Energy and Climate Myths Destroyed


    
On April 14th, 2018, environmentalist David Buckel committed suicide by setting himself on fire with gasoline to protest "global warming" after one of the coldest winters on record.  The media and our politicians are responsible for his death because they destroyed the scientific method by polluting it with small minded partisan politics.  As a scientific theory, man made climate change due to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels has as many loopholes as a rodeo, and is about as accurate as astrology.  Global warming theology is an invigorating new age doomsday religion that puts Mother Nature on the Cross instead of Jesus.  Christian fundamentalists have End Times Theology.  Secular humanists have the Church of Climate Change.  Many fall in love with the art of spreading climate change fear, which feeds an unhealthy psychological need.  Passionate Christians can see the face of Jesus in a random stain on a wall.  Passionate climate change enthusiasts see the unprecedented freezing of Niagara Falls two years in a row as a sign of global warming.

1)  The Discovery

     The crystal clear solar system wide climate discovery by Dr. Ned Nikolov and Dr. Karl Zeller is based on official NASA space probe data.  They used advanced mathematical analysis techniques to study the climates of rocky surfaced planets and moons in our solar system.  They found they could accurately predict their long term average surface temperatures by knowing just two strategic facts: their distance from the Sun and their atmospheric pressure.  This formula has worked correctly for Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, and Pluto, and for Earth’s moon, Europa, Callisto, Titan, and Triton.  Their predictions have been proven accurate to within one degree Celsius.  Like the value of Pi, this mathematical relationship will never go away because it was created by Nature, not by man.

     Nikolov and Zeller found that the specific gaseous composition of the atmospheres of planets and moons are irrelevant to determining their long-term average surface temperatures.  For example, the atmosphere of Venus is composed of 96.5% carbon dioxide, while Earth’s atmosphere contains only .04% carbon dioxide, yet that information was not even needed to predict temperature.  The logical conclusion is that atmospheric gases only contribute to warming by their physical mass, which increases atmospheric pressure.

     Schools teach that the carbon dioxide rich atmosphere of Venus creates a powerful greenhouse effect that keeps surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead: about 462 degrees Celsius.  The new evidence suggests that heat is actually produced by Venus’s proximity to the Sun and the weight of its atmosphere, which is over 90 times heavier than Earth’s.  Venus’s tremendous atmospheric mass produces crushing atmospheric pressure, which generates intense heat.

     Gas compression heating in a diesel engine eliminates the need for a spark plug.  Atmospheric gas compression heating due to gravity keeps the Earth warm, not the infrared radiative properties of the so-called "greenhouse gases."  Carbon dioxide has no special role in controlling Earth temperatures.  Nikolov and Zeller suggest that "the greenhouse effect" be replaced by the term "atmospheric thermal enhancement." 

     Obvious atmospheric heating due to air compression occurs regularly in Brookings, Oregon, which is famous for the "Brookings effect" weather phenomena, also known as a katabatic wind.  Winds sweep down from the coastal mountains at high speed which causes atmospheric compression at sea level.  This causes the air to heat up, which often makes Brookings warmer than lower latitude towns on the California coast.  Gravity driven atmospheric compression heating happens everywhere on Earth at all times.  We do not notice it because it is a continuous phenomenon.  Without it, our oceans would freeze to the Equator.
    
2)  The Secret

     Dr. Nikolov points out that the greenhouse gas theory violates the Energy-Conservation Law in trying to explain the atmospheric thermal effect exclusively through radiation.  Specifically, the total amount of short wave solar radiation absorbed by the Earth is about 240 watts per square meter.  The measured long wave radiation coming down from our atmosphere is about 343 watts per square meter.  This downward long wave radiation has been falsely assumed to be due to greenhouse gases absorbing long wave radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface as it heats up through short wave radiation bombardment from the Sun.  We thus have 43% more energy coming down from the atmosphere than all the energy received from the Sun in total.  The most likely cause of this excess energy is gas compression heating, not the greenhouse effect, which by definition can only help contain energy created by the Sun.

3)  The Fallacy

     Former NOAA climate scientist, Dr. Rex J. Fleming, stated that “there is no propensity for CO2 to store heat in a systematic way over time to produce a climate change effect.”  A greenhouse has glass walls that blocks convective heat exchange with the surrounding environment, thus insulating the air inside.  Earth's atmosphere has no walls, so convective cooling acts as an escalator transferring heat from the surface of the Earth all the way up to the stratosphere.  The commonly used greenhouse gas theory analogy to a parked car’s windshield is therefore false.

     Ask yourself; does the warm carbon dioxide rich smoke from a campfire make the fire hotter or act as insulation holding in the heat?  Rapid convective cooling overpowers any infrared radiative effects of gases in our atmosphere, so no free flowing gas can act as insulation.  Trying to build a greenhouse out of gas is like trying to build a canoe out of barbed-wire.

     Ask yourself; why is the top of Mount Everest always colder than the bottom of Death Valley?  The answer is that compression heating is obviously lower at higher altitudes where the air is thin.  Lower pressure means lower temperatures.    

     The greenhouse gas theory was first proposed in the 19th Century as a conjecture without observational evidence.  It later became "settled science" through repetition by many generations of scientists quoting their mentors and peers.  Only computer projection models formulated with erroneous assumptions and cult like zealotry keep the man-made climate change bandwagon going.

4)  The Evidence

     Earth’s climate history does not reveal any evidence of carbon dioxide increasing Earth’s temperatures as a “greenhouse gas.”  The temperature increase Earth experienced after the end of the Little Ice Age (1300 to 1870) up to about 1940 was not caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions because industrial output during those years was too low to make any significant difference.  Therefore, the heat waves and drought that caused the Dust Bowl of the 1930s had nothing to do with fossil fuels.

     Industrial output and CO2 emissions increased dramatically during World War II and during the post-war economic boom, but the Earth's temperature dropped after 1940 until about 1975.  By the early 1970s the weather had become so cold that there was fear of a coming ice age.  If CO2 was the driving force behind temperature increases, the Earth would have experienced vigorous heating during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, not the remarkable cooling that actually occurred.

     When the world dramatically increased biofuel farming during the Bush and Obama administrations, CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions rose as a result of deforestation, land use change, and increased fertilizer production, yet Earth's global temperature remained flat instead of rising. That fact goes counter to the basic premises of the man-made global warming hypothesis.

The Connolly weather balloon data study 
 
     Father and son scientists, Dr. Michael Connolly and Dr. Ronan Connolly, conducted a historic review of global weather balloon data going back for many years, and they came to the following conclusions:

“It doesn’t matter whether we double, triple, or even quadruple the carbon dioxide concentration.  Carbon dioxide has no impact on atmospheric temperatures.”

“It turns out that some of the assumptions used in man-made global warming theory had never actually been tested.  When we tested them, we discovered that they were invalid.”  

“We carried out new laboratory experiments, and analyzed the data from millions of weather balloons to calculate exactly how much global warming carbon dioxide was causing.  When we did this, we discovered that the answer was zero.”

"The "unusual global warming" that has caused such concern is not unusual, after all. We found that the world naturally switches between periods of global warming and periods of global cooling, with each period lasting several decades."

SEE  Balloons in the Air: Understanding Weather and Climate on YouTube.  Historically dramatic moments start at the 50-minute point.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfRBr7PEawY

SEE  The Connolly website, Global Warming Solved, for all the scientific data and details.  https://globalwarmingsolved.com/about-us/ 

The Finnish study
 
     A study by Dr. Jyrki Kauppinen and Dr. Pekka Malmi, from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Turku in Finland, found that the IPCC’s computer generated climate models fail to consider the very strong influence of solar mediated low cloud cover changes on global temperature.  The authors state that the IPCC’s results cannot be considered valid experimental evidence. See “No Experimental Evidence For The Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change”  https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

The Chinese study

     A Chinese archaeological based study has found that recent increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have had no measurable effect on climate.  Dr Wu Jing, from the Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, discovered that China's winters have been warming since 4,000 BC. She stated that "Driving forces include the sun, the atmosphere, and its interaction with the ocean." Her group of scientists concluded that "We have detected no evidence of human influence." Dr. Wu Jing is currently worried about global cooling, not global warming. She states that "A sharp drop of temperature will benefit nobody."

SEE  News story published in the South China Morning Post,  China scientists warn of global cooling trick up nature’s sleeve.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3022136/china-scientists-warn-global-cooling-trick-natures-sleeve

5)  The Past

     This new evidence helps explain our planet’s history.  During the Jurassic Period, about 200 million years ago, Earth was significantly warmer with tropical plants growing in polar regions.  Dinosaurs ruled the land while pterodactyls roamed the skies.  Pterodactyls were large winged reptiles that flew like birds despite their heavy bone structure.  Flight would be impossible in today’s relatively thin atmosphere, but when pterodactyls existed our atmosphere must have been much denser; perhaps up to three times as dense.  The greater the air density, the greater the aerodynamic lift, and the greater the atmospheric heat.

6)  Correcting Misconceptions

     Air pollution lowers temperatures instead of raising them because pollution blocks sunlight and reflects it back into Space.  That is why volcanic eruptions cause global cooling.  The net effect of having water in all three phases (solid, liquid, gas) on Earth is cooling, because clouds block and reflect sunlight.  Water dramatically affects weather and the distribution of heat, but it does not cause total global planetary warming.

     Politicians unscientifically brand carbon dioxide as a “pollutant,” forgetting the obvious proven fact that carbon dioxide created and feeds all life on Earth — and most likely — all life that exists anywhere in the universe.  Adding more CO2 to our atmosphere makes plants grow faster, bigger, and more resistant to drought, which produces more food and lumber.  NASA satellite observations have shown this is already happening around the world.  If we want to make Earth warmer, we will have to either significantly increase total atmospheric pressure or permanently reduce global cloud cover, both daunting tasks beyond our capabilities.

7)  The Bottom Line

     The Nikolov-Zeller formulas have been examined by scientists around the world, and no one has been able to find flaw in their mathematics, only displeasure in what their discovery means.  It means this whole charade of dangerous man-made global warming has been much ado about nothing.  It makes famous politicians, scientists, and celebrities look like charlatans and fools, and puts in jeopardy a trillion dollar renewable energy business, which has become a vampiric drain on humanity rather than a savior.  Nikolov and Zeller have not been rewarded for making the greatest discovery in climatology of the twenty-first century.  Instead, they have faced censorship, mud throwing, and deafening-silence from world leaders who should use this new information to develop productive energy polices that will dramatically elevate the human standard of living worldwide.   See New Insights on the Physical Nature of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effect  and other papers at http://renewable.50webs.com/Zeller.Nikolov.html

 Biofuels are the biggest crime of the 21st century

     Global biofuel farming has raised the cost of fertilizer, farmland, and food all over the world.  Malnutrition is the world’s leading cause of avoidable premature death, and the primary cause of avoidable mental retardation in children.  Estimates of how many people die every year worldwide from malnutrition and related illness range from 8 million to 19 million people.  To be conservative, let’s say only 8 million die and their average height is 36 inches because so many are children.  That means that enough humans die of hunger and related illness every year to make an unbroken chain of corpses 4,545 miles long (7,313 kilometers).  Driving 500 miles per day, it would take you 9 days to get past all those dead bodies.  Who would not be traumatized by such a corpse laden journey?  Yet, when I confront environmentalists, politicians, and government salaried bureaucrats with these facts, they just don’t seem to care.  Biofuels kill through malnutrition and related illness, not through bullets and bombs.  Those deaths are not reported by our media because biofuels are a diffuse crime.  The bodies of the poor who died because of unnecessarily high food prices are scattered all over the Third World, and their families do not have lawyers.  

     America currently uses well over 40% of its corn crop to manufacture ethanol for fuel, but that ethanol satisfies just 5% of U.S. transportation energy.  Ethanol contains one third less energy per gallon than gasoline, so ethanol mandates lower our miles per gallon while increasing engine repair bills.  Biofuel production is eroding away the last remaining half of America’s prime Midwest topsoil at an alarming rate.  Globally, topsoil is being lost ten times faster than it is being replenished.  What will our grandchildren eat when all of our topsoil is gone?  Biofuel farming is also speeding the depletion of the world’s finite supplies of phosphates needed to make fertilizer.  Ask yourself, in this overpopulated world with limited agricultural resources, was it a good idea to make cars and trucks our competitors for food?  Why is it more "green" to drill the human food supply for energy than Alaska?  Biofuels increase water pollution, aggravate water shortages, accelerate deforestation, and are inherently energy inefficient because their manufacture requires large amounts of fossil fuels to produce.  The bottom line is that biofuel production is indefensible by any measure and amounts to a unnecessary war on the human food supply. 

     It has been conclusively proven that common neonicotinoid pesticides kill bees in mass numbers, and that bees are exposed to more pesticides than previously thought, for longer periods of time than previously thought, and at greater distances from sprayed cropland than previously thought.  The United States uses massive amounts of pesticides on all of its biofuel crops, from corn, to soybeans, to rapeseed, and so does Brazil and all of the other countries engaged in biofuel farming.  With over 50 million acres of land dedicated to biofuel production in the USA, and over 155 million acres of land used for biofuel farming worldwide, and all those acres acting as death traps for bees, the impact on the world bee population is obviously tremendous.  The equation is simple; more biofuel farming equals more pesticide use, which equals more dead bees.

The wind and solar hoax

     To satisfy 100% of New York City's electricity needs with wind power would require impossible around-the-clock winds within a limited speed range, and a wind farm the size of the entire state of Connecticut.  After billions of dollars wasted on solar subsidies, solar energy provides just a tiny insignificant fraction of United States electricity.  Solar photovoltaic cells and windmills suffer from the incurable problems of intermittent and unreliable operation and LOW ENERGY DENSITY.  Would you hire a drunken employee who only showed up for work part of the time, and on his own erratic schedule, not yours?  On top of that, the sloppy drunk demands a far higher salary than do reliable workers.  Wind and solar are fairy tale energy solutions for people who do not understand the real-world mathematics of energy production, and for those who wish to make money on a fad that should have died out years ago.

     The only authentic replacement for fossil fuels possible is some form of safe nuclear power, which has the highest energy density of all sources and is capable of operating reliably 24-7-365, not just when the wind blows and the sun shines.  The most promising types of safe nuclear energy include simplified hot fusion technology that does not use expensive lasers, as does the government funded International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project, which has become a costly boondoggle.  A number of private companies, including aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, have compact fusion designs they think they can get to work at reasonable cost. 

     The second alternative is Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, a.k.a. cold fusion, which many laboratories around the world claim is real and can produce small amounts of energy.   Even if this is true, LENR is totally unproven as a reliable marketable device for large scale energy production.  Though energy from LENR is a long shot possibility, we should at least remain open minded to new ideas.  A successful miniature LENR reactor could theoretically be used to power automobiles and trucks directly, thus eliminating the need for liquid transportation fuels of any kind.  The third alternative is molten salt thorium reactor technology, which is an inherently much safer form of fission nuclear technology that does not produce large amounts of radioactive waste.

     Relatively small amounts of money should be spent on fusion power research instead of wasting untold billions on subsidies and mandates that only harm our economy, increase unemployment, and raise the cost of food and energy.  Efficient products never require subsidies and mandates.  You only have to force and bribe people to buy products that do not work in a cost effective way. 

     Mark Mills of the Manhattan Institute points out that in 2017 "The world’s nearly 8 billion people and $80 trillion economy depend on hydrocarbons to supply over 80% of global energy; oil fuels 98% of transportation."  Fossil fuels are keeping us all alive, and we should stop demonizing that gift of nature that is feeding us, clothing us, sheltering us, and allowing all of us, our children, and our beloved pets and farm animals to live another day.  Without fossil fuels we would not have even been born, and there would be no human civilization for radical environmentalists to complain about.  You cannot replace a three course meal (high energy density fossil fuels) with a single potato chip (low energy density wind, solar, and biofuels).  That is the basic mathematical truth our politicians are not telling us.

Jerry Brown’s forest fire hoax

     It took nature millions of years to evolve California’s giant sequoia trees and lodgepole pine.  Both those species require forest fires to reproduce.  What does that fact tell you?  On average, lighting sparked fires swept through California forests every 5 to 15 years before Europeans arrived.  Fire releases seeds and enriches the soil with nutrients that seedlings need to grow.  Climate change enthusiasts tell us that humans feeding plants the vital substance they need to survive, carbon dioxide, is the cause of deadly forest fires, not years of fire suppression and logging bans that produced an excess of forest fuel.  If you don’t allow free roaming forest fires, then you must carefully and wisely selectively cut the forests; it’s as simple as that.

Here are three quotes relevant to climate change enthusiasts.

1)  "The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is that it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all." --  "Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?" -- "Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.” —  Saikat Chakrabarti, former chief of staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y. 14th District)   

2)  "No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world." — Former Canadian Minister of the Environment, Christine Stewart

3)  "The challenge I think we have is for some reason climate change has become a religion -- a politically induced religion instead of science fact that now we have to embrace and move forward on." —  Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy

     Real scientists do not trade emails sharing secrets on how to rig computer projections to fake conclusions, as the IPCC has done.  Real scientists do not gerrymander Earth weather station data to show abnormal warming which does not exist in fact, as NOAA has done.  Real scientists do not "fiddle" with temperature records, as NASA has done. Under pressure from Obama, NASA changed the way it calculates world temperatures to include ocean temperatures instead of just land mass temperatures.  The only reason to do this was to create an artificial spike in Earth temperatures on a graph that Obama could use to scare the public.  When science is for sale and under the command of politicians, it is no longer science.  Fewer than 50% of real climatologists believe that dangerous man made global warming due to atmospheric carbon dioxide levels is proven.  The 97% consensus figure is, and always has been, pure fiction.  That is a proven fact, but facts bounce off zealots who have declared their theories as infallible and unquestionable as the word of God.

     Our main ecological problem is global human overpopulation, yet no well known politician has addressed this touchy issue publicly.  Our leaders are divorced from reality and living in ideological dream worlds.  They misdirect public unhappiness over numerous societal problems that they themselves have helped create in the name of political correctness toward the myth of man made climate change.  How is the United States of America ever going to protect its environment and survive as a nation with open border anarchy?  Climate change hysteria is a diversion from reality that is wasting time, money, and human lives.

     Localized surface level man made climate change due to land use change is real, not fiction.  Cities get hotter than forests because concrete absorbs and retains more heat than grass and trees.  Therefore, if you wish to control that proven form of global warming, the best defense is strict border security and an end to illegal invasion, which we dishonestly label "illegal immigration."  Immigrants ask permission, fill out forms, wait patently in line, and respect the laws of the country they wish to immigrate to.  Invaders just break in and take what they want.  The best way to protect our environment is to bury political correctness in our backyards and end open border anarchy.  National suicide is not good for our children or our environment, but the Democratic Party and many Republicans do not seem to understand that simple obvious fact.  Will they ever wake up from their ideological dream worlds?

Please watch Video Tutorial Cures Climate Hysteria.
http://renewable.50webs.com/Video-Tutorial.html

For information on data faking scandals and real climate science, see Moderating Climate Change Hysteria.
http://renewable.50webs.com/climate.html

For the big picture on energy production and better clean energy solutions, read The Renewable Energy Disaster.
http://renewable.50webs.com/

Christopher Calder   banbiofuels AT gmail DOT com

Christopher Calder is a nonprofit, nonpartisan advocate for world food supply security with no financial interest in any energy related business.