphere intercepts most of this radiation and turns it into convection, which has to fight the atmosphere’s gravity field to escape to space, slowing the surface cooling process enough to keep the surface temperature from swinging so fast. CO2 has no special role other than as part of the surface cooling process. The surface cooling happens at the surface, and once heat has left on its way to space, it can never return, which is the Big Lie of the CO2 greenhouse warming theory.
The physics of surface heating and cooling started way back in the 19th century when many aspects were poorly understood, but it has long been hijacked by global Marxists with dreams of a global Green New Deal that promises a Marxist utopia forced on the world in the name of slaying the CO2 dragon in the sky, even though it’s not there. CO2 just helps cool the Earth’s surface daily by taking the solar heat up to space where it is harmlessly dissipated. Claims that it delays this process by absorbing IR from the surface on its way up don’t matter back on the surface, which has been cooled even more by emitting the IR. The Byzantine mathematical formulas concocted to turn CO2 into a second Sun are mathematical science fiction, precisely because of the iron laws of you know what that override their fine print. Once heat and smoke leave a chimney, the heat can never go back down and cook the meal twice. When it’s gone it’s gone.
All along CO2 has been framed as a dragon in the sky just as a way to influence the shutdown of the fossil fuel industry even after it eliminated real polluting gases from its smokestacks, such as CO, SO2, and soot. Sorry, but fossil fuel is good not bad, for without it we couldn’t stay warm in the winter or cool in the summer, or operate the machinery and electrical devices that give us a comfortable lifestyle.
As to so-called surface temperature data, it has long ago been coopted by govt. agencies bent on pushing the Green New Deal even before it had a name, especially NASA and NOAA. The climate expert Tony Heller of Colo. has heroically spent many years putting their work through a magnifying glass and exposing rampant data tampering to create a tiny overall warming that tracks the CO2 level, literally erasing and rewriting history to make data fit the theory. The real question of what drives the climate is thrown under the bus by a few tricked-up graphs that aren’t physical but were made up in computers, mere sales tools for a future Green New Deal, where the slope of the graph is exponentially accelerated decades in the future under the guise of science when it’s really salesmen puffing their merchandise. Caveat emptor.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgk3xFHvWLE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j46mnIcz330
Read my devastating essay using fundamental physics to demolish the CO2 greenhouse warming theory that anybody can understand:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
Sunday, February 17, 2019
Is carbon dioxide really causing global warming or is it just a theory among others?
My reply:
CO2 in the atmosphere may absorb some surface radiation from the Earth, but only the Sun can deposit energy on the Earth’s surface and heat it up. The atmosphere only cools the surface, and its chemical composition doesn’t really matter. The iron laws of thermodynamics prohibit a cooler body from heating a warmer body, and the atmosphere is cooler than the surface because of the lapse rate, which is caused by the atmosphere’s gravity field pushing warmer air up and into space where all heat is dissipated forever, much like the water pressure in an aquarium pushes hose bubbles up to the surface where they are released into the air.
Instead of atmospheric CO2 stopping the flow of surface heat to space, it speeds it up because absorbed IR warms it up and makes it lighter. Since it’s a trace (0.04%) element, it absorbs the IR as increased internal kinetic energy, making it bump faster into neighboring molecules and diffuse the heat. CO2 never turns into a mini laser or radar satellite in the sky.
They get emission confused. All materials constantly emit radiation at all wavelengths from zero on up, but the power distribution peaks at an absolute temperature proportional to the fourth power of the temperature, meaning that the photons will not only be much weaker but way slower in flow rate, and they too will be absorbed by surrounding air molecules long before they reach the surface, while the whole mass just keeps rising to space like a chimney.
When you cook a meal in a fireplace, Earth’s atmosphere pushes the waste heat and smoke up the chimney and up to space. The heat never goes back down the chimney and cooks the meal twice. So-called climate scientists never seem to ‘get’ this. They tout CO2’s absorption abilities, but misrepresent its emission abilities, and are always turning physics upside down and backwards to invent a fictitious dragon in the sky supported by a Byzantine network of inscrutable mathematics that are nothing but mathematical science fiction. They also like to turn the Earth flat and pretend to calculate the entire energy flow from one flat quarter, always managing to find fictitious wattage beaming back to the surface from somewhere in fantasyland.
The basic paradigm is wrong, and that’s where climate scientists keep tripping on their own feet. The Earth’s atmosphere, in short, is a giant chimney not a greenhouse. Thus, the obsession with heat in the atmosphere has been misguided, because it contains heat that’s already left the surface, which has cooled and will never be rewarmed by a phantom second Sun made of trace CO2 molecules. In short, CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax, and its blind adoption by so-called climate scientists is one of the scientific scandals of history.
I’m a philosopher of science and technology and can back my views up. Read my devastating expose and join others who are waking up:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
Should we really be focusing on trying to prevent climate change at this point, or preparing for the inevitable?
My reply:
Sorry, anthropogenic climate change is a hoax that’s framing CO2 on sending heat from the atmosphere back to the surface, when this goes against the iron laws of thermodynamics. All of Earth’s surface heat comes daily from the Sun, not from CO2, which might absorb some heat from the surface but can’t send it back as it slowly rises to space and is lost forever. Nature is always changing the climate a little, and over time it can add up to a lot, but humans can do nothing about it other than try to adapt. No one except the global warming alarmists with their hands in your pockets can pretend to predict the future decades out, but to me it seems more likely that we’re headed for a period of global cooling not warming, but even that would be decades out if ever, so for the time being I’ll keep my wallet in my pocket. Check out the er, cool global cooling prediction videos on YouTube by retired U. of Conn. scientist Howard Hayden et al.:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3m-28rVJa4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD25umA6tSA
Here’s my take on the CO2 greenhouse warming hoax, which is waking people up:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change (http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html)
How can anyone deny climate change when the evidence is so compelling and the stakes are so high?
https://www.quora.com/How-can-anyone-deny-climate-change-when-the-evidence-is-so-compelling-and-the-stakes-are-so-high
My reply:
Evidence is so what? Nowadays nobody can claim that without trying to refute the great videos of climate expert Tony Heller of Colorado. For example:
https://canadafreepress.com/article/funding-the-climate-industrial-complex
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j46mnIcz330
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e82smfcypUc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YELYiHbsguY
People who stick to the dated argument that Big Oil is perverting the science to protect their income need to catch up with the reality that for 30 years they’ve switched to financing the environmentalists because of all the new sources of income opening up. The original flock of climate skeptic scientists were never owned by them, and after their funding dried up they stuck to their guns and have developed their arguments more fully, and now are the senior scientists in the climate science profession. The pro-greenhouse warming scientists are mainly a younger generation who had to blindly accept the dogmas to get their degrees.
https://canadafreepress.com/article/funding-the-climate-industrial-complex
Too bad for so-called climate scientists, the entire CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax because it violates the iron laws of thermodynamics. Just because CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs some of the radiation from the surface doesn’t send that heat back later. The entire atmosphere cools the surface and takes the heat to space, and CO2 is part of that. Who cares what the temperature profile is in the sky when we live on the ground? You can hang a side of beef over a fire but people sitting around it aren’t being cooked. The heat and smoke from the fire can never return and cook the meal twice. The atmosphere has a great mass that creates a gravity gradient that rules atmospheric convection and absorbs most radiation, but that doesn’t make CO2 a dragon in the sky that breathes fire to the surface. The lame attempts to claim that CO2 sends heat back to the surface are science fiction not fact, and the perpetrators are the ones suspect of ulterior political and financial motives, as revealed by the New Green Deal. CO2 stays in the atmosphere, but surface heat never does.
Speaking of ulterior motives, ironically, the U.N.-backed greenhouse warming colossus openly wants to destroy the fossil fuel industry and make us dependent on expensive intermittent solar and wind power, which would drag us down to a new Dark Ages, yet the only real anthropogenic global warming is caused every day by the burning of fossil fuels to keep us warm and operate our machinery to give us our comfortable lifestyles. All waste heat generated is immediately forced to space by the atmosphere, where it dissipates harmlessly, with atmospheric CO2 being irrelevant. Why fix something that isn’t broke?
https://papundits.wordpress.com/2019/02/05/a-brutal-example-of-why-100-renewables-cant-work/
The colossus suppresses all dissident views, and their tentacles envelop academia, who censor any climate skeptic papers and fire them for speaking out. Never fear, I completely devastate the CO2 greenhouse warming theory in my hot, er, cool independent essay here:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
Most climate scientists need to quit their jobs, ask for their money back and retrain for useful careers like nuclear energy.
Saturday, February 16, 2019
What is the best evidence you’ve come across that disproves the theory of global warming?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-evidence-you-ve-come-across-that-disproves-the-theory-of-global-warming
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-evidence-you-ve-come-across-that-disproves-the-theory-of-global-warming/answer/TL-Winslow
My reply:
You mean the CO2 Greenhouse Warming Theory? It’s been disproved as a cause of global warming since day one, because the iron laws of thermodynamics don’t allow a cooler body to heat a warmer one, hence CO2 way up in the sky can absorb all the energy it wants from the surface, but by definition the surface was already cooled by losing it, and it can never come back, but just continues on its way to the infinite heat sink of outer space. Only the Sun heats the surface each day. CO2 helps cool the surface by taking heat away from it, so the CO2 Greenhouse Warming Theory has been misapplied and can’t explain global warming. If it were even a little bit true then we’d long ago had winters without snow, not the Beast from the East. In short, the iron laws of thermodynamics rule out all theories of atmospheric CO2-driven global surface warming, because only the Sun can warm the surface, and incidentally, humans can too, for a short time, by burning fossil fuels to keep warm and operate machinery to live a comfortable lifestyle. Just like hot smoke from a campfire, once the heat has left the surface it never comes back, and obsessing what happens to it on the way to space is for people with too much time on their hands. The Earth’s atmosphere is a chimney not a greenhouse.
2018 Great Britain and Ireland cold wave - Wikipedia
Read my take that makes it simple that it’s really about global Marxism attempting a takeover, not about science, which has been hijacked by a big lie:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
Friday, February 15, 2019
What hard evidence is there that the current period of warming is caused by human beings? How can we possibly separate our contribution from the natural process?
https://www.quora.com/What-hard-evidence-is-there-that-the-current-period-of-warming-is-caused-by-human-beings-How-can-we-possibly-separate-our-contribution-from-the-natural-process/answer/TL-Winslow
My reply:
None, so we don’t have to separate our contribution from the natural process.
As one famous atheist said, the only evidence of the Universe is the Universe. For years globalist Marxists have been hijacking scientists to prepare the world for the Green New Deal, the most massive Marxist power grab in history, claiming to create a Marxist utopia but really crashing the world into a disaster.
The hijacked scientists peddle two scientific scams at the same time:
- Atmospheric CO2 causes global warming by its mere presence and concentration.
- As CO2 levels have risen after WWII, the global avg. temp has risen in lock step.
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
The data for global temps has long been tampered with by hijacked scientific organizations like NASA, NOAA, and the U.K. Hadley Centre to fit the CO2-driven hoax. Real science has been damaged in the quest for baksheesh.
THE Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming Scam
As climate change critic Tony Heller of Colo. puts it:
"Climate scientists are classic snake oil salesmen. They'll take whatever the current ailment is then say they have cure and you just need to give them money. And they employ Orwellian doublespeak as their standard technique.... Climate science is not a science at all. It's just the largest scam in history."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgk3xFHvWLE
TLW's Climatescope™, by T.L. Winslow (TLW), "The Historyscoper"™
Thursday, February 14, 2019
Why is the Global warming and Climate Change question such a polemical subject?
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-Global-warming-and-Climate-Change-question-such-a-polemical-subject/answer/TL-Winslow
My reply:
“A polemic (/pəˈlɛmɪk/) is contentious rhetoric that is intended to support a specific position by aggressive claims and undermining of the opposing position. “
Polemic - Wikipedia
Polemics is about all the U.N. IPCC (a political outfit backed by scientists) and its cheering section in NASA, NOAA et al. having to keep hawking trillions in baksheesh to prevent their prophesies of global Armageddon from coming true. Meanwhile even after tricking-up the statistics, they claim barely 1C in global avg. temp rise since 1880.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/history/
The very idea of not just lone scientists but whole scientific orgs. attempting to push prophesies of the fat, er, far future is polemical, n’est-ce pas?
Meanwhile I know that all along they have been framing CO2 for causing global surface temperature increases, because the iron laws of thermodynamics make this impossible. Often they try to confuse stratospheric temperatures with surface temperatures, but all their data is suspect of tampering as revealed by several independent critics such as Tony Heller, formerly of NOAA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgk3xFHvWLE
My online essay is waking people up to the CO2 greenhouse warming hoax because the Earth’s atmosphere is not a greenhouse but a chimney, cooling the Earth by taking solar energy to space, with CO2 going along for the ride:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
Wednesday, February 13, 2019
What are some of the main arguments against the acceptance of global climate change?
My reply:
This is a loaded question, become global climate like everything else in Nature never stays constant but varies over time. The current CO2 greenhouse warming colossus claims that global temps have been increasing faster in modern times than anytime in the past, but they use tricked-up data that is highly suspect of tempering to support their theory.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgxgkRmsF2g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgk3xFHvWLE
Otherwise, the evidence that CO2 is driving a future Armageddon is flimsy and suspect of political motives, as recently revealed by the announcement of the New Green Deal, which is a shameless Marxist global coup attempt under the guise of saving the world from the evil dragon in the sky of CO2. There’s no conspiracy among scientists? Why did NASA accommodate them by releasing a so-called study in 2015 predicting an Armageddon by 2100, when real scientists don’t engage in crystal ball work? Because they were preparing people for the Marxist power grab?
https://spectator.org/the-green-new-deal-is-about-punishing-working-class-americans/ (https://spectator.org/the-green-new-deal-is-about-punishing-working-class-americans/)
https://papundits.wordpress.com/2019/02/11/the-green-new-deal-would-take-us-back-to-medieval-times/ (https://papundits.wordpress.com/2019/02/11/the-green-new-deal-would-take-us-back-to-medieval-times/)
The World in 2100, According to NASA's New Big Dataset (https://gizmodo.com/the-world-in-2100-according-to-nasas-new-big-dataset-1710798646)
Too bad for the U.N. IPCC, NASA, NOAA et al., the iron laws of thermodynamics rule out CO2’s ability to warm the Earth’s surface beyond what the Sun does. The entire atmosphere, CO2 included just removes the heat and takes it up to space for permanent disposal. Earth is not a greenhouse but a chimney. Heat and smoke from a chimney can never go back down and cook the meal twice, sorry. The only global surface warming is caused by fossil fuels being burned to keep us warm and operate our machinery to give us comfortable lives. Once the fossil fuels have been burned, they’re gone forever too, as the waste heat always escapes straight up to space, and CO2 can’t change this. I don’t care what’s happening up in the sky, I live on the surface. That’s why CO2 global warming is a deliberate hoax. No other argument is needed to destroy the CO2 greenhouse warming theory because it strikes a stake through its heart. Only I have a free online essay allowing everybody to satisfy themselves that CO2 global warming is a hoax and a generation of so-called climate scientists have been cheated and need to demand their money back and retrain for useful careers such as nuclear energy, the only real replacement for fossil fuels. NASA needs to get out of the climate business and concentrate on its original mission of space exploration.
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change (http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html)
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Why do a lot of conservatives have such a hard time understanding the difference between climate and weather?
Carbon Dioxide ‘Pollution’ On Vacation In Hawaii
Too bad, all along CO2 has been framed as controlling global temperature, leading to pretzel logic that makes all cold weather get labeled as weather and all hot weather labeled as climate. Sorry, if there were true global warming there would be no more cold winters and snowfall.
CO2 can’t heat the Earth’s surface because of the iron laws of thermodynamics, period. When will the so-called climate scientists admit they were wrong and really try to learn what drives Earth’s climate? Here’s my devastating analysis that’s waking people up:
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
How many UN climate change experts does it take to change a sceptics mind?
My reply:
Is this a serious question or another lightbulb joke? The real answer is that it only takes one climate change skeptic to change all the so-called climate experts’ minds: moi. My new online essay devastates the basic claim that CO2 controls the Earth’s temperature, pulling the rug out from under their feet and exposing the New Green Deal as a Marxist globalist coup attempt in the name of a beautiful but impossible fairy tale of a Marxist utopia.
Why can’t CO2 control Earth’s temperature? Because the Earth’s atmosphere is a chimney not a greenhouse, taking the Sun’s heat from the surface up into space, and no matter what CO2 does in the sky the heat can never be sent back to the surface because of the iron laws of thermodynamics. Who cares what the temperature of a chimney’s exhaust is when it can never send the heat back down and cook the meal twice? The only heating on the surface is what’s caused by the burning of fossil fuels to keep us warm and operate our machinery, and once it vents its waste heat to the sky it can never return, and CO2 can’t change this. CO2 greenhouse warming is a pure hoax, originally proposed back in the 19th century, and no wonder so far the claimed global temperature increases are so small that they can only be calculated in computers with tricked-up data, yet the Marxist globalists are jumping on their Armageddon claims out to the year 2100, which are no longer science but crystal ball prognostications unworthy of real scientists.
Long Term Temperature Records Contradict GISS Temperature Record (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/30/long-term-temperature-records-contradict-giss-temperature-record/)
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change (http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html)
Monday, February 11, 2019
Sunday, February 10, 2019
Do people really think global warming is a myth? If yes, then why?
https://www.quora.com/Do-people-really-think-global-warming-is-a-myth-If-yes-then-why/answer/TL-Winslow
My reply:
Not myth, but hoax. Why? There is a deliberate attempt to confuse the heat deposited on the Earth’s surface by the Sun with heat way up in the atmosphere, which originally came from the Sun. The atmosphere’s function is to cool the Earth’s surface by taking the Sun’s heat up into space, and it can never send it back to rewarm it - that’s against the basic laws of thermodynamics. The only global warming is that caused by the burning of fossil fuels at the surface to heat us and run our engines to give us a comfortable lifestyle. This heat soon escapes into the sky and never returns. Earth’s atmosphere is not a greenhouse it’s a chimney. The confusion of heat escaping to space with the situation down where we live has to be a hoax because it’s so deliberate. Just note the lying attempts to claim that CO2 in the atmosphere sends the heat back to the surface, like a second Sun. This is totally non-physical, a fiction invented on paper by so-called climate scientists educated beyond their intelligence. That atmospheric CO2 doesn’t send heat to the surface was proved with the Mar. 20, 2015 total solar eclipse, where measurements in Svalbard saw the surface temperature drop from 8F to -7F in less than 3 minutes because only the CO2 in the sky was left to heat it and it just wasn’t able to.
Solar eclipse of March 20, 2015 - Wikipedia
http://principia-scientific.org/how-a-solar-eclipse-can-make-or-break-scientific-theories/"
My complete exposure of the GHG warming hoax is waking people up.
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change
What Is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project?
It's too bad the current brouhaha about CO2 is so narrowly focused. So what if a higher concentration in the atmosphere raises global average temps? If higher temps were accompanied by increased atmospheric moisture, it would even out around the world and turn it into a paradise planet, greening the deserts so that the teeming billions could be fed. Cold temperatures are inimical to life, not a goal of life.
Too bad, it might take a lot more CO2 than you think to really change the global weather, but not because it has any control over Earth's surface temperatures. In fact atmospheric CO2 can't melt an ice cube with its 15 micron main radiation wavelength that has a Planck radiation temperature of -80C, colder than dry ice (-78.5C).
Why do they call CO2 greenhouse gas? Because plants breathe it, and they pump it into greenhouses to help them grow and thrive. Polar regions and deserts look good in postcards, but who wants to live there. Meanwhile global pop. is zooming, so obviously the real answer is to pump more CO2 and water vapor into the atmosphere to turn the Earth into a greenhouse, turning deserts both hot and cold into lush green crop-growing regions like 35 million years ago when the avg. global temp was 88F and the CO2 level was 1K parts per million (vs. 415 PPM today). So what if we lose some desert polar regions and even some yummy coastline, the adjustments will be inconvenient but temporary, but I prefer shirt-sleeve weather to Frosty the Snowman. How many arctic animals can't adapt to a warmer climate? What animal needs to live in ice and snow and wouldn't like a vacation to Tahiti? They can lose the fat, hair or feathers.
The real question is can we make and keep the global CO2/H20 levels high enough, and for how long? Sooner or later mass global starvation will become unstoppable if world pop. keeps climbing, and this is the way to forestall it, if we act soon enough. Don't give me them Malthusian objections, give me some CO2/H20 solutions. I like a paradise Earth in the possibility window.
So, while the world is debating the horrors, extent or lack thereof of global warming caused by CO2, let's engineer the CO2/H20 solution to making the Earth a warm temperate planet from pole to pole with no deserts or ice wastelands, allowing vastly more food to be grown and turning poor nations rich. I DON'T mean a planet with wild swings between super-hot summers and super-cold winters, but one that is warmer than now everywhere, but moister and greener, with a giant network of plant life helping to avoid extremes. Since CO2 and water vapor are the keys, and the paltry amounts in the atmosphere need to be increased as soon as possible to turn deserts green and get the warming process off to a good start, but the new levels have to be maintained permanently, I'm looking to remote Antarctica (which is really a sea) as the most promising source for unlimited CO2 and water vapor generation, given that noxious emissions (sulfur dioxide, etc.) can be controlled.
This blog is for posting news on the world climate situation, scientific and political, along with my own articles. I'm sure it will start out with hardly any interest or followers, but I'm hoping that it will attract the smartest people eventually and in the end I hope for a global consensus that if it can be done it must be done.
So what is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project? My working idea is that an international effort to reactivate as many volcanoes in Antarctica as possible in an ideal location for distributing the CO2/H20 will produce the best and most cost-effective results. Sorry, one-worlders, it won't give you a license to override and control any country's economy, but if your country is suffering from lack of food you will be too busy expanding farming to care. Hence until I think of or hear about a better way to increase world CO2/H20 levels, this is my pet project. If you are a scientist, please climb aboard my AVP Express and let's make it happen.
It Would Be Funny If It Were's So Sad
It would be funny it weren't so sad, but when the scientists say "greenhouse gas" they are using a malaprop. It should be greenhouse GLASS, because that's why a greenhouse stays warm, by glass walls stopping convection of air and trapping heat. Yes, CO2 is pumped into greenhouses, but not for heating purposes, only to help plants BREATHE. So the whole sucker's game of "greenhouse gas" must truly be for the purpose of stopping more vegetation from growing and feeding the teeming billions. Is that their true goal? Another blip on the horizon is the promise of melting permafrost releasing gigantic amounts of CO2 from the Arctic not Antarctic sector. Let's hope we at least get some more good CO2 that way.
Jan. 14, 2011. Good article on CO2 levels and global temps 30-40 million years ago
Aug. 31, 2011. Giant pipe and balloon to pump water into the sky in climate experiment
May 31, 2013. Scientists find that higher CO2 levels green arid regions
Mar. 30, 2015. Higher atmospheric CO2 levels causing boom in vegetation
Aug. 2015. 'Unprecedented' volcanic eruption released enough water vapor to heat Earth: report
Aug. 15, 2017. Scientists find 91 new volcanoes miles beneath Antarctica's thick ice sheet
How Much CO2 Do Volcanoes Emit?
Will a major volcanic eruption fix climate change? - James Matkin
Part of the heat is coming from beneath our feet
Did any volcanoes erupt in 2020?
T.L. Winslow (TLW, the Historyscoper (tm)
My Blog List
-
We’re all Doomed. Yawn - Almost as surprising as the downpour’s intensity was the rush by agencies in this space to conclude it was caused by the bogeyman apparently driving all na...1 hour ago
-
Skeptical Science New Research for Week #47 2024 - Open access notables *Projected increase in the frequency of extremely active Atlantic hurricane seasons, *Lopez et al., *Science Advances:* *Future chan...6 hours ago
-
Fish Farming Industry is Using ‘Misleading’ Figures to Downplay its Role in Overfishing, New Research Finds - Aquaculture is the world’s fastest growing food sector – one that proponents have long argued can help conserve wild fisheries. The argument goes that fa...11 hours ago
-
Scientific American Ignored Years of Editor Laura Helmuth’s Appalling Conduct, Then Scalped Her After I Circulated Her Own Tweets - Little did I realize that a post I threw up on X would cause Scientific American to shove editor Laura Helmut out the door for hateful post-election commen...14 hours ago
-
Digging below the surface: Hidden risks for ground-nesting bees - \We should have done this decades ago. Yet here we are and in need of a mandate that protects insects in our agriculture. Alternate strategies need to ...19 hours ago
-
Operationalizing Climate Science - There is a need to make climate science more agile and more responsive, and that means moving (some of it) from research to operations. The post Operatio...4 days ago
-
The climate case of the century - by Lucas Bergkamp On the 12th of November, the Hague Court of Appeal ruled in the “climate case of the century” that Milieudefensie (“FoE”) filed against S...1 week ago
-
Death Valley Temperatures, Part 3: Twelve Years of July Daily Tmax Estimates and the 134 deg. F Record - In Part 1 I claimed that using stations surrounding Death Valley is a good way to “fact check” warm season high temperatures (Tmax) at the Death Valley sta...1 week ago
-
-
How Was Sustainable Development Introduced - The lynchpin of U.N. Agenda 2030, originally U.N. Agenda 21, is Sustainable Development (SD) with its 17 SD goals established by the United Nations’ global...7 months ago
-
-
Who really discovered DNA's structure? Five people. - Tuesday 28th February marks the 70th anniversary of – in my view – the most important day in the entire history of science. On a fine Saturda...1 year ago
-
-
The last 10 years are the hottest ever, yet deniers are still in denial - *Summary: *Despite three years of La Nina, 2022 was the* sixth hottest year *on record. The last decade was the hottest decade on record. As you all know...1 year ago
-
Rising CO2 levels reduce the nutritional value of food. - In 1998 a mathematics graduate, Irakli Loladze, was in a biology laboratory at Arizona State University when he observed an experiment where a test tube ...2 years ago
-
First skull of Homo Naledi unearthed - https://www.science.org/content/article/first-child-s-skull-homo-naledi-unveiled2 years ago
-
Fraud Detection and the Presidential Election - Since the recent presidential election, I have seen a number of claims about supposed election fraud. The Trump campaign and allies have filed a number of ...4 years ago
-
-
By: John O'Sullivan - Andy, yes that's our old FB page. We have been using the one found in the link in the article since 2016.5 years ago
-
Adjust contrast of a pdf free - Closer to the eye of the shooter, this is because Preview is quite literally applying a filter to each individual page of the PDF you are saving. the proce...7 years ago
-
Dr. Pielke Jr. mocks new claim: ‘A magic force field’ is now preventing land-falling hurricanes? – Warmists scramble to explain lack of extreme weather - Background: Roger Pielke Jr. wrote last month in the WSJ, “There is scant evidence to indicate that hurricanes, floods, tornadoes or drought have become mo...7 years ago
-
Court Voids Obama Administration’s Federal Fracking Regulations - In a setback for the Obama administration’s effort to limit fracking on public lands, a federal judge struck down new regulations requiring companies to...8 years ago
-
Climate Change Impacts - As environmental change influences transportation, it will be paramount to see how transportation base may be affected over the short- and long haul. Thi...10 years ago
-
-
-
代理店募集をして販路を拡大 - 自社で魅力的なサービスや商品を展開している場合は、販路を拡大する方法を考えることが多いです。販路を拡大する方法としてはいくつかあり、サイトを作成して、商品の魅力をアピールしたり、通信販売をするなどは効果的です。もしくは、 […]11 years ago
-
Last time CO2 was this high, our ancestors were using stone tools - Caught this in yesterday's SMH: Carbon dioxide concentrations in the Earth's atmosphere are on the cusp of reaching 400 parts per million for the first tim...11 years ago
-
Cow Farts causing Global Warming!? - Scientists and farmers around the world are debating a very serious subject at the moment. You may not know it, but cows are actually one of the rudest an...15 years ago
-
Green Printing - Recyled Paper vs. E-Paper - One kind of industry rarely discussed among environmental movements is the paper business. It seems like such an obvious industry – paper is made from tre...16 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-