Climate Change Killed Your Pets
-
if people’s dogs started dying, maybe then they would sit up and take
notice.
3 hours ago
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Saturday, March 30, 2019
Friday, March 29, 2019
Thursday, March 28, 2019
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Monday, March 25, 2019
Sunday, March 24, 2019
Saturday, March 23, 2019
Friday, March 22, 2019
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Saturday, March 16, 2019
Friday, March 15, 2019
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
Monday, March 11, 2019
What is the effect on global temperature of an increase of 0.01% Co2 (100ppm) in the atmosphere. What is the physical process that allows this extra CO2 to have such an effect? Is it radiation absorption?
Sunday, March 10, 2019
Saturday, March 9, 2019
Friday, March 8, 2019
Thursday, March 7, 2019
What is the real source of global warming?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-real-source-of-global-warming
My reply:
The one and only source of global warming of the Earth is the SUN. Nothing else heats the Earth’s surface, except for an insignificant amount of geothermal energy. The atmosphere can’t heat the surface of the Earth, only cool it at a certain speed and keeping it within livable limits between revolutions. Yes, CO2 absorbs IR from the surface, but that only means it’s helping cool the surface too. The gigantic hoax being peddled by so-called climate scientists is that this heat can be piped back to the surface in a useful form in violation of the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. Sorry, these laws trump their fantastic Byzantine mathematical contraptions that are little more than elaborate sleight of hand designed to fool science laymen, which most people are. A trump card wins the hand no matter what it’s composed of, and one doesn’t have to be a card shark to know that. Smoke and heat from a chimney rise slowly to space and dump their heat, and can never send it back down to cool the meal twice. The Earth’s atmosphere is a gigantic chimney, not a greenhouse. Its sheer mass is what acts as a thermal blanket, because anything with mass takes time to heat and cool, and the presence of a trace amount of the gas we breathe out doesn’t have any special effect anywhere, much less control the climate.
Read my devastating essay listed on my profile that nobody has or can answer and see how fundamental physics applied correctly makes the CO2 greenhouse warming theory into junk science whose days are numbered as more people wake up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlsJ1o3fVc
http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html
My reply:
The one and only source of global warming of the Earth is the SUN. Nothing else heats the Earth’s surface, except for an insignificant amount of geothermal energy. The atmosphere can’t heat the surface of the Earth, only cool it at a certain speed and keeping it within livable limits between revolutions. Yes, CO2 absorbs IR from the surface, but that only means it’s helping cool the surface too. The gigantic hoax being peddled by so-called climate scientists is that this heat can be piped back to the surface in a useful form in violation of the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics. Sorry, these laws trump their fantastic Byzantine mathematical contraptions that are little more than elaborate sleight of hand designed to fool science laymen, which most people are. A trump card wins the hand no matter what it’s composed of, and one doesn’t have to be a card shark to know that. Smoke and heat from a chimney rise slowly to space and dump their heat, and can never send it back down to cool the meal twice. The Earth’s atmosphere is a gigantic chimney, not a greenhouse. Its sheer mass is what acts as a thermal blanket, because anything with mass takes time to heat and cool, and the presence of a trace amount of the gas we breathe out doesn’t have any special effect anywhere, much less control the climate.
Read my devastating essay listed on my profile that nobody has or can answer and see how fundamental physics applied correctly makes the CO2 greenhouse warming theory into junk science whose days are numbered as more people wake up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlsJ1o3fVc
http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html
I thought science weighed both sides of a subject so Why are there no studies paid for by the government against climate change?
https://www.quora.com/I-thought-science-weighed-both-sides-of-a-subject-so-Why-are-there-no-studies-paid-for-by-the-government-against-climate-change
My reply:
For decades the ranks of so-called climate scientists have been virtually 100% yes-men in lock step, never questioning the basic hoax that CO2 warms the Earth’s surface, but instead trying to prove it, not with physics, which they know disproves it, but with statistics, which they can rig. As Mark Twain said, there’s lies, damned lies, and statistics. No wonder that major govt. orgs. filled with climate scientists have resorted to data tempering, making the past temperature record disappear and a fake record appear that precisely fits the CO2 level in the atmosphere like magic. It’s a super scandal that will one day fall into the dustbin of history.
It all started with Canadian globalist Marxist Maurice Strong and the U.N., and went bigtime with James A. Hansen in 1988, who worked closely with NASA and NOAA, hijacking the science. Ever since no really independent thinker can get a job with the but must support themselves somehow without all those cushy salaries, benefits, perks, and retirements. Read about it in my climate historyscope and weep. One brave critic is Tony Heller of Colo., who resorted to YouTube to reach the masses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoaLEDgeR1c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwjYkYCXnU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlsJ1o3fVc
Here’s one climate scientist who lived through it and summarized it:
"The AGW climate scare of the last 30 years did not come to the forefront from individual scientists beginning to coalesce around the idea that rising levels of CO2 might pose a serious future climate threat to society. This threat was, by contrast, imposed upon the world from ‘above’ by the coming together of globally influential politicians, environmentalists, internationalists, etc. who knew little about climate but saw great political opportunities by using the rising CO2 levels as a scare tactic in order to exercise control over them. People respond best out of fear. But lasting response to fear must have a firm basis in truth. The AGW scare does not." - William M. Gray (1929-2016)
The Physical Flaws of the Global Warming Theory and Deep Ocean Circulation Changes as the Primary Climate Driver
Never fear, Pres. Trump’s admin. is currently planning a new govt.-funded study not run by the CO2 greenhouse hoaxer scientists, but by skeptics who have a healthy independent stance. Of course the hoaxers don’t want you to read it, but this time they might lose, let’s hope, else the nightmare Green New Deal threatens to extinguish Western civilization as we know it.
Too bad, most people aren’t scientists and can’t even do trig. If you have a flair for physics, read my essay that devastates the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever; it’s listed on my profile.
My reply:
For decades the ranks of so-called climate scientists have been virtually 100% yes-men in lock step, never questioning the basic hoax that CO2 warms the Earth’s surface, but instead trying to prove it, not with physics, which they know disproves it, but with statistics, which they can rig. As Mark Twain said, there’s lies, damned lies, and statistics. No wonder that major govt. orgs. filled with climate scientists have resorted to data tempering, making the past temperature record disappear and a fake record appear that precisely fits the CO2 level in the atmosphere like magic. It’s a super scandal that will one day fall into the dustbin of history.
It all started with Canadian globalist Marxist Maurice Strong and the U.N., and went bigtime with James A. Hansen in 1988, who worked closely with NASA and NOAA, hijacking the science. Ever since no really independent thinker can get a job with the but must support themselves somehow without all those cushy salaries, benefits, perks, and retirements. Read about it in my climate historyscope and weep. One brave critic is Tony Heller of Colo., who resorted to YouTube to reach the masses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoaLEDgeR1c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RwjYkYCXnU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFlsJ1o3fVc
Here’s one climate scientist who lived through it and summarized it:
"The AGW climate scare of the last 30 years did not come to the forefront from individual scientists beginning to coalesce around the idea that rising levels of CO2 might pose a serious future climate threat to society. This threat was, by contrast, imposed upon the world from ‘above’ by the coming together of globally influential politicians, environmentalists, internationalists, etc. who knew little about climate but saw great political opportunities by using the rising CO2 levels as a scare tactic in order to exercise control over them. People respond best out of fear. But lasting response to fear must have a firm basis in truth. The AGW scare does not." - William M. Gray (1929-2016)
The Physical Flaws of the Global Warming Theory and Deep Ocean Circulation Changes as the Primary Climate Driver
Never fear, Pres. Trump’s admin. is currently planning a new govt.-funded study not run by the CO2 greenhouse hoaxer scientists, but by skeptics who have a healthy independent stance. Of course the hoaxers don’t want you to read it, but this time they might lose, let’s hope, else the nightmare Green New Deal threatens to extinguish Western civilization as we know it.
Too bad, most people aren’t scientists and can’t even do trig. If you have a flair for physics, read my essay that devastates the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever; it’s listed on my profile.
Wednesday, March 6, 2019
Tuesday, March 5, 2019
Monday, March 4, 2019
Should a climate scientist who suspects that global warming is not happening be allowed to continue to do research?
https://www.quora.com/Should-a-climate-scientist-who-suspects-that-global-warming-is-not-happening-be-allowed-to-continue-to-do-research
My reply:
This is a loaded question, because everybody knows that any scientist who is skeptical of the official explanation of global warming is not only denied research funds but driven out of their academic positions and reduced to publishing their research on their own blogs and the few independent scientific sites, which the pro-AGW scientists snub, ostracize, and suppress. So the issue is not open for debate like this question pretends, even though the straight answer would be yes if the words “to continue” were omitted. The climate change industry is ballooning into a multi-billion-dollar industry, meaning that those who have their noses in the pig trough have no reason to rock the boat, and corruption is inescapable.
Scientist Confesses: "Global Warming a $22 Billion Scam" (https://www.newsmax.com/Finance/MKTNews/Global-Warming-climate-change/2014/11/17/id/607827/)
Climate Change: The Hoax That Costs Us $4 Billion a Day (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/08/08/climate-change-the-hoax-that-costs-us-4-billion-a-day/)
Too bad, the truth still means something to some scientists, and a few brave scientists work outside the pig trough, regularly coming up with evidence of data tampering and fraud by mainline govt. orgs. such as NOAA and NASA despite the ease with which they could get pig trough jobs and join the herd. One prominent and prolific climate skeptic is geologist Tony Heller of Colo.:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqZGgaZaXig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0l3tymEagc
Many other climate skeptics are retired scientists with stellar records, but there is everything in a spectrum down to serious amateurs. They have been regularly criticizing trough scientists and their papers, finding plenty of things to criticize, and generally creating a suspicion of a conspiracy by the trough scientists to reinforce each others’ conclusions to keep the funding coming in along with little if any evidence of a robust spectrum of views and support for independent thought. In short, more like an official established religion than science, like in the days of the Roman Catholic Church and Galileo. Big Oil is now funding the pro-
AGW scientists because they found that there’s trillions to make from alternative energy.
https://principia-scientific.org/big-oil-fuels-the-climate-campaign/ (https://principia-scientific.org/big-oil-fuels-the-climate-campaign/)
I personally know from fundamental physics that CO2 has been framed as capable of controlling Earth’s surface temperatures, and that the gigantic edifice of papers built on the CO2 greenhouse warming hoax are a house of cards that will not stand the test of time.
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change (http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html)
Want to see the big picture, not just one side? Here’s my free list of blogs being published on all sides of the issue, showing the robust debate on the Internet by the independents, and the yes-man culture on the trough sites.
TLW's Climate Blog List (http://www.historyscoper.com/climateblogs.html)
After the announcement of the Green New Deal and its bald Marxist globalist demands for Western capitalism to dismantle itself in favor of a Marxist utopia that’s certain to become a nightmare New Dark Ages, it all reminds me of Pres. George Washington’s observation: "Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder."And Pres. Dwight D. Eisenhower’s observation:
"Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present - and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific/technological elite."
Sunday, March 3, 2019
Why did AOC say that the world is going to end in 12 years from climate change?
https://www.quora.com/Why-did-AOC-say-that-the-world-is-going-to-end-in-12-years-from-climate-change
Yes, AOC’s opposition jumped to conclusions about her Jan. 21, 2019 tweet, failing to appreciate that she just attended a memorial for MLK Jr., and was referring to his famous statement:
"We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.”
Of course the CO2 greenhouse warming colossus already warned that 2030 is the last chance to sharply cut CO2 emissions without leading to an apocalypse:
Scientists say Ocasio-Cortez’s dire climate warning is spot on
The end end of the world belief isn’t her idea. On July 27, 2018 American environmentalist Jim Bendell published a paper claiming the inevitability of near-term (10 years) social collapse due to climate chaos, becoming a hit with 100K+ page views, causing readers to go into depression and seek therapy. AOC was probably echoing that feeling among the youth without having read it (or much else, either).
The Climate Change Paper So Depressing It's Sending People to Therapy
Too bad, CO2 greenhouse warming is a hoax, and there is no looming Armageddon from CO2 emissions alone. CO2 is a good clean green gas that is the basis of all plant life and hence our lives, and burning fossil fuels is the main way to keep ourselves warm and operate machinery to give us a comfortable lifestyle until the arrival of universal nuclear power. More likely is a new ice age, but by then the global Marxist U.N. colossus that hates nuclear power expects to have ruined Western capitalism so that there will be no way to keep warm with solar and wind power and untold billions will die :) Let’s hope nobody listens to them.
Yes, AOC’s opposition jumped to conclusions about her Jan. 21, 2019 tweet, failing to appreciate that she just attended a memorial for MLK Jr., and was referring to his famous statement:
"We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there is such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.”
Of course the CO2 greenhouse warming colossus already warned that 2030 is the last chance to sharply cut CO2 emissions without leading to an apocalypse:
Scientists say Ocasio-Cortez’s dire climate warning is spot on
The end end of the world belief isn’t her idea. On July 27, 2018 American environmentalist Jim Bendell published a paper claiming the inevitability of near-term (10 years) social collapse due to climate chaos, becoming a hit with 100K+ page views, causing readers to go into depression and seek therapy. AOC was probably echoing that feeling among the youth without having read it (or much else, either).
The Climate Change Paper So Depressing It's Sending People to Therapy
Too bad, CO2 greenhouse warming is a hoax, and there is no looming Armageddon from CO2 emissions alone. CO2 is a good clean green gas that is the basis of all plant life and hence our lives, and burning fossil fuels is the main way to keep ourselves warm and operate machinery to give us a comfortable lifestyle until the arrival of universal nuclear power. More likely is a new ice age, but by then the global Marxist U.N. colossus that hates nuclear power expects to have ruined Western capitalism so that there will be no way to keep warm with solar and wind power and untold billions will die :) Let’s hope nobody listens to them.
Saturday, March 2, 2019
What is the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere when it becomes saturated and adding more CO2 would have no additional effect on global warming?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-concentration-of-CO2-in-the-atmosphere-when-it-becomes-saturated-and-adding-more-CO2-would-have-no-additional-effect-on-global-warming
My reply:
Try ZERO. Despite all the degreed “climate scientists” and their inbred papers, CO2 has no effect on Earth’s surface temperatures because it’s part of the atmosphere, whose great mass creates a gravity field taking all of the Sun’s heat away from the surface to space via convection and radiation. Even if the atmosphere had zero CO2, it would keep the surface temperature within livable limits as compared to the Moon. This is what’s happening on Venus with its 90 atmospheres of pressure, and the CO2-rich atmosphere is irrelevant. The temperature profile in the sky is always lower than the surface because it contains only part of the surface’s energy, and adiabatic expansion causes it to cool as it ascends. The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax that confuses the surface where we live with the sky where we don’t, just like smoke and heat from a chimney takes the heat away from the cooking pot and can never return to cook the meal twice. Sorry, the iron laws of thermodynamics trump all the other physics involved and rule out heating of the surface by CO2 in the sky. If your forte is physics, read my devastating essay destroying the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever, listed on my profile.
http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html
My reply:
Try ZERO. Despite all the degreed “climate scientists” and their inbred papers, CO2 has no effect on Earth’s surface temperatures because it’s part of the atmosphere, whose great mass creates a gravity field taking all of the Sun’s heat away from the surface to space via convection and radiation. Even if the atmosphere had zero CO2, it would keep the surface temperature within livable limits as compared to the Moon. This is what’s happening on Venus with its 90 atmospheres of pressure, and the CO2-rich atmosphere is irrelevant. The temperature profile in the sky is always lower than the surface because it contains only part of the surface’s energy, and adiabatic expansion causes it to cool as it ascends. The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax that confuses the surface where we live with the sky where we don’t, just like smoke and heat from a chimney takes the heat away from the cooking pot and can never return to cook the meal twice. Sorry, the iron laws of thermodynamics trump all the other physics involved and rule out heating of the surface by CO2 in the sky. If your forte is physics, read my devastating essay destroying the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever, listed on my profile.
http://www.historyscoper.com/climatetlw.html
Since temperature is an intensive thermodynamic variable, isn't it meaningless to discuss climate change in terms of global temperature change?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-concentration-of-CO2-in-the-atmosphere-when-it-becomes-saturated-and-adding-more-CO2-would-have-no-additional-effect-on-global-warming
My reply:
Try ZERO. Despite all the degreed “climate scientists” and their inbred papers, CO2 has no effect on Earth’s surface temperatures because it’s part of the atmosphere, whose great mass creates a gravity field taking all of the Sun’s heat away from the surface to space via convection and radiation. Even if the atmosphere had zero CO2, it would keep the surface temperature within livable limits as compared to the Moon. This is what’s happening on Venus with its 90 atmospheres of pressure, and the CO2-rich atmosphere is irrelevant. The temperature profile in the sky is always lower than the surface because it contains only part of the surface’s energy, and adiabatic expansion causes it to cool as it ascends. The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax that confuses the surface where we live with the sky where we don’t, just like smoke and heat from a chimney takes the heat away from the cooking pot and can never return to cook the meal twice. Sorry, the iron laws of thermodynamics trump all the other physics involved and rule out heating of the surface by CO2 in the sky. If your forte is physics, read my devastating essay destroying the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever, listed on my profile.
My reply:
Try ZERO. Despite all the degreed “climate scientists” and their inbred papers, CO2 has no effect on Earth’s surface temperatures because it’s part of the atmosphere, whose great mass creates a gravity field taking all of the Sun’s heat away from the surface to space via convection and radiation. Even if the atmosphere had zero CO2, it would keep the surface temperature within livable limits as compared to the Moon. This is what’s happening on Venus with its 90 atmospheres of pressure, and the CO2-rich atmosphere is irrelevant. The temperature profile in the sky is always lower than the surface because it contains only part of the surface’s energy, and adiabatic expansion causes it to cool as it ascends. The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is a hoax that confuses the surface where we live with the sky where we don’t, just like smoke and heat from a chimney takes the heat away from the cooking pot and can never return to cook the meal twice. Sorry, the iron laws of thermodynamics trump all the other physics involved and rule out heating of the surface by CO2 in the sky. If your forte is physics, read my devastating essay destroying the CO2 greenhouse warming theory forever, listed on my profile.
AOC DESTROYED ON TWITTER: President Trump Destroys 'Green New Deal' and its Embattled Sponsor Rookie Radical Freshman Rep. AOC(D-NY) “.@realDonaldTrump on @AOC 's GREEN NEW DEAL ... " No planes. No energy. When the wind stops blowing, that's the end of your electric. Let's hurry up! Darling, darling is the wind blowing today? I would like to watch television, darling."
Friday, March 1, 2019
Is that tiny CO2 portion of the atmosphere really the control knob on global warming?
https://www.quora.com/Is-that-tiny-CO2-portion-of-the-atmosphere-really-the-control-knob-on-global-warming
My reply:
Heck no! CO2 can’t warm the Earth’s surface because of the iron laws of thermodynamics. Instead, it helps cool the surface by absorbing heat energy from it and taking it to space where it is dissipated harmlessly. Only the Sun can heat the Earth’s surface. Once heat has left the surface, it never returns. Fixating on the “heating of the atmosphere by CO2” is a hoax, because we don’t live in the atmosphere, we live on the surface. It’s like bubbles in an aquarium, which rise and never go back down. It’s like rocks at the top of a mountain, which fall and never return. It’s like smoke and heat rising from a chimney, which can never send the heat back down to cook the meal twice. The concentration of CO2 is irrelevant, and even if it were 100% it can’t become a dragon in the sky and send heat back to the surface, which is warmed by the Sun and the Sun alone. Every day pure CO2 is used in fire extinguishers, and it doesn’t absorb IR and shoot it back in our face like a flamethrower or “ping machine”. CO2 greenhouse warming is a deliberate and evil hoax, and the announcement of the Green New Deal reveals the motivation, namely, to extort trillions for the purpose of creating a global Marxist paradise that’s really a fool’s paradise. Anybody who peddles the hoax and won’t address the iron laws of thermodynamic isn’t worth listening to. Those laws will still be here a thousand years from now, and the hoaxers won’t. All they want is your wealth now.
All along fossil fuels have made our comfortable modern lifestyle possible, and only nuclear energy promises to replace them one day. Real pollutants like soot, CO, NO2, SO2, etc. are being taken care of, so leave clean green life-giving CO2 alone. The renewable (solar, wind) scam is just as big a hoax as the CO2 greenhouse warming scam.
NOW That We Know Renewables Can’t ‘Save The Planet’, Are We Really Going To Stand By And Let Them Destroy It?
If physics is your forte, read my great essay that devastates the CO2 greenhouse warming hoax forever using fundamental physics, which hasn’t been and can’t be answered, only ignored or pooh-poohed by the hoaxers. It’s listed on my profile and is free for all to read.
The Myth of a Fossil Fuel Phase-Out How we use energy is a hot topic for a warming world, and fears of pollution and resource strain have produced an arms race of energy efficiency solutions. But despite fears of shortages or threats from pollution, the planet has actually entered an era of fossil fuel abundance that shows no sign of abating.
Can you simply explain global warming in a way that I can share with others?
https://www.quora.com/Can-you-simply-explain-global-warming-in-a-way-that-I-can-share-with-others/answer/TL-Winslow
My reply:
The sun shines on to earth. Some of the heat is reflected back to space, but the atmosphere keeps some of the heat close to the earth. This is good because it allows the earth to be warm enough for humans to exist.
This is the standard explanation of global warming, and it is a lie.
What really happens? The Sun heats the Earth’s surface after some sunlight is blocked by clouds and dust in the atmosphere. Once heated, the surface begins radiating IR, some of which escapes directly to space, but most of which is absorbed by the various gases of the atmosphere including water vapor, heating it up and causing it to rise to space, where the heat is dissipated. The great mass of the atmosphere takes time to heat and cool like any material, so it can only remove so much heat at a time, keeping the surface livable. Water vapor in the sky often releases precipitation, cooling the surface even faster. It’s not the CO2 in the atmosphere but the atmosphere as a whole that acts as Earth’s blanket. CO2 is good not bad, and is being demonized for political and economic purposes. Atmospheric CO2 can double or triple and the average surface temperature won’t be affected, but plants will flourish, feeding the teeming billions. Only the Sun can set the surface temperature, subject to many complex variables science doesn’t fully understand yet.
There is no way any component of the atmosphere can send the heat back down to the surface like a dragon in the sky, and the trace component CO2 is totally irrelevant, but since it keeps steadily increasing it makes a great scapegoat, and this is the lie being spread by Green New Deal activists including a huge well-paid scientific army (including NASA and NOAA) to justify their trillion-dollar scam. Here is a new super-scam that was just announced:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/02/25/french-experts-propose-trillion-euro-eu-climate-finance-pact/
Here’s the lie being spread by NASA:
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget by NASA
My reply:
The sun shines on to earth. Some of the heat is reflected back to space, but the atmosphere keeps some of the heat close to the earth. This is good because it allows the earth to be warm enough for humans to exist.
This is the standard explanation of global warming, and it is a lie.
What really happens? The Sun heats the Earth’s surface after some sunlight is blocked by clouds and dust in the atmosphere. Once heated, the surface begins radiating IR, some of which escapes directly to space, but most of which is absorbed by the various gases of the atmosphere including water vapor, heating it up and causing it to rise to space, where the heat is dissipated. The great mass of the atmosphere takes time to heat and cool like any material, so it can only remove so much heat at a time, keeping the surface livable. Water vapor in the sky often releases precipitation, cooling the surface even faster. It’s not the CO2 in the atmosphere but the atmosphere as a whole that acts as Earth’s blanket. CO2 is good not bad, and is being demonized for political and economic purposes. Atmospheric CO2 can double or triple and the average surface temperature won’t be affected, but plants will flourish, feeding the teeming billions. Only the Sun can set the surface temperature, subject to many complex variables science doesn’t fully understand yet.
There is no way any component of the atmosphere can send the heat back down to the surface like a dragon in the sky, and the trace component CO2 is totally irrelevant, but since it keeps steadily increasing it makes a great scapegoat, and this is the lie being spread by Green New Deal activists including a huge well-paid scientific army (including NASA and NOAA) to justify their trillion-dollar scam. Here is a new super-scam that was just announced:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2019/02/25/french-experts-propose-trillion-euro-eu-climate-finance-pact/
Here’s the lie being spread by NASA:
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget by NASA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
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
-
-
UK Govt must repeal meaningless net zero targets - Britain will likely become world leader at destroying the economy and impoverishing the population6 hours ago
-
NASA to reexamine space-based solar power - Well maybe. this is one of those easy to grasp big ideas that makes space engineering look promising. some of those ideas are simply absurd, not least...9 hours ago
-
EGU2024 - An intense week of joining sessions virtually - Note: this blog post has been put together over the course of the week I followed the happenings at the conference virtually. Should recordings of the Gr...1 day ago
-
Revealed: How Development Banks Underwrote Fast Food’s Global Takeover - With its unparalleled purchasing power and exacting demands, fast food has long shaped agricultural systems in the United States, Europe, and China. But ...1 day ago
-
How we know that the sun changes the Climate. Part I: The past - by Javier Vinós Part I of a three part series. The Sun is a variable star and the amount of energy it emits varies from month to month, year to year, and c...1 day ago
-
Net Zero CO2 Emissions: A Damaging and Totally Unnecessary Goal - The goal of reaching “Net Zero” global anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide sounds overwhelmingly difficult. While humanity continues producing CO2 at...2 days 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...6 days ago
-
Much ado about acceleration - There has been a lot of commentary about perceived disagreements among climate scientists about whether climate change is, or will soon, accelerate. As w...2 weeks 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 ...1 year 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 ...3 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 2016.4 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...6 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...7 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...9 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、 […]10 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...10 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...
15 years ago -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
