- Follow budbromley on WordPress.com
-
Recent Posts
- DEI in the US military: How this perversion expanded
- What happened to Tucker? What happened to the Pope?
- USAID corruption was expensive to U.S. taxpayers and probably enabled terrorist atrocities
- Vote Theft
- Who is more likely to spread the pertussis bacterium (aka, whooping cough)—those vaccinated or those unvaccinated? (reblog +)
- Reparations?
- Brilliant video about the islamic caliphate
- The meaning of “net” as in net CO2 emissions, net zero, etc.
- Europe will never recover from this
- U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s historic speech
Archives
- April 2026
- March 2026
- February 2026
- January 2026
- December 2025
- November 2025
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- May 2025
- April 2025
- March 2025
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- March 2011
Hal. Hal. We have a problem Hal.
“It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried American Physical Society (APS) before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.
…There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club.”
~ The late Harold (Hal) Lewis, Professor of Physics, in his letter of resignation after 67 years of membership to the president of the APS.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
U.S. Congress introduces carbon tax
…U.S. Congress Introduces Carbon Tax… Rep. Theodore Deutch, (D-FL) introduced H.R. 7173: Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act of 2018. “This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a fee on the carbon content of fuels, including crude oil, natural gas, coal, or any other product derived from those fuels that will be used so as … “
to tax us at an annually increasing rate until the undefined “goals” are met.
“The fee is imposed on the producers or importers of the fuels and is equal to the greenhouse gas content of the fuel multiplied by the carbon fee rate. The rate begins at $15 [per ton of carbon] in 2019, increases by $10 each year, and is subject to further adjustments based on the progress in meeting specified emissions reduction targets.”
US Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) introduced a similar bill in the Senate.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
U.S. moving on up to #3
“Number of the Week: Advancing to # 3?”
“According to reports, the American Petroleum Institute
is estimating that in 2019 the US will become the third largest exporter of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). According to the EIA, the largest LNG exporters from 2013 to 2017 were (in order):Qatar, Australia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Indonesia Algeria, US.”
“In the late 1970s many in Washington were convinced the US was about to run out of natural gas. Their belief was supported by then “state of the art” numerical models run on computers. In 1978, Congress passed, and President Carter signed an energy bill including the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act which included provisions effectively prohibiting Construction of power plants solely using natural gas or oil.”
“In 1987 the act was repealed. All reliable power plants being built in the US today are powered by natural gas.”
“This history demonstrates the folly of basing government policies on long-term predictions from numerical models that have not been verified and validated. Verification and validation of models is a process that climate modelers avoid.”
By Ken Haapala, President, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP).
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Intrinsically implausible AGW narrative
The 2018 Annual Global Warming Policy Foundation Lecture by Richard Lindzen, former Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Sub-title of his lecture is “The Narrative of Global Warming” He begins with, “It is a narrative that we have approached defensively, but which I think is intrinsically implausible if not absurd.” About 55 minutes.
Posted in Uncategorized
1 Comment
A perspective on Facebook
A perspective on Facebook, January 21, 2019:
Many days and weeks, I receive more comments via a tiny Facebook group (which is specifically about a 40 year old Linn phonograph turntable) than I receive on my regular Facebook timeline. It’s not uusual, but my phone beeps when there is a Facebook message. It’s a feature that occurs so infrequently. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that that bias can be traced easily. From that perspective, Facebook and its ilk in social media are ALL at risk. All of them can always find out anything about you. You can also watch them. The problem is that it also must be about them. It is their property. Yep.
Or, we can decide to use their media rather than be abused by it. Used to what purpose you may ask?
Will we tire of looking at ourself? Or, will we tire of loving another? Or, will we love at all? And then, will we tire of that? And what does that say about us? Can you love another if you don’t love yourself? The answer is no. If you don’t value yourself, then you have nothing to offer of value, Ayn Rand would say.
It says to me that we are being analytical. But not too analytical.
It says that to me everyday is a new dance.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Dr. Vaclav Klaus
At this link is an 18-minute talk by Dr. Vaclav Klaus, economist, former president of the Czech Republic, critic of the European Union. Prescient. Enjoy. I have listened and watched several times and learn each time. And a great sense of humor. Hat tip to Tim Ball and Tom Tamarkin for reminding me of this great lecture.
Posted in Uncategorized
3 Comments
Climate impact of increasing carbon dioxide
“The present findings corroborate the earlier conclusion based on study of the Paleozoic climate that “global climate may be independent of variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration.” [64] (p.198).
Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
J. Hansen, D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff, P. Lee, D. Rind, G. RussellScience: 28 August 1981, Volume 213, Number 4511
…”The major difficulty in accepting this theory has been the absence of observed warming coincident with the historic C02 increase. In fact, the temperature in the Northern Hemisphere decreased by about 0.5°C between 1940 and 1970 (9), a time of rapid C02 buildup. In addition, recent claims that climate models overestimate the impact of radiative perturbations by an order of magnitude (10, 11) have raised the issue of whether the greenhouse effect is well understood.” …
(The authors are atmospheric physicists at the NASA Institute for Space Studies, Goddard Space Flight Center. New York 10025. D. Johnson contributed to the carbon dioxide research as a participant in the Summer Institute on Planets and Climate at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University.)
http://www.sealevel.info/1981_Hansen_etal_1.pdf
Reference 11 from above article is found in “Science. 1980 Mar 28;207(4438):1462-3. The following is an excerpt from reference 11.
The Climatological Significance of a Doubling of Earth’s Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration. Idso SB.1
1U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, 4331 East Broadway, Phoenix, Arizona 85040
Abstract: “The mean global increase in thermal radiation received at the surface of the earth as a consequence of a doubling of the atmospheric carbon dioxide content is calculated to be 2.28 watts per square meter. Multiplying this forcing function by the atmosphere’s surface air temperature response function, which has recently been determined by three independent experimental analyses to have a mean global value of 0.113 K per watt per square meter, yields a value of </= 0.26 K for the resultant change in the mean global surface air temperature. This result is about one order of magnitude less than those obtained from most theoretical numerical models, but it is virtually identical to the result of a fourth experimental approach to the problem described by Newell and Dopplick. There thus appears to be a major discrepancy between current theory and experiment relative to the effects of carbon dioxide on climate. Until this discrepancy is resolved, we should not be too quick to limit our options in the selection of future energy alternatives.”
PMID: 17779615 DOI: 10.1126/science.207.4438.1462
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17779615

Sherwood Idso, PhD. http://www.co2science.org
The Relationship between Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentration and Global Temperature for the Last 425 Million Years. W. Jackson Davis 1,2
1 Environmental Studies Institute, Boulder, CO 80301, USA; JacksonDavis@EnvironmentalStudiesInstitute.org
2 Division of Physical and Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA
Received: 8 August 2017; Accepted: 22 September 2017; Published: 29 September 2017
Abstract: “Assessing human impacts on climate and biodiversity requires an understanding of the relationship between the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere and global temperature (T). Here I explore this relationship empirically using comprehensive, recently-compiled databases of stable-isotope proxies from the Phanerozoic Eon (~540 million years to 0 years before the present) and through complementary modeling using the atmospheric absorption/transmittance code MODTRAN. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is correlated weakly but negatively with linearly-detrended T proxies over the last 425 million years. Of 68 correlation coefficients (half non-parametric) between CO2 and T proxies encompassing all known major Phanerozoic climate transitions, 77.9% are non-discernible (p > 0.05) and 60.0% of discernible correlations are negative. … This study demonstrates that changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration did not cause temperature change in the ancient climate.” …
… “The absence of a discernible correlation between atmospheric CO2 concentration and T over most of the Phanerozoic, as demonstrated above, appears to contravene the widely-accepted view about the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and temperature, by which increases in atmospheric CO2 concentration cause corresponding increases in T owing to increased radiative forcing.” …
“The logarithmic RFCO2 curve, established more than a century ago [10], implies a saturation effect, or diminishing returns, in which the marginal forcing power of atmospheric CO2 declines as CO2 concentration in the atmosphere increases.” …
“Discussion and Conclusions”
“The principal findings of this study are that neither the atmospheric concentration of CO2 nor ΔRFCO2 is correlated with T over most of the ancient (Phanerozoic) climate. Over all major climate transitions of the Phanerozoic Eon, about three-quarters of 136 correlation coefficients computed here between T and atmospheric CO2 concentration, and between T and ΔRFCO2, are non-discernible, and about half of the discernible correlations are negative. Correlation does not imply causality, but the absence of correlation proves conclusively the absence of causality [63]. The finding that atmospheric CO2 concentration and ΔRFCO2 are generally uncorrelated with T, therefore, implies either that neither variable exerted significant causal influence on T during the Phanerozoic Eon or that the underlying proxy databases do not accurately reflect the variables evaluated.”
“The present findings corroborate the earlier conclusion based on study of the Paleozoic climate that “global climate may be independent of variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration.” [64] (p.198). The present study shows further, however, that past atmospheric CO2 concentration oscillates on a cycle of 15–20 My and an amplitude of a few hundred to several hundreds of ppmv. A second longer cycle oscillates at 60–70 My. As discussed below, the peaks of the ~15 My cycles align closely with the times of identified mass extinctions during the Phanerozoic Eon, inviting further research on the relationship between atmospheric CO2 concentration and mass extinctions during the Phanerozoic.”
https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/5/4/76 (pdf)
These 3 papers are well worth reading in their entirety.
Posted in Uncategorized
2 Comments
CO2 is not causing global warming
CO2, water, and CH4 (methane) and some other minor gases are so-called “greenhouse gases” because they absorb infrared energy. However, be careful to avoid the common misunderstanding that the earth and its atmosphere behave like a garden greenhouse; that is not true. Greenhouses are closed systems except to incoming energy. Earth is an open system, open to receive energy, as well receive gases and other matter from space and also open to transmit energy, gases and matter back into space. A greenhouse is a poor analogy for earth’s climate.
Near earth’s surface, greenhouse gases re-emit almost instantly the energy they absorbed, emitting that energy at a slightly lower energy than which it was absorbed but emitting it into 3D space. Rarely is that emission mentioned in the news or by climate alarmists. Proponents of global warming want you to believe that energy is stored and builds up in the atmosphere in a sort of hothouse or pressure cooker, but that is not true.
In most locations, the concentration of water vapor (including clouds) in the atmosphere is far higher than CO2 and methane. That is, there are far more water vapor molecules in a given volume of air than there are CO2 or methane molecules. Near the equator and bodies of water, swamps and tundra, water vapor concentration in the air will be high. That is, the air is saturated, no more water vapor can be added to the air at that temperature and air pressure. Cold air holds very little water vapor. Cold air over cold water is also saturated, but air at the poles is usually very dry, water vapor concentration is very low. A volume of warm air holds much more water vapor than the same volume of cold air. Air in the tropics is usually humid.
The tropics and sub-tropics receive large amounts of solar radiation during the day, but none at night. During the day, the surface of ocean water is warmed by solar radiation and that warmth results in release of large amounts of CO2 and CH4 as well as water vapor into the atmosphere; the amount of these released gases dwarfs all emssions of these gases by humans. At night, the cooler ocean surface absorbs large amounts of CO2. CO2 is very soluble in cold water. A cold soda-pop keeps its bubbles.
The oceans and subsea floor hold far more methane (CH4) than all petroleum and fossil fuels ever discovered, and this methane is continuously degassed out of warm water and soil into the air. CH4 released into open air spontaneously converts (oxidizes) to CO2 and water at standard temperature and pressure. CH4 + 2 O2 -> CO2 + 2 H2O + a small amount of energy. Almost all CH4 originated as living cells. The cells died, entered the soil, rivers, lakes and ocean as runoff, metabolized and degraded by natural biological activity; this is the ultimate source of almost all fossil fuel on earth. That natural resource is continuously renewing and unlikely to be exhausted so long as there is life in the oceans.
Water vapor is the dominate greenhouse gas, absorbing by far both more direct solar energy and indirect solar energy re-emitted by the earth. More than 70% of the earth is covered with liquid water and about 40% of the earth and liquid water is receiving direct solar radiation every day. Additional liquid water is on land and in soil and plants. Solar radiation increases the molecular activity of liquid water molecules until they can no longer be held by the surface tension of the water. These active water molecules evaporate, i.e. release energetic water molecules, to become gaseous water vapor in the atmosphere. This release of energetic molecules cools the surface of the water, not warm the water, they just left. Your skin is cooled when your sweat evaporates.
Liquid water is far denser than air. Dense liquid water in the oceans is a huge reservoir of stored energy. The oceans contain greater than 1000 times more energy than the atmosphere; this means that earth’s atmosphere as a whole – regardless which gases make up the atmosphere – cannot warm the oceans in any significant amount. And this means the oceans are warming the atmosphere. The oceans are controlling the weather and climate on earth, not the atmosphere. The oceans are warmed by direct solar radiation as well as volcanic and tectonic forces resulting from gravity.

Figure 1
The specific gas molecules (nitrogen, oxygen, water vapor, as well as CO2, methane, and several other trace gases) that make up the atmosphere, each with their various concentrations, individually or in combination, are irrelevant to the long-term average temperature of the planet. In other words, an atmosphere of 100% CO2 could not significantly change the earth’s average temperature; instead, the ocean with its huge heat content would control the temperature of the 100% CO2 atmosphere. The atmosphere cannot warm significantly the earth over an extended time period, such as a year. But a warm ocean current, such as an El Nino, can change our climate and weather overnight.
However, water vapor and CO2 cause relatively minor temperature changes of the atmosphere at the surface (troposphere.) Water vapor and CO2 delay the release of energy from the earth into outer space, and this is most evident at night. Night time air temperatures at earth’s surface would be significantly cooler without water vapor and CO2. In a sense, greenhouse gases act as a nighttime insulator for the earth.
The effects of this are clearly seen at night. In warm, humid climates like New Orleans, the warmth of the air is retained late into the night, finally cooling by morning. Water vapor and CO2 do that. In dry desert or arctic areas, the warmth of the day very rapidly is re-radiated into outer space and nighttime temperatures plunge rapidly. The absence of water vapor and CO2 do that. CO2 has the same effect as water vapor/humidity except in far less amount than water vapor/humidity. CH4 is even less than CO2.

Figure 2

Figure 3
Nitrogen (78%), oxygen (21%) are the primary gases in the atmosphere, but these gases are mostly transparent to direct incoming solar radiation. Transparent means there are very limited or no energy bands available in these gaseous molecules to absorb energy at the wavelengths of the incoming solar radiation. A significantly large amount of solar energy is reflected by earth’s clouds, land and water surfaces back into outer space; this effect is known as albedo. The other atmospheric gases in total comprise about 1% of the atmosphere; this 1% includes water vapor, the inert gases (mostly argon which makes up 0.93%) and the trace gases. Carbon dioxide, methane and all other trace gases combined make up only about 0.04% of air.
Most radiant energy of the sun is transmitted through the gases in the atmosphere to the surface, i.e. to water and land surface, where it is absorbed. Most solar radiation is in the higher energy infrared, visible and ultraviolent wavelengths. Visible light, UV, X-Ray, and gamma radiation are all higher energy (higher frequency/shorter wavelength) than IR. Water vapor absorbs at certain visible energy bands…so we see darkening clouds as water vapor concentration increases. Solar radiation is absorbed by the molecules at the surface of water and land and then is spread through conduction and convection and dissipated in the energy cascade in the molecules of the water or solid matter. Some energy is re-emitted from the surface of land and water into the atmosphere but at lower energy, longer wavelengths, lower frequency than which it was originally absorbed.
Solar radiation received by the earth is known as Total Solar Irradiance (TSI). TSI has a cycle involving multiple variables which I will not go into here except to point out that climate cycles on earth correlate well with the TSI cycle and also with ocean temperature cycles known as PDO.

Figure 4
Temperature does not track CO2 very well (figure 11 below). Note temperature is flat, increasing, declining, and increasing while CO2 is increasing. Statistical correlation is weak.

Figure 5
Over longer time periods, the correlation between CO2 and temperature is very poor. The two trends are widely diverging as seen in the graphic below. If the global warming hypothesis were valid, these two trends would be parallel or converging.

For the remainder of this discussion, I will consider only energy in the infrared (IR) wavelengths. Molecules in water and land absorb IR at several discrete higher energy/shorter IR wavelengths that match discrete energy bands of the electrons of each molecule. If the incoming energy does not match an energy band of the molecule, or if that energy band is not available to absorb because the band is already occupied with energy, then the energy passes through the molecule without being absorbed. If the IR energy is absorbed, then in a fraction of a second, part of that energy is dissipated as kinetic energy (various motions such as stretching, bending, and vibrations internal to the molecule or collisions with other molecules) leaving slightly lower energy/slightly longer wavelength/slightly lower frequency IR energy. That lower energy is then re-emitted. Since part of the energy has already been dissipated internally by the molecule, the emission has a longer wavelength, lower frequency of IR than the IR that was originally absorbed. Energy is not stored in a molecule except in the macro sense of all molecules taken together, and then only temporarily while the energy is progressively dissipated. Energy moves from one molecule to the next and at each step the energy is reduced. By this process, IR energy is absorbed by a water vapor, or CO2 molecule, or CH4 molecule for only fraction of a second and then re-emitted at a longer wavelength (lower frequency, lower energy, cooler). This cascade continues progressively downward in the energy until eventually the remaining energy is dissipated as kinetic energy by collision with other molecules, or various internal molecular motions.
IR radiation is a sub-spectrum within the overall solar radiation spectrum. IR is 49.4% of solar energy reaching the outer atmosphere of earth. H2O, CO2, and CH4 absorb IR radiation ONLY at specific, discrete wavelengths (or quanta, or energy bands). Other wavelengths, which include most down-dwelling IR radiation directly from the sun, pass transparently through the molecules. Water vapor does absorb some incoming direct IR radiation. Some H2O, CO2, CH4 absorption wavelengths overlap (see graphic Figure 5-2), that is, these three molecules absorb IR at some of the same discrete wavelengths. This means that the gas which has the highest concentration in air absorbs and re-emits the most IR radiation. On average, water vapor including clouds is the highest concentration among the greenhouse gases, and thereby water vapor including clouds is the dominant greenhouse gas.

Most direct solar IR passes through air molecules to interact with molecules on the surface of water or land. Thus, infrared radiation is largely responsible for warming Earth’s surface, both land and water. In other words, the sun is not DIRECTLY warming the atmosphere, but INDIRECTLY warming the atmosphere. Most solar energy is absorbed in the molecules of the ocean and land which in turn warm the atmosphere. Most greenhouse warming is caused by reflected IR and IR emitted after dissipation from higher energy visible and UV energy. We don’t perceive visible light as heat; but when visible light interacts with matter, unless reflected, its energy is dissipated step by step in the downward energy cascade as described above until it becomes longer wavelength IR which then we perceive as heat. Re-radiation, conduction and convection from the surface of water and land warms the atmosphere.
IR energy only penetrates a few meters beneath the surface in liquid water in the oceans and lakes, while visible light transmits many meters beneath the surface of water, progressively loosing its colors from red to eventually higher energy blue and finally no visible light at increasing depth. The higher energy, shorter wavelength, higher frequency UV, x-ray and gamma energy mostly transmits through liquid water and finally interacts with molecules in solid matter in land or sea floor, or minimally with inorganic molecules dissolved in ocean water. Molecules on land and the seafloor surface are irradiated by these higher energy wavelengths, absorbing this energy, or conducting it further, and then these molecules progressively dissipate their energy as described above to progressively longer wavelengths and lower energy, eventually to IR wavelengths. The energy cascade continues on down the energy spectrum to satellite, wireless, radio, TV, MRI wavelengths and finally dissipated as kinetic motion of the molecule itself or collision.
The earth and the atmosphere also reflect and emit energy back into outer space, mostly in the visible and IR bands. IR emission from the atmosphere, water and land into outer space occurs day and night and is measured by satellite. Earth is an open system, continuously re-radiating its energy (which originally came from the sun) back into outer space, that is, radiating from higher energy earth to the much lower energy outer space beyond our atmosphere.
The fact that earth’s temperature is relatively stable over long periods of time, millions of years in multiple geological periods, implies that there is a balance between incoming energy and outgoing energy. I won’t go further into this energy balance topic here.
Over the very long time period of millions of years leading to the present, the earth has been in a slow cooling trend and has had a slowly declining atmospheric CO2 concentration as indicated in these graphics; this is probably contrary to what you have been told and taught.
On the other hand, and probably what you have been taught, in the geological short term, that is since the Little Ice Age and Industrial Revolution, earth warmed and total CO2 concentration increased. However most of that warming occurred before the 1950’s and that period was prior to the highest CO2 emissions by humans due to use of fossil fuels. In other words, the warming that followed the end of the Little Ice Age had very low CO2 concentration, thus that CO2 could not have caused the warming that occurred. The warming that occurred since the end of the Little Ice Age is within the statistical variation of the much longer-term cooling trend. In geological terms, since there is year-round ice at both poles, our present period is part of an interglacial period within an ice age.



Figure 6

There has been global warming during our lifetime, mostly occurring before the 1950’s, but this warming is not unprecedented. And there has also been global cooling during our lifetime, also not unprecedented.


Figure 7


Figure 8
Returning to our “greenhouse gases,” the takeaway point is, again, the sun heats the earth, then the earth heats the atmosphere. The atmosphere is not heating the earth. According to the laws of thermodynamics, energy only flows from higher energy earth to the lower energy atmosphere. Earth (oceans and land) heat the air, not the reverse. Where can we measure this effect in the natural world? Detrended (i.e. seasons removed) sea surface temperatures versus air temperatures, we see in the graph below that increasing air temperature ALWAYS FOLLOWS increasing sea surface temperature. No matter how high the CO2 or methane concentrations are in the air, the ocean temperature will control the air temperature of the earth. In bulk, like insulation, water vapor, CO2, and methane temporarily delay but do not halt the continuous dissipation of energy/heat via the process described in the above paragraphs.

According to the proposed hypothesis for human-caused global warming (AGW), the continuing accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere causes or forces increased warming in the atmosphere. The hypothesis requires disregarding the important facts that warming has currently stopped and also that there has been cooling for some periods in our lifetimes and historically, when according to AGW there should have been an increasing rate of warming due to the increasing concentration of CO2. Also, again falsifying the AGW hypothesis, when warming periods have occurred, there is no difference in the rate of warming during those periods despite the fact that CO2 has increased.

Figure 9
Based on a single molecule, one CH4 molecule absorbs more energy and re-emits more energy than one CO2 molecule, and one CO2 molecule absorbs more energy and re-emits more energy than one H2O molecule. But, the concentration (or abundance) of water vapor in air is about 1%, while the concentration of CO2 in air is only about 0.04% (or 400 ppm) and the concentration CH4 in air is only about 0.0018% (or 1.8 ppm). Thus more water vapor molecules in the air absorb more IR energy upgoing from the earth. Also, the IR radiation absorption wavelengths of water vapor overlap most of the IR radiation absorption wavelengths of CO2 and CH4. Since the concentration of water vapor is more than 10 times higher than that of CO2 and 100 times higher than CH4, the IR radiation emitted by the ocean, land and sun is more than 10 times more likely to be absorbed by water vapor molecules than by CO2 molecules and 100 times more likely to be absorbed by water vapor molecules than CH4 molecules. Then, when the water vapor, CO2 and CH4 molecules re-emit their energy upgoing and horizontally, or else collide, once again these emissions or collisions are far more likely to be interactions with a water vapor molecule; these phenomena change with increasing altitude.

Figure 10
With regard to CO2 and CH4, the net result is that exponentially less warming results from each incremental increase in CO2 or CH4 concentration. The natural logarithm function is the inverse of the exponential function. The graphic below illustrates the natural log curve of temperature versus CO2 concentration that results from progressively increasing the CO2 concentration. In climatology terms, climate and temperature sensitivity are progressively diminished as CO2 concentration increases. Each doubling of CO2 concentration results in incrementally less warming, following a logarithmic progression. The available quantum energy bands of CO2 and CH4 are already occupied with energy received from nearby molecules. Adding more absorbing molecules decreases the mean-free-path of the radiation between molecules. Progressively higher levels of CO2 (and methane) produce progressively less warming. The absorbance of radiation is logarithmic.

Figure 11
Furthermore, of the approximate 400 ppm (or 0.04%) total CO2 concentration in earth’s atmosphere, humans from all sources emit only about 3% of that total. About 97% of atmospheric CO2 is natural. About 98.5% of total CO2 is absorbed by nature.

CO2 concentration has been increasing since the end of the Little Ice Age, around the time of the Industrial Revolution, primarily because earth has been slowly warming since that time. The human contribution is minimal. But, since CO2 is not causing significant warming (or even reproducibly measurable warming), and since the earth is in fact becoming greener according to NASA satellite studies, then there is no good reason to reduce CO2, or to reduce use of fossil fuels. Also, since most CO2 is natural, there is no practical way for humans to significantly reduce atmospheric CO2 concentration. Carbon sequestration, carbon offsets, carbon taxes, carbon trading are environmentally useless, harmful, economically wasteful, fraud. On the contrary, there are benefits to higher CO2, such as increasing crop yields. And there are also benefits to warming.


Figure 12
Despite clear evidence that the atmosphere is not significantly warming the planet, and under the laws of physics the atmosphere could not significantly warm the planet, still some politicians and scientists try to alarm citizens to persuade them that increasing CO2 and CH4 concentration forces catastrophically dangerous, large increases in temperature trends by increasing absorption of IR by water vapor. The alarmists’ torturous and unvalidatable hypothesis and models treat water vapor as part of a feedback system rather than as the dominant greenhouse gas. But, if this hypothesis were true, and it is not, since CO2 has been increasing steadily since the end of the Little Ice Age (CO2 increased about 150% from a very low CO2 level), then we should be seeing rapidly rising global temperature due to this feedback forcing effect, and we should be seeing a difference in rate of warming over time (or significant difference in second derivative.) However, the temperature trend has been only slightly increasing, and then only sometimes, and the warming trends are not exceptional or unprecedented in nature, and the overall temperature trend is diverging from the steadily rising CO2 trend.
If CO2 were the cause of warming, then the CO2 and temperature trends would be parallel or converging during the same time periods, and the CO2 increasing trend would occur before the warming trend; however, these correlations are not found in real world evidence unless the time periods are cherry-picked or the data has been manipulated. Even worse for the climate alarmists, there are multiple time periods, decades, where the temperature trend decreased while CO2 trend increased…for example the 1960s to late 1970s when most scientists and news outlets were proclaiming global cooling. CO2 cannot force both warming and cooling.
Climate catastrophe and gloom are entirely based on computer models, models which have never been validated against scientific observations.

Cover of Time magazine, January 31, 1977.

As of December 2018, the global temperature measured by satellites (the most accurate and reproducible measurement available), is only 0.45 degrees F above the average temperature computed since 1978 when satellite measurement began, meanwhile CO2 has been steadily rising during this same period. That’s not much warming; but the CO2 concentration is growing. In other words, nature has falsified the global warming hypothesis and climate models. Temperature has not been increasing in unison in correlation with increasing CO2. https://www.nsstc.uah.edu/climate/2018/december2018/GTR_201812Dec_1.pdf
Importantly, as shown in the graphic below, trends of increasing temperature precede trends of increasing CO2. Many peer-reviewed scientific papers confirm this observation. If CO2 were the cause or were forcing temperature increases, then that CO2 increase must precede the trend of increasing temperature; unfortunately for the AGW hypothesis and climate alarmists that evidence is not observed. Obviously, an effect cannot precede its cause. In other words, earth’s temperature is controlling CO2 concentration, not the other way around. (Al Gore’s science fiction movies show CO2 increases preceding or coincident with temperature increases leading up to a runaway ‘hockeystick’ warming.)

Most CO2 is emitted by the oceans and lands, naturally, by degassing caused by the slow warming trend since the Little Ice Age. Warmer water holds less CO2 than cold water. The relative partition ratio of a gas such as CO2 between water and air is controlled by Henry’s Law. Compared to the atmosphere, the oceans contain enormous energy (as already shown). Oceans contain about 50 times more CO2 than the atmosphere and 20 times more CO2 than the biosphere on land.
It would take 10,000 years for humans to change the temperature of the ocean by a mere 1 degree even if humans devoted all energy resources full time to that effort. The effects of the oceans on the earth’s climate are enormous, but the warming effect of human CO2 is trivially tiny.

Figure 13
The claim that the relatively tiny amount of CO2 contributed to the atmosphere by humans is controlling earth’s temperature is falsified according to the rules of science. We mere humans are not able to change the temperature of earth by adding or subtracting CO2, no matter the amount of CO2. Even if the air were 40% CO2, an amount that is 1000 times higher than today’s total CO2 and 10,000 times higher than the human contributed CO2, the atmosphere can not significantly warm the oceans. Oceans are a gigantic heat sink or reserve, moderating the earth’s temperature and controlling earth’s climate.
This is NOT to say that humans do not affect temperature and climate in other ways, such as building cities, roads, planting or cutting forests and fields, etc. This IS to say that AGW, the hypothesis of human-caused global warming by the contribution of a mere 0.004% of the total CO2 emissions, is scientifically wrong. The human contribution to global warming is statistically insignificant, so tiny it is unmeasurable in the real world; the hypothesis of human-caused global warming/climate change has been falsified by real world observations and experiments.
What is really going on?
António Guterres, the current Secretary General of the UN, is the former president of Socialist International, which “was formed in London on 28 September 1864 by socialist, communist and anarchist political groups and trade unions. Tensions between moderates and revolutionaries led to its dissolution in 1876 in Philadelphia. The Second International was formed in Paris on 14 July 1889 as an association of the socialist parties.” (Wikipedia) With member organizations in more that 100 nations, following the communist tradition of Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky and Vladimir Lenin, Socialist International views the chief source of oppression and exploitation in the world to be capitalism — private property — whose inevitable by-products are poverty, environmental degradation, war, famine, and most other ills that plague humanity. UN leaders have also announced the UN’s anti-capitalist intentions. http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticleID=1902
Bottom line: the global warming / climate change agenda is a giant, global fraud. The where, why, who, and when proponents knew it was a fraud is a subject for another day and a court of law. The global warming/climate change agenda is a global, political scheme to re-distribute wealth, change national economic systems away from capitalism, reduce national and individual sovereignty and reduce citizen control of private property, and hand over funding and control to unelected supra-national alliances and organizations like the UN and the EU.
References:
- https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/New-Insights-on-the-Physical-Nature-of-the-Atmospheric-Greenhouse-Effect-Deduced-from-an-Empirical-Planetary-Temperature-Model.pdf
- Figure 2 and 3. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/04/why-summer-nighttime-temperatures-dont-fall-below-freezing/?fbclid=IwAR1Rv6gpWDE57LYYfeFSPQLa1tDIL7LfMQIoQhMrH0YDaiwSdGWDayoRMSA
- IBID
- Figure 4 and 5. Dr. Willie Soon. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/16/arctic-ice-refreezing-after-falling-short-of-2007/ and https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2005GL023429
- IBID
- Figure 6 Lisiecki and Raymo (2005) http://what-when-how.com/global-warming/five-million-years-of-climate-change-from-sediment-cores-global-warming/
- Figure 7. Kobashi, T., K. Kawamura, J.P. Severinghaus, J.-M. Barnola, T. Nakaegawa, B.M. Vinther, S.J. Johnsen, and J.E. Box. 2011. High variability of Greenland surface temperature over the past 4000 years estimated from trapped air in an ice core. Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L21501, doi:10.1029/2011GL049444. ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/…/iso…/gisp2-temperature2011.txt
- Figure 8. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DeuAH_4VMAAlBDd.jpg
- Figure 9. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/03/laughable-new-paper-claims-99-999-certainty-global-warming-over-past-25-years-is-man-made/
- Figure 10. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/28/visualizing-the-greenhouse-effect-atmospheric-windows/
- And https://thebestschools.org/special/karoly-happer-dialogue-global-warming/happer-major-statement/
- Figure 11. http://employee.heartland.edu/rmuench/carbondioxide.htm
- Figure 12. Sherwood Idso, PhD. http://www.co2science.org and https://thebestschools.org/special/karoly-happer-dialogue-global-warming/happer-major-statement/ Dr. Sherwood Idso with Eldarica pine trees grown in various amounts of CO2 in experiments done about 10 years ago when the ambient concentration of CO2 was 385 ppm. S.B. Idso and B.A. Kimball, “Effects of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment on Regrowth of Sour Orange Trees (Citrus aurantium; Rutaceae) after Coppicing,” American Journal of Botany, 1994, 81: 843–846.
- Figure 13. https://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html Table 4a.
- 14. Sorokhtin et al. (2007) Sorokhtin, O.G., Chilingar, G. V., Khilyuk, L.F. (2007). Global Warming and GlobalCooling. Evolution of Climate on Earth,Developments in Earth & Environmental Sciences 5, Elsevier, ISBN 978-0-444-52815-5.
- 15. Climate Change Reconsidered. http://climatechangereconsidered.org/#tabs-1-2
- 16. https://budbromley.blog/2019/01/20/climate-impact-of-increasing-carbon-dioxide/
This article is re-published here:
Posted in Uncategorized
84 Comments
Kiss America goodbye
It’s our republic and we are losing it rapidly now. This collectivist dillusion collusion will destroy America, just as European nations and their individual freedom are being destroyed before our eyes.
The 2020 Census controls the ratio of Dems versus GOP in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Electoral College. Without asking the citizenship question, all people – legal or illegal – determine the Dem vs GOP apportionment. Sanctuary cities, open borders, no wall or immigration enforcement laws result in more Dems in the U.S. House and the Electoral College which elects the U.S. President. Unless successfully appealed, this ruling and the dereliction of sworn duty by Congress to protect the nation will result in an undefeatable supermajority of Democrats (socialists) in the House and Electoral College.
Dominance by a supermajority exists today as in California and Hawaii, where a citizen’s vote is now totally irrelevant to any political outcome. End of story for America, the world and individual freedom.
The only alternative left at that point is violent revolution by Americans against their government. Take a look at France today; the violence is spreading and being crushed by Macron’s government. The individual freedoms that have been realized over hundreds of years, since the Magna Carta over 800 years ago, are being destroyed by rich globalists in a regressive quest for totalitarian power. They call it social justice, but its effect on all of us is feudal totalitarian.
http://news.trust.org/item/20190115143936-yfedz
SCOTUS ruled already during the Obama administration in a case brought by a citizen and Texas. SCOTUS ruled unanimously “one man one vote”… that is, U.S. House and Electoral College are determined by number of all residents regardless of legality of residence, despite the fact that “one man one vote” is not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. A new case would have to be built and brought to appeal. Freedom is in deep trouble.
The U.S. census should reflect the population of legal residents. Not those who broke the law to come here. But, the unanimous SCOTUS disagrees.
“..8–0 judgment was unanimous in Texas’ favor, the Court offered three separate justifications — the majority opinion, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and joined by five other justices, as well as two concurring opinions written by Justice Clarence Thomas and Justice Samuel Alito.”…
“There can be no truer principle than this — that every individual of the community at large has an equal right to the protection of government,” it read….“As the Framers of the Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment comprehended, representatives serve all residents, not just those eligible or registered to vote,” Ginsburg wrote. “Nonvoters have an important stake in many policy debates — children, their parents, even their grandparents, for example, have a stake in a strong public education — and in receiving constituent services, such as help navigating public-benefits bureaucracies.”
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/04/04/texas-case-supreme-court-upholds-one-person-one-vo/
https://www.scotusblog.com/case…/cases/evenwel-v-abbott/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evenwel_v._Abbott
The Magna Carta was signed in 1215 by the Thames River near Windsor Castle in today’s London England, 804 years ago. The Plantagenet line of monarchs, who believed they ruled by divine right, had been returned to the throne of England. English barons surrounded King John’s forces and forced him to sign the Magna Carta. Arguably, it is the most important agreement in history. Magna Carta, which means ‘The Great Charter’, established the principle that everyone is subject to the law, even the king, and guarantees certain rights of individuals, the right to justice and the right to a fair trial. Translated from the Latin original, among other things it states:”No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.” …“To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”
King John reversed his position on the agreement after communication with the Pope. Bloody civil war ensued between the barons and the Kings forces. The King died of illness and was replaced by King Henry III in 1216. A new Magna Carta was issued by Henry III in return for taxes paid by the whole kingdom. The Magna Carta was used to restrain the supreme power of monarchs. The Magna Carta strongly influenced the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, also known as the Bill of Rights, as well as England’s constitution.
Today, as in the days of divine right monarchs and feudalism, the Pope in Rome is on the side of the monarchs, on the side of tyranny and domination of the people by government.
May God help us all.
Feudalism definition: the dominant social system in the medieval world, in which nobility held lands and titles granted by monarchs in exchange for military service, taxes and obedience. Nobles were vassals of the monarch, doing everything the kings or queens wished. The people were in turn tenants of the nobles, paying the nobles taxes, their goods, and owing duty to be conscripted to military or any service demanded by their land-holding nobility. The monarch’s/the government owned everything, while the peasants (serfs, slaves) were obliged to live on their lord’s land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, in exchange for military protection. A rigidly class-based society.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
Yes we can?
It does not mean what you think. Here’s the real story on immigration.
Posted in Uncategorized
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.