The Historyscoper's Climate Watch: Scientists for climate change have many proofs. Do Anti climate change scientists have any proofs of their own?

Monday, May 27, 2019

Scientists for climate change have many proofs. Do Anti climate change scientists have any proofs of their own?

https://www.quora.com/Scientists-for-climate-change-have-many-proofs-Do-Anti-climate-change-scientists-have-any-proofs-of-their-own

https://www.quora.com/Scientists-for-climate-change-have-many-proofs-Do-Anti-climate-change-scientists-have-any-proofs-of-their-own/answer/TL-Winslow

My reply:

Scientists pushing the CO2 greenhouse warming theory have no proofs, because the theory is bogus fake science based on wilfully confusing the temperatures of the air at Earth’s surface with temperatures way up in the sky. In practice those pushing mysterious easily-doctored statistical global warming dominate the U.N. IPCC and its gigantic octopus of politicians and scientists, and can’t be reasoned with because they have closed minds and only want to get their hands on big bucks after the climate alarmist industry does their dirty work.

The CO2 greenhouse warming theory is fake science? Let’s say we have a hot air balloon filled with CO2 on the ground, and you beam IR energy at it. Let’s say that the CO2 absorbs the IR and heats up. Then what? It will become lighter than air and rise towards the sky, taking the heat energy with it, thereby cooling the Earth’s surface where we live. There could be a million or billions of such balloons and the result is just more and more cooling of the Earth’s surface as the balloons take the heat energy into the sky, cooling via the lapse rate and eventually dissipating any remaining energy in space, where it is harmless to us on the surface. This is the biggest scientific hoax since Lysenko, and it’s being pushed by globalist Marxists bent on destroying the fossil fuel energy industry and capitalism itself. Don’t buy it. You don’t have to have a degree in physics to smell a rat. Keep your wallet safe from these con artists.

There have been many publications by scientists disproving the CO2 greenhouse warming theory. If you haven’t heard of them even on Quora you might wake up that you’re being manipulated by an octopus bent on withholding vital information so they can keep pushing their fraud to get your money. Behind the scenes they’ve long been busy suppressing any scientists not backing the party line, then engaging in ad hominem attacks when they can’t be silenced. Sorry, the truth will win.

Vilifying People Who Question Global Warming Is Anti-Science | PSI Intl
Rewriting The Past At The Ministry Of Truth | PSI Intl
Report: U.S. Owes the World $1 Trillion for Carbon Emissions
Ned Ryun: Green New Deal Is "Coercive Socialism," In Other Words, Communism
‘Extinction Crisis’ Speciously Targets Free Markets
Marc Morano on Panel 5B: Battling Russia and America’s Big Green Machine

Read the truth about CO2 greenhouse warming here:

Heat Flow Science Discredits Greenhouse Gas Theory | PSI Intl
Why greenhouse Gas Warming is Physically Impossible | PSI Intl
Earth cannot heat itself by it's own radiation | PSI Intl
Back Radiation does not Create a Greenhouse Effect
Top Aussie Scientist Reveals UN IPCC Greenhouse Gas 'Errors' | PSI Intl
TLW's Two Cents Worth on Climate Change

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THSQqsYvL9o

No comments:

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