https://climateofsophistry.com/2023/09/28/a-tale-of-two-energy-budgets/
My reply:
https://climateofsophistry.com/2023/09/28/a-tale-of-two-energy-budgets/
My reply:
The flat Earth/weak Sun con game was created specifically to frame atmospheric CO2 as being needed to keep the Earth from being an ice planet, as if that proves CO2 global warming without needing more proof. You hardly ever hear a summary of CO2-driven global warming without the -18C/-20C lie, for example, from the British Geological Survey:
[[‘Greenhouse gases’ are crucial to keeping our planet at a suitable temperature for life. Without the natural greenhouse effect, the heat emitted by the Earth would simply pass outwards from the Earth’s surface into space and the Earth would have an average temperature of about -20°C.]] -
https://www.bgs.ac.uk/discovering-geology/climate-change/how-does-the-greenhouse-effect-work/
It's all irrelevant anyway because you can't just weaken the Sun's power without lowering its temperature, because it's ruled by the T^4 Planck black body law. Even they can't mess with Mother Nature and get away with it. What a big laugh when they claim that the Sun's power has not been increasing enough to account with their fake global avg. temp. (GAT) numbers.
https://www.quora.com/The-heatwave-was-made-two-degrees-Celsius-3-6F-warmer-by-climate-change-What-was-the-impact-of-this-heatwave/answer/TL-Winslow
Here's my deeper analysis of the U.N. IPCC flat Earth hoax. Like all leftists, they love to accuse opponents of what they are, so guess what they call us "climate deniers"?
http://www.historyscoper.com/howmuchdoesthesuncontributetoglobalwarming.html
The global Marxists have hijacked every scientific and academic org. to grab for the brass ring. Their weird version of climate science is a beehive of lies that takes a million words to dissect. It would be funny if it weren't so tragic, but the only real climate scientists left are those banned by the U.N. IPCC.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-examples-of-credible-scientific-resources-on-global-warming-Why-would-they-be-good-choices-for-high-school-students/answer/TL-Winslow
A doctorate in astrophysics? Big wow. Charlatans such as Kneel in the Grass What's His Name have one of those. Like I've tried to tell you before, no one needs to delve into the intricacies of climate science to disprove the U.N. IPCC's sick Victorian steampunk greenhouse gas warming hoax, just know how to count like a 5th grader.
Yes, it's an all-out attempt to deny Nature's ironclad Second Law of Thermodynamics (entropy), but it ultimately rests on a blatant denial of the First Law (energy conservation), because it relies on a sleazy carnival shell game of energy double-counting, claiming that atmospheric CO2 molecules trap and reemit surface IR cooling photons, adding to the solar photons to cause global warming, but that requires them to do it all with those IR photons before they even left! Shell game, double-counting, circular reasoning, sleazy carnival garbage. We want all that money back.
As to Nikolov-Zeller, yes, the stagnant atmosphere can be considered as a bunch of thin tubes extending from the ground to space, in each of which the Ideal Gas Law rules, where PV=nRT, or T=PV/nr, creating a temperature gradient without need for radiation or convection. It still doesn't explain the boundary conditions at the ground level, where everybody knows that hot asphalt in Phoenix on July 4 may get way higher (up to 10C higher) than the air temperature at the 5 ft. level where surface temperature measurement stations place their thermometers.
https://caas.usu.edu/weather/graphical-data/surface-temperature
The temperature drop is too large to be caused by gravity, and indeed it's caused by convection, which uses ground heat to power an atmospheric heat engine that generates all winds and storms by turning heat into work. These can be considered as Le Chatelier responses to solar radiation. Every wind or breeze uses up some solar energy irreversibly. Worse, the conversion of short wavelength solar radiation by the surface to heat (increased internal energy density) then to long wave IR increases entropy, dispersing some of the heat energy irreversibly to the heat death of the Universe, making it forever unavailable for heating or doing work, without violating the First Law. That's why every time I hear talk of an Earth-Sun balance to justify the fake greenhouse gas effect and calling on the First Law I have to restrain the urge to ROTFL.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-greenhouse-effect-Is-entropy-the-cause-of-the-greenhouse-effect/answer/TL-Winslow
https://newrealclimatescience.quora.com/
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
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)
.jpg)
