Archive for the ‘climate’ Category

GH Gas Claimers Virtually Admit They Know They Are Lying

February 19, 2016

If those who claim that carbon dioxide has some special insulating properties really believe their claims, why aren’t they encouraging the use of carbon dioxide to insulate buildings in winter.  If concentrations of CO2 of only a few hundred parts per million can cause earth to become warmer then pure carbon dioxide used as an insulation for buildings should be even more effective at holding in heat.  If CO2 could be used as insulation, CO2 emissions would be collected so the gas could be used to insulate buildings

The CO2 would have to be placed in some type of container. For new buildings the container would presumably be something rigid. For older buildings, a plastic bag could be inserted into the walls.   I suppose there would need to be some equipment to pull the CO2 out of the container into a separate container for storage. during the summer so the building wouldn’t get too warm.

I tried a search for CO2 insulation and only found products designed to insulate electrical equipment.   Of course the reason no one offers CO2 products to  insulate buildings is because no one really believes CO2 has any special insulating properties.   The fact is that CO2 cannot trap earth’s heat and thus it could not insulate buildings any better than other atmospheric gases.


Are Global Warmers Intellectually Challenged?

January 23, 2016

If a person with normal intelligence enters a warm room with a fire in the fire place, he will say the fire is heating the room.   A global warmer will say that the room is warm because carbon dioxide is trapping heat.

Before you say warmers couldn’t be that dumb consider that they make the same claim about earth’s temperature.   If their calculations indicate earth is getting warmer, they ignore the fact that humans keep increasing the amount of heat they produce and claim that the increase must be because of minute increases in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Any average person knows that if you turn up the heat in a room it will get warmer unless someone opens a door or window to let in cooler air.   It would be logical to think adding heat to the atmosphere, such as by increasing the number of vehicles producing hot exhaust gases, would  raise air temperature.   Simply increasing the number of people can raise temperatures because, except in desert and tropical areas, the human body usually has a higher temperature than the air.

Unfortunately the global warmers seem to lack the intelligence necessary to understand that adding heat can make a room or the atmosphere warmer.   They believe carbon dioxide has a  magical  power to control the temperature of the air.  If the temperature of the atmosphere goes up the  only reason they can conceive of is an increase in carbon dioxide.

Some people have accused the warmers of using inflated temperatures.  It doesn’t make any difference whether their temperature figures are accurate or not because the most logical explanation for a temperature increase is the increased heat produced by human activity.

Crooked Politicians Do Their Masters’ Bidding in Paris

December 19, 2015

The crooked corporations who are pushing Enron’s global warming scam got their money’s worth from the crooked politicians who recently met in Paris. They got their pet politicians to support carbon trading which was the reason Enron set up the scam with the crooked administration of President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore.

The following a copy of an earlier blog post. I’ve changed the link to the Lawrence Solomon article because it is now at another site, but haven’t checked the other links.

Remember Enron, the corrupt firm whose failure should have disproved the myth “too big to fail”, but didn’t? At the time it was the seventh largest corporation. It’s bankruptcy was the largest in history until Lehman Brothers failed. Incidentally, Lehman Brothers was also involved in carbon trading.

Enron owed part of its early success to emissions trading. Basically emissions trading was established as a way for some companies to profit from pollution while allowing some companies to continue to produce the chemicals that can cause acid rain.

Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Energy Probe and Urban Renaissance Institute, has reported that Enron played a major role in pushing the global warming scam, including establishing the Kyoto Protocals.

Enron had already profited from trading sulfur dioxide credits and saw the potential for even greater profits from trading what would become known as “carbon credits“.

The article is the first in a series of articles about those who seek to profit from what Weather Channel founder John Coleman calls “the greatest scam in history.”

Solomon states, ” The climate-change industry — the scientists, lawyers, consultants, lobbyists and, most importantly, the multinationals that work behind the scenes to cash in on the riches at stake — has emerged as the world’s largest industry. Virtually every resident in the developed world feels the bite of this industry…” which increases the costs of various goods and services.

Enron was an early player beginning early in the administration of Bill Clinton to push for a carbon dioxide trading system. Enron also sought support from environmental groups.
“Between 1994 and 1996, the Enron Foundation donated $1-million to the Nature Conservancy and its Climate Change Project, a leading force for global warming reform, while [Chairman Kenneth] Lay and other individuals associated with Enron donated $1.5-million to environmental groups seeking international controls on carbon dioxide.”

According to Solomon, “Political contributions and Enron-funded analyses flowed freely, all geared to demonstrating a looming global catastrophe if carbon dioxide emissions weren’t curbed. An Enron-funded study that dismissed the notion that calamity could come of global warming, meanwhile, was quietly buried.”

Enron advised the Clinton administration what to do at the Kyoto Japan Conference in 1997.

To improve its chances for success Enron hired former Environmental Protection Agency regulator John Palmisano to become the company’s lead lobbyist as senior director for Environmental Policy and Compliance. Palismano wrote a memo describing the historic corporate achievement that was Kyoto.

“If implemented this agreement will do more to promote Enron’s business than will almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring of the energy and natural-gas industries in Europe and the United States,” Polisano began. “The potential to add incremental gas sales, and additional demand for renewable technology is enormous.”

The memo, entitled “Implications of the Climate Change Agreement in Kyoto & What Transpired,” summarized the achievements that Enron had accomplished. “I do not think it is possible to overestimate the importance of this year in shaping every aspect of this agreement,” he wrote. He cited three issues of specific importance to Enron in the climate-change debate: the rules governing emissions trading, the rules governing transfers of emission reduction rights between countries, and the rules governing a gargantuan clean energy fund.

Polisano’s memo expressed satisfaction bordering on amazement at Enron’s successes. The rules governing transfers of emission rights “is exactly what I have been lobbying for and it seems like we won. The clean development fund will be a mechanism for funding renewable projects. Again we won …. The endorsement of emissions trading was another victory for us.”

“Enron now has excellent credentials with many ‘green’ interests including Greenpeace, WWF [World Wildlife Fund], NRDC [Natural Resources Defense Council], German Watch, the U.S. Climate Action Network, the European Climate Action Network, Ozone Action, WRI [World Resources Institute] and Worldwatch. This position should be increasingly cultivated and capitalized on (monetized),” Polisano explained.

Those who believe in Global Warming like to claim that they are opposed by corporate interests in the form of the energy companies. They neglect to mention that the battle isn’t against corporations, it is between different groups of corporations. The energy companies are attempting to continue providing energy to consumers. Companies on the other side are merely attempting to create a financial opportunity for themselves as financial parasites who provide nothing to anyone and get rich in return.

Democrats often criticize Republicans for being too close to business. Democrats are just as close to business. They simply favor different businesses.

As William O’Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, puts it: “The American people have had enough of convoluted, indecipherable financial schemes and the opportunists who exploit them. The public is understandably angry about Wall Street’s exploitation of Main Street, and yet our political leaders are setting the stage for another complex trading market, ripe for corruption. The future Enrons and Bernie Madoffs of the world would like nothing better than to see the U.S. impose a new market for carbon emission trading.”

Gravity Cools the Atmosphere

December 10, 2015

This statement may sound strange to those who don’t understand that heat is the kinetic energy, or motion, of atoms/molecules. Actions which increase kinetic energy of atoms cause an increase in heat. Actions which decrease kinetic energy of atoms reduce heat energy thus cooling atoms/molecules. I will use molecules instead of atoms because gas atoms exist as parts of molecules and at atmospheric temperatures atoms in molecules behave as a unit. The following is a simplified view of atmospheric heating and cooling involving the rising and falling of air molecules. Air currents can cause warm air and cold air to mix with heat transferring from warm air to cool air.

Inertia is the property of matter in which an object in motion will tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by some force. Gravity is a force which can increase or decrease motion. If you push a rock off a cliff, gravity will cause a downward motion with the velocity increasing as the object falls. If you throw a baseball up into the air, gravity will gradually decrease its upward motion until the baseball stops going up and gravity starts to pull it back down to the ground.

Physicists determined in the 19th Century that heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. Individual molecules have their own kinetic energy which physicists call “heat”. There is a common misconception that heating causes molecules to vibrate. Heat causes motion in molecules but molecules seldom have freedom of movement. Molecules in solids are held in place in a matrix. Attempts to move result in vibration unless molecules become hot enough to break the bonds of the matrix, such as when ice melts. Gas molecules bounce off each other like ping pong balls in a bingo machine which in effect is vibration.

As the sun heats the earth’s surface, air molecules in thermal contact with the surface begin absorbing heat energy from the ground. Two substances in what physicists call “thermal contact” will attempt to become the same temperature. Although the process is far more complicated than what happens with billiard balls on a pool table, the behavior of billiard balls is one way of visualizing how energy is transferred from molecule to molecule.

As air molecules heat up they begin to rise from the earth’s surface because warm air is less dense, and thus lighter, than cool air. As air molecules bounce off each other the area they cover spreads out and there are fewer molecules per cubic meter. The upward movement allows cooler air to flow in under the warm air and begin heating. The process continues as long as some air is cooler than the ground.

The atmosphere also receives heat energy from the evaporation of water. The water vapor comes from bodies of water and the ground as well as the evaporation of water from plants and animals. For example, the human body cools itself by perspiring water to the outside of the skin where it evaporates and takes the heat energy into the atmosphere.

The heat energy held by water vapor involves more than just its temperature. Water vapor also holds what physicists call latent heat which includes the heat energy that must be absorbed for water to go from a solid to a liquid [heat of fusion] and from a liquid to a gas [heat of vaporization]. Other gases also possess latent heat , but they are gases at atmospheric temperature so they don’t go through a change of state that would involve this heat. Water is normally a liquid or solid at atmospheric temperature.

When matter rises from the earth’s surface it must turn part of its kinetic energy into potential energy to overcome the force of gravity. This process affects all matter regardless of whether it is as big as a rocket or as small as a water molecule. The conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy doesn’t cause a loss of energy, just a change in status from what might be called “active” energy to “inactive” energy. The is analogous to charging a battery.

Objects, including gas molecules, above ground have potential energy because that energy will become kinetic energy if they fall, If some of the kinetic energy (i.e., heat) of gas molecules didn’t change to potential energy gas molecules would gain energy from the movement upward which is impossible.

When gas molecules rise the conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy causes them to slow down and thus become “cooler”, The cooling process is slow because of the low mass of gas molecules, particularly water vapor which consists of an oxygen atom and two atoms of hydrogen which is the element with the lowest mass. High air pressure blocks this cooling by preventing warm air from rising.

When matter begins falling back to the ground, gravity converts its potential energy back into kinetic energy. As gravity increases the kinetic energy of solid objects when they fall, the velocity of the object increases. Gravity generally doesn’t increase the kinetic energy of individual gas molecules[cause heating] as they fall back to the ground. Instead, gravity increases the kinetic energy of the air mass, or wind. An exception is the Chinook winds that sometimes occur along the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains.

In its gaseous state water molecules are lighter than the other molecules of the other atmospheric gases. Although water molecules can fall back to earth as gas molecules, they usually condense into liquid droplets or freeze into ice particles. If the ice particles are large enough, they can acquire enough kinetic energy as they fall to cause damage to solid objects on the ground. If water drops freeze on tree limbs or power lines when they near the ground their kinetic energy will temporarily become potential energy which can become kinetic energy if whatever they attach to falls.

The amount of potential energy held by water is determined by the distance it rises above sea level rather than just its distance from the ground. Generally water droplets will transfer their kinetic energy to whatever they hit such as human skin. If sufficient water hits on a slope, the kinetic energy of the flood water can be sufficient to move dirt or in rare cases buildings.

And the Snow Flies … Jerusalem?

January 12, 2013

Would you believe an 8 inch snowfall in Jerusalem? How about Israeli President Shimon Peres making a snowman?

The childern of Jerusalem are enjoying throwing snowballs while drivers slip and slide on the treacherous roads. On Mount Herzl the heavy snow caused numerous historic trees to fall including some that were over 50 years old. Over 100 trees have fallen in the city as a whole . Some power lines are also down. Highways leading to and from Jerusalem were closed due to the snow.

The storm system has also brought freezing temperatures to Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

Global Warming Greenhouse Theory Disproved a Century Ago

January 10, 2013

The claim that carbon dioxide (CO2) can increase air temperatures by “trapping” infrared radiation (IR) ignores the fact that in 1909 physicist R.W. Wood disproved the popular 19th Century thesis that greenhouses stayed warm by trapping IR. Unfortunately, many people who claim to be scientists are unaware of Wood’s experiment which was originally published in the Philosophical magazine , 1909, vol 17, p319-320.

Philosophical Magazine might not sound like the name of a science publication, but a century ago leading scientists published their discoveries in it.

During the early 19th Century many physicists supported the theory postulated by Benjamin Franklin that heat involved some type of fluid. The theory became known as “caloric theory”. Joseph Jean Baptiste Fourier’s theory that the atmosphere was heated from infrared radiation from the ground was a variation of caloric theory with IR functioning as the “fluid”. Fourier believed greenhouses were heated by trapping this radiation.

Physicists in the early 19th Century were attempting to develop theories to explain the nature of atoms and their properties such as heat. Physicists theorized that atoms were the smallest particles of matter.

By the end of the century a new theory of heat, called “kinetic theory”, was being developed that suggested heat was the motion, or kinetic energy, of atoms. However, Fourier’s theory that IR heated the atmosphere particularly by interacting with carbon dioxide and water vapor continued to have support.

In 1897 J.J. Thompson overturned the popular theory of the atoms being the smallest particles of matter by reporting his discovery of the electron and predicting two other types of charged particles he called protons and neutrons.

Wood was an expert on IR. His accomplishments included inventing both IR and UV (ultraviolet) photography. In 1909 he decided to test Fourier’s theory about how greenhouses retained heat.

Wood constructed two identical small greenhouses. The description implies the type of structure a gardener would refer to as a “cold frame” rather than a building a person could walk into.

He lined the interior with black cardboard which would absorb radiation and convert it to heat which would heat the air through conduction. The cardboard would also produce radiation. He covered one greenhouse with a sheet of transparent rock salt and the other with a sheet of glass. The glass would block IR and the rock salt would allow it to pass.

During the first run of the experiment the rock salt greenhouse heated faster due to IR from the sun entering it but not the glass greenhouse. He then set up another pane of glass to filter the IR from the sun before the light reached the greenhouses.

The result from this run was that the greenhouses both heated to about 50 C with less than a degree difference between the two. Wood didn’t indicate which was warmer or whether there was any difference in the thermal conductivity between the glass sheet and the rock salt. A slight difference in the amount of heat transfered through the sheets by conduction could explain such a minor difference in temperature. The two sheets probably didn’t conduct heat at the same rate.

The experiment conclusively demonstrates that greenhouses heat up and stay warm by confining heated air rather than by trapping IR. If trapping IR in an enclosed space doesn’t cause higher air temperature than CO2 in the atmosphere cannot cause higher air temperatures.

The heated air in the greenhouses couldn’t rise higher than the sheets that covered the tops of the greenhouses. Heated air outside is free to rise allowing colder air to fall to the ground.

Atmospheric CO2 is even less likely to function as a barrier to IR or reflect it back to reheat the ground or water than the sheet of glass in Wood’s greenhouse.

The blackened cardboard in Wood’s greenhouses was a very good radiator of IR as is typical of black substances. The water that covers 70% of earth’s surface is a very poor radiator and produces only limited amounts of IR as is typical of transparent substances. Water releases heat through evaporation rather than radiation.

The glass sheet provided a solid barrier to IR. Atmospheric CO2 is widely dispersed comprising less than 400 parts per million in the atmosphere. Trapping IR with CO2 would be like trying to confine mice with a chain link fence.

Glass reflects a wider spectrum of IR than interacts with CO2. The glass sheets reflected IR back toward the floor of the greenhouse. CO2 doesn’t reflect IR.

At the time of Wood’s experiment, it was believed that CO2 and other gas molecules became hotter after absorbing IR.

Four years later Niels Bohr reported his discovery that the absorption of specific wavelengths of light didn’t cause gas atoms/molecules to become hotter. Instead, the absorption of specific wavelengths of light caused the electrons in an atom/molecule to move to a higher energy state. After absorption of light of a specific wavelength an atom couldn’t absorb additional radiation of that wavelength without first emitting light of that wavelength. He called the amount of energy absorbed and emitted as a “quantum”. (Philosophical Magazine Series 6, Volume 26 July 1913, p. 1-25)

Unlike the glass which reflects IR back where it comes from, CO2 molecules emit IR up and sideways as well as down. In the time interval between absorbing and reemitting radiation, CO2 molecules allow IR to pass them by. Glass continuously reflects IR.

Those who claim that CO2 molecules in the atmosphere can cause heating by trapping IR have yet to provide any empirical scientific evidence to prove such a physical process exists. The experiment by R.W. Wood demonstrates that even a highly reflective covering that reflects a broad spectrum of IR cannot cause heating by trapping IR in a confined space. There is no way CO2, which at best only affects a small portion of the IR produced by earth’s surface, can heat the atmosphere by trapping IR.

Contrary to the lie repeated in news stories about climate, science doesn’t say that CO2 is causing higher temperatures by trapping IR. Empirical science indicates that no such process exists in this physical universe.

The Greatest Scam in History

January 2, 2013

The residents of California are about to become victims of what Weather Channel founder John Coleman has accurately called “the greatest scam in history”. They will be paying higher energy bills to help carbon traders get richer.

In the 1990’s the corrupt Enron company began paying scientists and purported environmental groups to support the outright lie that slight increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide could increase atmospheric temperatures. Enron also supported politicians who were willing to go along with this scheme. Enron’s goal was to get governments to establish a system for trading what the company called “carbon credits”.

Companies producing carbon dioxide have to pay for “carbon credits” to do so . These carbon credits can then be traded by speculators just like stocks and bonds. More on Enron and carbon trading later.

I’ve posted numerous articles on the global warming fraud over the last several years. I’m going to repost some of them to make it easier for readers to find them. Because of their age, some of the articles they link to may no longer be available on the web. I’m going to post them as is for now, but may rewrite some of them with new links later.

One fact many people don’t understand about science is that science has long had an attraction for con artists. A few centuries ago “scientists” called “alchemists” would get wealthy nobles to finance their research by claiming to be working on a way to turn metals like lead into gold .

As a college undergraduate, I initially started studying math and physics before making the mistake of thinking I could help politicians find solutions to social problems by studying the social sciences. I didn’t realize politicians weren’t particularly interested in actually solving social problems. My physics course work included the study of light. Physics is the science that deals with energy such as heat and electromagnetic radiation or light.

The physics of climate is relatively simple. It isn’t necessary to understand quantum physics to understand climate unless you want to study the peculiar characteristics of water molecules such as why ice(solid water) floats on liquid water. It’s the complex interaction of various factors, including cycles like el Nino / la Nina, that makes climate complicated. The study of climate inspired development of the math/science field of chaos theory which applies to a variety of subjects including human behavior. Those of you who invest in the stock market might want to investigate applications of chaos theory.

My interest in human behavior includes human interaction with the physical environment. There are actions humans take that can impact climate, but production of carbon dioxide isn’t one of those actions. For example, humans can cause desertification by eliminating trees. The draining of wetlands in Florida has increased the potential for freezing weather in the state. The increased danger of freezing weather potentially threatens the orange crop that plays a major role in Florida’s economy.

The claim by global warming alarmists that slight changes in the amount of the very minor, but essential, atmospheric gas, carbon dioxide can significantly change temperature is absurd. CO2 comprises less than 0.04% of the atmosphere. The only change in CO2 that could impact temperature would be if CO2 levels dropped below the amount necessary to support plant life. Plants store solar energy in the form of the electron bonds holding complex carbon molecules together. This process reduces the amount of solar radiation converted to heat.

Those who claim CO2 causes warming by trapping infrared radiation (IR) ignore the fact that physicist R. W. Woods disproved the theory that “trapping” radiation causes heating in greenhouses or the atmosphere over a century ago.

My knowledge of human behavior helps me understand how otherwise intelligent individuals can support the nonsense that a minor gas like CO2 can control climate. Many people support the claim that CO2 causes warming because they are profiting from trading carbon credits or are being paid by carbon traders. Natural gas companies like the late Enron company can gain a competitive advantage over coal because coal has a higher carbon content than natural gas

Others have reverted to primitive religious beliefs. They want to believe that humans can “control” climate because they are scared by the idea that climate is beyond control. In effect, many of them believe that if unfavorable weather events it means they have offended the “weather gods”. Global warming believers use the equivalent of the word “heretic” to describe those who disagree with them. Terms like “denier” and “contrarian” labels those who use the terms as childish. The terms brand those who use them as religious fanatics rather than scientists.