|
| ||||
| ||||
| Global Warming not caused by carbon dioxide | ||||
|
| ||||
|
Gary Novak Crunching the Numbers Absorption Spectra Explanations Oceans not Rising Future Ice Age Acid in the Oceans Context My Description of G.W. List of Issues News, Opinions, More The Cause of Ice Ages and Present Climate How can all those Review: Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth Outside Links: News Collection Video: Another DVD— Book Senate Floor Speech Book Review The Deniers |
The Science of Global Warming
History of AGW Fraud. For most of the twentieth century, scientists were unconcerned about global warming, because carbon dioxide saturates and cannot do more heating. Whatever CO2 did in the past, adding more CO2 cannot change anything. But then global warming was dug up by environmentalists, and rationalizers took another look at the science and said, maybe saturation does not occur at the top of the atmosphere. As time went on, every element of the science was contrived to promote global warming alarmism. Incongruous Atmosphere. The temperature of the atmosphere is not determined by the amount of heat entering it nor by the amount of heat leaving it but by an equilibrium between the two which nature establishes and humans cannot comprehend. Physics Contrived. Equations for calculating heat in the atmosphere do not apply for saturation. But to pretend otherwise, a fudge factor was contrived for fake calculations. The so-called settled science is nothing but a fudge factor. Temperature Measurements Falsified. After all the claims of unquestionable science, the end result is based on one point only—thermometer measurements—because there is no physics which can resolve the complexities. Climategate files show what had already been established by critics: The temperature increase is fake. Satellite measurements show very little temperature increase (due to warming oceans, not CO2), but the satellite data was adjusted to fit the fake thermometer data. Fake Temperature Measurements Second Climategate: An investigation shows NCDC and GISS faking temperature measurements to show an artificial increase. No Scientifically Valid Mechanism for CO2 Creating Global Warming. CO2 saturates absorbing the limited radiation available to it in about ten meters (Heinz Hug). An increase in CO2 only shortens the distance, which is not an increase in temperature. Since scientists know this, a fake mechanism is contrived for the top of the troposphere based on thin spectrum shoulders. But again, an increase in CO2 only shortens the distance radiation travels, which does nothing significant to increase the temperature. And there is no explanation of how the supposed temperature increase at the top of the troposphere, which is very cold, can produce heat at ground level. And since this is also known, some climatologists revert back to the near-earth analysis. They can't figure out where it is happening, but it has to be happening, god said so. Faulty Logic: Media types keep saying the physics is beyond question: More CO2 will block more radiation. Wrong. Radiation goes around greenhouse gasses like a river, not through them like a window. It's like a River, not a Window Disputed Zone. Only a miniscule fraction of the CO2 is in question to the increase in heat, as shown in the yellow zone below. And it is up high in the atmosphere, not at ground level. No one has suggested a mechanism for getting heat at the top of the troposphere, which is cold, to ground level. Heat cannot move from cold to warm. See The Disputed Area.  If the atmosphere were entirely nitrogen and oxygen with no so-called greenhouse gasses, the top of the troposphere would be slightly colder, and the near-surface would be almost the same temperature, because radiation goes around the greenhouse gasses. Even the first 10% of the greenhouse gasses did not create much heat, because the atmosphere functions like a river, not a window. Nature shows that greenhouse gasses do nothing, because precipitation has been increasing, and any heating of the atmosphere due to greenhouse gasses would have decreased precipitation. Increased snow and ice over the centers of Antarctica and Greenland have caused oceans to stop rising over the past few years. CO2 does not accumulate for centuries. The claim is that half of the CO2 humans put in the air goes into the oceans. That's 4.3 GTC/Y. In 1970, humans produced 4.3 GTC/Y. Before 1970, oceans should have been removing more than humans were adding. It's oceans warming and releasing more that has been causing the recent increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. See 30% Fraud. Decades ago, scientists agreed that since greenhouse gas absorptions are saturated in the atmosphere, adding more such gasses would be irrelevant. The only thing that has changed since is political motives driving scientific fraud.
There was 5 times as much CO2 in the air during the dinosaur years, and 20 times as much before that, because oceans absorb CO2 and tie it up as calcium carbonate in coral reefs gradually forming limestone. There is now 1/3 as much CO2 in the air as plants need to grow on. Words Thirty one thousand scientists signed a petition saying humans are not the cause of global warming. External Link Climate is controlled by the oceans, not the atmosphere.The oceans have 1,000 times more heat capacity than the atmosphere. It means oceans can heat the air far more than air can heat the oceans. And it means carbon dioxide is not heating the oceans. Solar and geothermal energy heat the oceans. Arctic ice melt has been going back and forth from fast melt to recovery, while CO2 is as constant as the clock. Ocean currents melt arctic ice, not CO2 effects. The Cause of Ice Ages Hansen and the modelers forgot to take into account oceans, which control about 98% of climate variation. The essence of the error (fraud) is in claiming some radiation goes around the center of absorption peaks for CO2 but gets picked up on the shoulders of the peaks. Even the shoulders absorb in such a short distance that increasing the CO2 only shortens a short distance. Cooling of the planet is caused by long wave infrared radiation which goes around the shoulders as well as the peaks. Geo-engineering is like throwing beer bottles in the ditch, but on a larger scale. Al Gore, who has never studied an iota of science in his life, and the IPCC acquired the Nobel peace prize. Peace is putting an end to scientific dispute through authoritative decree. News Flash: Twenty Year Cool-DownMainstream media ignores it. Japanese government advisory panel says humans are not the cause. Mainstream media ignores it. A massive cool-down in the north may have triggered the next ice age in 2008. What's been happening is that warm Pacific ocean water has been flowing into the Arctic and melting ice, which cools the whole planet a little. This caused a recent temperature decrease over the past two years. Then it stops, and Arctic ice reforms, while the Pacific Ocean heats back up, which is happening now (August, 2009). Greenhouse gasses do what they do in such a short distance, at such a low concentration, that the first 1-10% does almost all that they do, and adding more such gasses cannot create more heat in any significant way. 10% Math A major reason why greenhouse gasses do not create significant global warming is because the relevant radiation only interacts with the earth within the first few meters (10 meters for CO2). Above that, the radiation is doing everything it does in all directions equally, which does not change the amount of heat in the atmosphere. At the top, another zone of interaction exists creating two narrow zones of relevance as shown here. More  Radiation is the limiting factor. That means it all gets used up. You can't get more heat without more radiation. Greenhouse gasses do not increase the radiation. Water vapor shows that greenhouse gasses are nothing. It is 100 times more of a greenhouse gas than CO2, and it varies immensely due to changes in ocean surface temperatures. The warm ocean water of an El Nino causes floods; the cold of an El Nina causes droughts. The opposite of greenhouse effect occurs: The increased water vapor cools by evaporation instead of heats by greenhouse effect. Water Vapor The planet cools through low frequency infrared radiation (below the wavelength absorbed by "greenhouse gasses"); and therefore greenhouse gasses do not reduce the rate of cool-down. An erroneous Stephan-Boltzmann constant and its misapplication to gasses allows fakes to pretend that significant radiation goes through greenhouse gasses. There is no theoretical basis for the claims. Climate is too complex for a theory. Instead, old thermometer measurements were used, adjusting and manipulating to get a 0.6°C temperature increase, and then a mass of half-baked computer equations were used to predict an additional increase.
Here's the other view: My Description of Global Warming Oceans control the climate, not greenhouse gasses. Temperature is irrelevant; only precipitation matters, and it has been increasing due to warmer oceans. Nothing could be better for mankind and the planet than what has been occurring over the past few decades. The warm weather and increase in precipitation is nothing but good for humans and all life forms. The Oceans have stopped rising after increasing for tens of thousands of years, because snow is accumulating on 90% of Antarctica due to increased precipitation everywhere as a result of warmer ocean water. However, there was a major heat loss around the Arctic over the past 18 months, and it is too early to say what that will amount to. The media saying the opposite is nothing but a mockery of all science involved. Frauds in science will do some fake number juggling and proclaim doom everywhere. It is a total contempt for the evidence and scientific truth. The anthill model is the goal. The frauds don't care whether carbon dioxide exists, because it's nothing but a means to an end—the anthill model.
The fraud by officials is spelled out and documented for Congress by Monckton - 3.5M pdf. The 41% Fraud: Supposedly, the surface of the earth gives off its energy as 41% radiation and the rest as conduction and evaporation. 41% is about how much radiation an incandescent light bulb gives off at 3,000°C, not what a cold basement gives off at 15°C. A fraudulent Stephan-Boltzmann constant rationalizes the over-emission of radiation. Greens want the nuclear reactors shut down, because they can't be managed in a responsible way. You don't have to be nearly as responsible to remove carbon dioxide from the air as to run a nuclear reactor. The Coal Fraud: Coal is supposedly the black death—the purpose of cap-and-trade. But it's replacement, natural gas, is worse as a greenhouse gas emitter, because it emits methane into the air, which is 23 times as strong of a greenhouse gas as CO2. At least 5% of natural gas is lost into the air, and probably much more in the process of reducing the temperature of shipping containers to cryogenic levels through boil-off. 5% x 23 = 115%. That means more than doubling the greenhouse gas problem through natural gas. If a gunman in a school shoots 30% fewer people it's not called a victory, so how could a 30% reduction in the black death be the answer to everything. Cap and Trade is what Enron did to California. The state spent $20 billion trying to keep the electricity running. Now the government is going to do the same thing to everyone as Enron did to California through cap-and-trade. Why Wrong? It's how power is mongered. There is nothing constructive that can be done with power. So mongering power requires a war against truth and justice. The first losers are the most vulnerable persons. So mongering power always results in a war against the lower classes, which becomes chronic and habitual. Cap-and-trade is nothing but a war against the lower classes. Totalitarian Overwhelm Important Fact: Oceans overwhelm all other influences on climate. Oceans, being 70% of the earth's surface, are the climate regulators influencing air temperature, humidity and precipitation. Yet the IPCC did not account for the effects of oceans, because they had no data or theory to go by, and they couldn't handle that much complexity. The total fraud of the IPCC is demonstrated by this fact. When an El Nino shows up in the Pacific Ocean as a hot water mass, Central and South America get flooded due to increased evaporation from the ocean. Now (some time back), an El Nina is in the Pacific as a cold water mass, and it is creating cold weather and droughts. Scientists don't know what creates El Ninos and El Ninas. So they don't have a clue as to what's controlling the climate. Ice Ages The air does not heat the oceans; the oceans heat the air; because the oceans have a thousand times as much heat capacity as the atmosphere. And the claimed 0.6°C increase in atmospheric temperature is not much heat to be adding to anything, while satellites show less temperature increase, unless Hansen is screwing around with the numbers as usual. Thermometer Fraud Greenhouse gasses cannot trap more heat, because they already trap all they can. Up in the stratosphere and higher, they can trap a slight amount more, but the stratosphere does not influence the lower atmosphere; and the quantities are miniscule beyond relevance. Trapping Heat Volcanoes put 2.3% as much CO2 into the air as humans every year (gov source). If CO2 could accumulate, the volcanic amount in 43 years would equal the human amount for one year. Volcanoes have been doing it for 5 billion years, and humans for only 150 years. The supposed total amount of human accumulation (240 GT) is put into the atmosphere by volcanoes every 1,200 years. See Delicate Balance Fraud Where does the volcanic CO2 go, if the human amount accumulates? If it is acidifying the oceans, why didn't volcanoes acidify the oceans many times over? See Acid in the Ocean Fraud Nature puts 26 times as much CO2 in the air through decay and respiration as humans do through energy sources.
The fraud of carbon dioxide agitators is visible in the shutting down of coal plants. Very little reduction in CO2 results, while dependence upon foreign energy increases. Why not shut down the airlines? People need heat and electricity more than they need to fly. It's not about protecting the environment; it's a war against the lower classes. Replacing coal with imported natural gas: Methane is 23 times as strong of a so-called greenhouse gas as CO2. If 5% is boiled off to cool cryogenic containers during shipping, that's 0.05 x 23 = 115% plus the original 100% = 215% x 66% as much CO2 in a power plant = 142% as much of a supposed greenhouse effect from shipped natural gas as from using coal to generate electricity. And the ship would burn about 20-50% as much energy as the methane being shipped. That's more kids and pets dying from shipped natural gas than burning coal would produce. But the whole greenhouse argument is fraud, and it doesn't make diddly what source of energy is used.Not the least absurdity is opposition to the warmer temperatures and increased rainfall which are infinitely better than the cold that is beginning to descend upon the planet. Most people don't realize that this subject is not about science. The propagandists were doing the same thing before carbon dioxide came along. They were using ozone and other environmental concerns as a pretext for lowering the population of the globe to one tenth. Carbon dioxide brought their cause out of obscurity. So they don't care what the science is; and in fact, they refuse to allow scientific evidence to interfere with their agenda—and this includes a large number of scientists.
How could all of those scientists be wrong? They get paid to be wrong through billions of dollars from the government; and they are not a consensus. There is a shortage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere for plant growth, because alkaline oceans absorb it and only release a small amount (because salt drives some out). The atmosphere is only 0.04% CO2. When an ice age begins, global Warming occurs exactly as it is doing now. Heated oceans cause increased evaporation followed by precipitation. Eventually, increased snowfall will reflect away solar energy and trigger a cool-down. Surface Temperatures over 800,000 Years
The real cause of global warming could be an increase in solar energy, as critics generally claim. Solar energy would accumulate in the oceans while dissipating more rapidly from the atmosphere. But there is evidence that solar energy controls short term effects, while long term effects are due to variations in heat from the earth's core. Ice ages are caused by oceans heating, which appears to result from increased heat from inside the earth. The primary evidence is the exact cycling of ice ages. Environmental factors would not be so precise. Also, some of the ocean heat is deep down, while warm water tends to rise, not sink. The earth's core is fluid, in constant motion and heterogeneous, which adds up to variations in heat escaping to the surface. (Science Article) Volcanoes Show how Sunshine Heats Oceans — external link Ice over oceans is melting much faster than expected. The reason is because the oceans are heating, not the atmosphere. Heated oceans can melt ice rapidly, while heated air cannot. Ninety percent of ice is below the surface—exposed to water, not air—and water has the heat capacity needed for melting. The recent cool-down is consistent with oceans heating, because ocean currents are highly erratic and unexplainable, as an El Nino demonstrates, and they create odd microclimates in the atmosphere.
Oceans are Warming Oceans are too complex and heterogeneous to determine averages, but nature shows the net effect. There are two points of evidence indicating that oceans are warming: One is that precipitation is increasing, which means increased evaporation from warmer oceans; and the other is that ice is melting over oceans more than over land. The oceans have a heat capacity 1,000 times that of the atmosphere. This means the air cannot easily heat the oceans, but oceans can easily heat the air. The atmosphere would have to heat a lot, before it could heat the oceans a little; yet the opposite is occurring. The atmosphere is only said to have warmed 0.6°C in recent times. The ice which is suspended over the oceans is 90% submerged. To melt it, the water has to provide the heat, not the air. Not only is the water surrounding 90% of the ice, but water has the heat capacity needed to transfer a large amount of heat, while air has little heat capacity. Ice is obviously melting rapidly at both north and south poles, but primarily over oceans. In localized areas, there is warming over land which is melting showpiece glaciers and northern tundra. But where it really matters, over the Antarctica land mass, ice is thickening. Over Greenland, both thickening and thinning of ice is occurring, but Greenland is small, and it's climate is influenced by an ocean current called the Gulf Stream. (Over the past couple of years, the whole southern hemisphere has been cooling due to ocean currents shifting. Antarctic ice is re-accumulating, even over oceans around Antarctica, while the Arctic is melting rapidly.) The ultimate test of whether the oceans or atmosphere is heating more is precipitation, and it is increasing. If the atmosphere were heating more than the oceans, there would be less precipitation, because warmer air holds more moisture. If the oceans are heating more than the air, more precipitation occurs, because evaporation increases, while there is less change in the amount of moisture the air will hold. If the atmosphere heats more than the oceans, precipitation decreases. Because of the increase in precipitation, ice is thickening over land at Antarctica and Greenland, as shown by satellites which use radar to measure thickness of ice. (Details and references are on Oceans Page). Recently, Arctic ice has been rapidly melting, but this is submerged ice melting due to warm ocean water flowing over the Bering Strait. Here's a related oddity. Scientists cannot figure out why the Great Lakes are losing so much water. An indication is the large amount of snowfall around them during the winters. The Lakes are apparently heating up just as the oceans are, and they are evaporating away. Ocean levels are increasing due to expansion from warming, but the increase over the past four years is twice as much as scientists can account for. This is another indication of the heat coming from the earth's core, which would cause more heat to accumulate in the deep oceans than scientists are aware of. Deep Ocean Heat Measured - (external) Ice Ages The present global warming is part of a natural ice age cycle. It's what always happens at the beginning of an ice age. Ice ages cycle at precise 100 thousand year intervals. The next one is scheduled to begin now. The temperature reversal will begin between 100 and 200 years from now. The time can be determined from the amount of precipitation. Cold temperatures alone cannot create an ice age. There has to be more snow than can melt during the summer to create an accumulation of ice. There is not enough moisture in the air at this time to do that. But it's increasing. There should be enough precipitation in a century or two to produce more snow than can melt during the summers in low enough latitudes to reflect away enough solar energy to trigger an irreversible cool-down. The amount of moisture in the air is increasing because oceans are warming. The warming of oceans is observable in the amount of ice melting at the poles. Measurement of long term trends show ocean temperatures to be peaking at a level where ice age reversals begin. Such precise cycling of temperatures cannot be caused by environmental factors such as greenhouse gases, because there would be too many variations. The variations would be like trying to use the clouds for a calendar. The cause of ice ages must be some force which overrides environmental influences. Two possible sources are cyclic variation in solar energy and motion of a hot spot in the earth's core. An underlying factor is that ice age cycles correlate with a variable in the earth's orbit. Orbital influences could explain either variations in solar energy or motion of a hot spot in the earth's core. No one has been able to clearly identify a factor in the orbit of the earth which would increase solar intensity in a way which correlates with ice age cycles, not the least reason being that there is a huge amount of complexity in several variables in the orbit of the earth. There are additional problems in explaining ice age cycles in terms of solar intensity. There are many environmental factors which interact with solar energy creating variations in the result. But it's not impossible that solar variations could override all environmental complexities and create the ice age cycles as shown on the graph. There is however a clearer impression that the oceans are being heated from within the earth's core. The main factor creating this impression, besides total immunity of the cycles to environmental influences, is that all other changes show clear evidence of following the ocean temperature increases rather than responding to some other influence. The most significant factor is that precipitation is increasing. Areas where weather patterns indicate warming are all microclimates resulting from nearby oceans being warmer. The most obvious example of this is Greenland and parts of Europe, which are warmed by the Gulf Stream. North America is showing milder winters due to less ice around Alaska, where the winter air often comes from. But satellite measurements show little warming in evaluating total global conditions. Global warming is occurring, but it's not the frying pan situation that it is portrayed as. Movement of a hot spot in the earth's core could correlate with changes in the earth's orbit. The central core of the earth could be pulled farther south due to gravitational effects, and this would heat the oceans more, since there is less land area in the southern hemisphere. Heat constantly migrates from the core of the earth to the surface. This heat keeps lakes from freezing solid, after ice forms on the surface. It keeps the ground from freezing more than six feet deep in the winter. It causes deep well water to be hot, which can sometimes be used for geothermal heating. Therefore, the cause of global warming could be oceans increasing in temperature due to increased heat flowing from the earth's core. The increased heat could be due to a hot spot which rotates in the molten fluid within the earth. As it rotates, it could get closer to the surface in an area where the heat can diffuse into the oceans. Or it could be the central core being pulled closer to the surface due to gravitational forces in the solar system related to changes in the earth's orbit. The central core of the earth is highly dense, consisting largely of iron, which would cause it to respond to gravitational forces. Magnetic north constantly migrates demonstrating that masses move around in the molten fluid within the earth. There is new evidence for the earth's core heating based on variations in the earth's magnetic field. There is about a six year lag for "global warming" correlating with the amount of time required for the heat to conduct through the mantle. A summary article is here:http://www.gsaaj.org/articles/TempPaperv1n22007.pdf A new submarine for measuring the temperature of deep oceans found more heat than expected on its first measurement. Deep ocean heat points to the heat coming from the earth's core. Deep Ocean Heat Measured - (external) A related point is that expansion of the oceans from heating is twice as much as expected, with no explanation. The best explanation is that the deep oceans are hotter than expected due to heat coming from the earth's core. Deviations in the earth's orbit around the sun has a lot of complexities, which is sometimes given as an explanation for ice ages. A basic problem with that explanation is that the yearly average exposure to the sun is always about the same. Therefore, this concept implies that how the earth is exposed to the sun is more important than average exposure. Here's a link which explains it as follows: When the northern hemisphere gets less exposure to the sun during the summer, there is less snow melting in the north. The accumulation of snow causes more sunlight to reflect away causing a global cool-down. Those types of explanations seem too interpretive for the amount of complexity involved. Oceans currents are at least as significant as amount of solar energy in heating the Arctic, as recent melting indicates. Furthermore, it appears to be not cold temperatures but increased precipitation which triggers an ice age. El Ninas (cold ocean water) create droughts, while El Ninos (warm ocean water) create floods. The oceans accumulate heat and release it as precipitation. So it could be increased solar energy that triggers the accumulation of snow rather than decreased solar energy. "Total human CO2 emissions primarily from use of coal, oil, and natural gas and the production of cement are currently about 5.5 GT C per year (giga tons of carbon per year). A recent update says 8.6 GT. "To put these figures in perspective, it is estimated that the atmosphere contains 780 Gt C; the surface ocean contains 1,000 Gt C; vegetation, soils, and detritus contain 2,000 Gt C; and the intermediate and deep oceans contain 38,000 Gt C, as CO2 or CO2 hydration products. Each year, the surface ocean and atmosphere exchange an estimated 90 Gt C; vegetation and the atmosphere, 100 Gt C; marine biota and the surface ocean, 50 Gt C; and the surface ocean and the intermediate and deep oceans, 40 Gt C." Notice that the oceans exchange ten times as much carbon with the atmosphere as humans produce (90GT vs. 8.6 GT). Exchange means regulation. And humans only add 1% as much CO2 to the atmosphere per year as already in it. If such a miniscule amount were as critical as propagandists claim, all life would have been destroyed long ago. Nature hasn't been sitting on a 1% knife edge for millions of years. Reference:Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine The Cost of Global Warming Alarmism From Marc Morano, Senate Staffer October 19, 2007 The Lieberman-Warner bill will burden American families with additional energy costs and significantly harm the United States economy... CO2 cap-and-trade schemes were exposed by a recent CBO (Congressional Budget Office) study as creating massive wealth redistribution from the poor and working class to wealthier Americans. Further, according to a MIT study released earlier this year, cap-and-trade legislation introduced earlier in the Senate this year by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Senator Boxer (D-CA) would cost energy sector consumers an amount equal to $4,500 per American family of four. The same study found a bill sponsored by Senator Lieberman and Senator McCain (R-AZ) would cost consumers $3,500 per family of four. And a new EPA analysis shows the Lieberman - McCain bill would cost up to half a trillion dollars by 2030 and $1.3 trillion by 2050 - and that was based on assumptions designed to low-ball the number, begging the question of how high the real figure would be. [Note: That's just one congressional bill at the starting point. It doesn't begin to total the cost of removing carbon dioxide from the air, particularly since the underlying motive of the agitators is to reduce the population of the globe by 90%. GN] [A recent UN study concluded that the cost would be $45 trillion to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to stated goals by 2050.] Markley-Waxman Cap-and-Trade Bill: Money doesn't move from Wall Street to consumer; it moves the other way. So why would we want Wall Street buying and selling energy derivatives?A 10% tax on energy would not reduce CO2 one iota. People would need to be shoved out of the economy and into the gutters to reduce CO2 production. People can't live in the gutters in northern states. There would have to be a mass migration from northern states to southern states, so people can live under the bridges and in the heat tunnels to remove CO2 from the air. Climate Change: The carbon creates the droughts, and the oxygen creates the floods. Since it does two things, they call it CO2. If you don't believe this, it's because you promote big oil and big tobacco, and you refuse to look at the science of the subject. The IPCC said so; and it's peer reviewed science.
External Links: More updates, news and opinions, on Links Page Sign a petition to stop "cap-and-trade"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alarmists always make claims (including subjective attacks) without
explanations, which prevents truth from being established. Doing that
is never a legitimate standard of communication. Honest persons always
provide enough explanation to pin down the truth.
