As has become the usual practice at the UN climate summits, COP 19 in Warsaw has gone past its Friday closing time and is now in overtime.
This year’s talks became bogged down by a series of challenges.
Russia raised fundamental issues of procedural fairness — little things like the UN not recognizing nations seeking to speak or permitting them to vote.
132 poor nations walked out to pressure industrialized nations to accept legal liability for “loss and damage” they suffer as a result of natural disasters. That science cannot show a meaningful causal relationship between natural disasters occurring today and global warming is an afterthought — or no thought at all.
In a truly bizarre twist, hundreds of members of far-left enviro NGOs walked out of the talks to express their frustration when the UNFCCC did not immediately cave in to their demands and fund loss and damage and a host of other redistribution schemes. They also found sponsorship of the COP by charitable gifts from industry and the presence of business representatives in the proceedings to be intolerable — that they themselves are tolerated in the proceedings under the same rules is quite conveniently beyond their ken.
All that Sturm und Drang left the climate talks way behind schedule.
Negotiators did emerge from behind closed doors to announce that they had an agreement in hand to finalize the UN’s REDD scheme. If you’ve been dreaming of becoming a billionaire by selling carbon offsets from third world forests that will have no meaningful effect on world temperatures, your moment has come.
With most negotiating tracks way behind schedule, the Obama administration tried to ride to the rescue. U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern announced that for the first time the U.S. now supports all nations declaring their targets for reducing CO2 emissions before 2015. This would clear the path for the UN to adopt a full climate treaty and successor to the Kyoto Protocol in Paris in 2015, while Obama is still in office.
E.U. climate chief Connie Hedegaard has been trying to get the U.S. on board for years. Stern’s announcement gave her something with which to encourage the delegates that their climate treaty of Paris remains in sight. -However, major stumbling blocks remain. Developing nations remain simultaneously reluctant to reduce their own emissions and adamant that they want immediate funding for both the Green Climate Fund and Loss and Damage.
As the talks enter their final hours, how big a bribe can Hedegaard and the industrial world come up with to get developing nations to agree to a COP 19 outcome? Alternatively, will developing nations defer their global warming distribution dreams to at last have the U.S. on board?
Whose money after all do you think it is that they are so eager to redistribute?
Here is the crux of this scam by the UN. Why do you have to pay for reducing greenhouse gases? If you truly are hell bent on reduction, then simply ruled the reductions be met. Period. This is nothing more than a scam to get the developed world to give more money to the UN in the range of $15, B per year, keep $12,B and distribute $3, B. Wake up Canada, US, Europe and Russia. The increase in greenhouse gases is not the result of more commercial developed nations, but to the direct increase in undeveloped nation population explosion and they want us to pay for them. Have some birth control first and then maybe I would think about contributing to the cause monetarily. Stop looking for reasons to rape the civilized world and give to the bankster of the world, Rothschilds, Windsors, Bushes, Rockefellers and the ilk. If you are so hell bent on giving your money away, UN, I will gladly take some from you. When was the last independant audit? How do we know where you spend your money. The world does not know. Name me one program that the UN has started that has been successful on its own merits. I know the US does not have a record of successful programs that have worked. Know why not? All the trails lead to somebody making a ton of money form the program. Ultimately the large banks and corporations have raped the SUA of its legacy and it has to stop. We have not had one reason to continue sending our money to Washington and I say it is about time to stop it all and return Washington back to the people. I dare you to prove me wrong and have physical proof of the rebuttal. Good Luck.
obama has made another lame decision by siding with the U.N. and continues to dismantle America!!!!! The U.N. can’t manage itself and the majority of the Third World Nations at the U.N. do not like the United States of America!!!!! Let them hate us for free!!!!!
When are those dip-squats in the Congress going to impeach this guy? When there is nothing left? He has taken numerous unilateral unconstitutional actions in the last few years that he could be impeached for. Even National Black Republicans Association has filed articles of impeachment against him. How long is America going to continue to be “black” mailed by the civil rights movement.
I believe Obama is sick of being blamed for everything so he will kiss up and continue to use the U.N as his tool to destroy the economy and security of the U.S . Impeach him and get this madness over with.
Yet another scheme to steal money from the American taxpayers, and reduce the American standard of living.
Not minimizing the blatant lie and scam of “climate change”, if all of these obliviating fools (eco terrorists) would stay home instead of flying to all these “summits”, traveling in their limos/cabs, and staying in expensive hotels….and just SHUT UP, just think of how much CO2 we could eliminate!
While we are at it, shut up 90% of DC and send them home for one last time….just think of how the planet will benefit!
He is just taking his “revenge vote” to another level….
When are these climate change charlatans going to get the message? The game is up!
Catastrophic man-made global warming is a complete con!
I totally agree with Walt Cunningham that Mann-made global warming does not exist. Here is the first part of an experiment that shows that the Hypotheses of Greenhouse gas effect has been proven wrong.
Albert
Einstein once said, “No
amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single
experiment can prove me wrong.”
Einstein’s words express a foundational principle of science
intoned by the logician, Karl Popper: Falsifiability. In order to
verify a hypothesis there must be a test by which it can be proved
false. A thousand observations may appear to verify a hypothesis, but
one critical failure could result in its demise. The history of
science is littered with such examples.
The
Experiment that Failed which can save the World Trillions:
Proving the “greenhouse gas effect”
does not exist!
By Berthold Klein P.E (January 15, 2012)
Edited by John O’Sullivan,
incorporating comments by Dr. Pierre Latour, Professor Nasif Nahle,
Edward J. Haddad Jr. P.E, Ganesh Krish, and others.
Dedication
To Professor Robert W. Wood (1909), the
first scientist to demonstrate that the Hypothesis of the “Greenhouse
effect in the atmosphere” was unscientific. To all other scientists
since Professor Wood who have added sound technical and scientific
knowledge in many related fields to strengthen the case against the
greenhouse gas effect hoax.
To protect my grandsons JJ and BA plus
their generation and all the generations that follow – because we
finally got it right. For the generations that would otherwise suffer
extreme economic harm if the Hoax of (Michael) Mann-made global
warming – AKA the “greenhouse gas effect” (GHGE) is not stopped
now and forever.
Table of Contents:
Preamble
Section 1: The Hypotheses
Section 2: The Definitions – The Clues
Section 3: The Experiment
Section 4: Numbers
Section 5: Holding the gases –
“containment”
Section 6: Setting up the Experiment
Section 7: Results: Examining the Clues
Section 8: Water – liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
References
Appendix
Preamble:
This paper endeavors to solve a
188-year-old mystery that has eluded many scientists. It merely takes
a cogent, specialist application of science that has been in the
books of physics and thermodynamics for over 100 years. To solve the
mystery of why “The greenhouse gas effect (GHGE)” does not exist,
one certainly has to have an understanding of quantum physics and the
basic laws of conservation of energy. To most people, including many
scientists, quantum physics is a mystery especially because many
things that occur are not intuitive. When explained and proven by
experiments, it can be understood. As with any mystery; what are the
real clues and what are the red herrings?
It is desirable that anyone that can
read be able to understand the experiment documented herein and what
it means. This paper is for everyone – from the man on the street
who would suffer the most by government “1984 Big Brother”
control to the Ph. D. holders in social sciences, finance and
otherwise unrelated branches of science, law and politics.
At the outset, having communicated with
real people and some Ph. D’s, I realized that my mission appeared
to be a veritable “Mission Impossible”. Being able to read does
not mean that the reader can comprehend the inner workings of
science. While having a Ph. D. in one field does not give someone
sound knowledge or judgment in unrelated fields (although many are
increasingly taking the time to study in other areas to accumulate
the knowledge needed). Each person may possess an area of expertise
but only a few can extend this knowledge to analyze clues within
totally unfamiliar mysteries.
We need to start with a very brief
definition of the greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) – an effect where
certain gases have the molecular composition to absorb Infrared
(heat) radiation – and what happens afterward is important because it
is not intuitive but is proven by basic physics. The Bohr model shows
this millions of times each day by our use of Infrared heaters in
homes, restaurants (food warmers), factories, bus stops, etc. This
process of absorbing Infrared radiation (IR) is supposed to cause the
earth to be warmer than a planet without carbon dioxide (CO2), or any
other atmosphere. Yet here is just one example of a recent paper that
gives us insight into the real causes of “climate change”:_
hyperlink
“http://notrickszone.com/2011/12/30/the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
By _ HYPERLINK
“http://notrickszone.com/author/admin/”__P
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
Section 1:
The Hypotheses:
To demonstrate the existence of
“greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) it is necessary to define it. We are
told the Hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process
involving a combination of “Infra-red absorbing gases” (IRag),
including Water/liquid/vapor/solid (H2O/lvs), CO2, CH4, NO2 and
others are super insulation which cause the atmosphere to be 33
degrees C warmer than would be explained by the “black body
temperature” (a theoretical perfect radiator of electomagnetic
energy).” -The earth along with its atmosphere is not one of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of
the magic caused by the “greenhouse gas effect” as has been said
the truth is in the details. Regarding this see the Commentary by
Professor Nahle and Dr. Latour
To begin to define “The
greenhouse gas effect” let’s start with the “features that
should be testable.” Because water/liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
physically reacts differently than other IRag gases
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
these IRag gases will be dealt with first.
Section 2: The
Definitions – The Clues
Here are those critical features claimed
(yet unproved) in the Standard Model “greenhouse gas effect”:
Infrared absorbing gases (IRag)
absorb IR radiation and thus they inhibit such radiation from
escaping into space, thereby reducing the rate of atmospheric
cooling i.e. causing air to be warmer.
IRag’s will “back radiate” IR
radiation to earth causing increased heating of the surface.
IRag’s will heat up by the
absorption of the IR radiation thus heating the air. (Oxygen,
Nitrogen, Water vapor and trace gases).
IRag’s have different levels of
“back-forcing”. Thus CH4 (methane) is supposed to deliver 23 to
70 times more “back radiation “ than CO2. NO2 delivers 289 times
that of CO2. (Alarmist ‘experts’ have yet to explain these
numbers). Evidently, it is assumed that someone quantified the
amount of IR that a particular sample of gas absorbs utilizing IR
spectrophotometer analysis and then compared this data to the
absorption of CO2. This is a very important feature of the “GHGE”
The higher the concentration of
IRag’s the greater the amount of “back-radiation” and the
higher the temperature of the earth which in turn results in an
increase in the global atmospheric temperature.
The concentration of CO2 found in
million-year-old ice cores can be utilized as proof that the “GHGE”
exists.
Where
does this standard model greenhouse gas effect lead?
We all know that there is one true kind
of “greenhouse” effect. Engineers have built real greenhouses
for decades for a useful purpose (growing plants). Anyone that has
gotten into a hot car on a sunny day (either in summer or winter),
experiences this. We see temperatures that are much higher in the car
than in the shade. This is caused by confined space heating. This was
established in 1909 by R.W. Wood a professor of Physics and Optics at
John Hopkins University from 1901 to 1955 an expert in IR and UV
radiation. Professor Nasif Nahle famously confirmed Professor Wood’s
worth in 2011.
So what experiment could be performed to
“prove” that the “greenhouse gas effect exists?
I totally agree with Walt Cunningham that Mann-made global warming does not exist. Here is the first part of an experiment that shows that the Hypotheses of Greenhouse gas effect has been proven wrong.
Albert
Einstein once said, “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.”
Einstein’s words express a foundational principle of science
intoned by the logician, Karl Popper: Falsifiability. In order to
verify a hypothesis there must be a test by which it can be proved
false. A thousand observations may appear to verify a hypothesis, but
one critical failure could result in its demise. The history of
science is littered with such examples.
The
Experiment that Failed which can save the World Trillions:
Proving the “greenhouse gas effect”
does not exist!
By Berthold Klein P.E (January 15, 2012)
Edited by John O’Sullivan,
incorporating comments by Dr. Pierre Latour, Professor Nasif Nahle,
Edward J. Haddad Jr. P.E, Ganesh Krish, and others.
Dedication
To Professor Robert W. Wood (1909), the
first scientist to demonstrate that the Hypothesis of the “Greenhouse
effect in the atmosphere” was unscientific. To all other scientists
since Professor Wood who have added sound technical and scientific
knowledge in many related fields to strengthen the case against the
greenhouse gas effect hoax.
To protect my grandsons JJ and BA plus
their generation and all the generations that follow – because we
finally got it right. For the generations that would otherwise suffer
extreme economic harm if the Hoax of (Michael) Mann-made global
warming – AKA the “greenhouse gas effect” (GHGE) is not stopped
now and forever.
Table of Contents:
Preamble
Section 1: The Hypotheses
Section 2: The Definitions – The Clues
Section 3: The Experiment
Section 4: Numbers
Section 5: Holding the gases –
“containment”
Section 6: Setting up the Experiment
Section 7: Results: Examining the Clues
Section 8: Water – liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
References
Appendix
Preamble:
This paper endeavors to solve a
188-year-old mystery that has eluded many scientists. It merely takes
a cogent, specialist application of science that has been in the
books of physics and thermodynamics for over 100 years. To solve the
mystery of why “The greenhouse gas effect (GHGE)” does not exist,
one certainly has to have an understanding of quantum physics and the
basic laws of conservation of energy. To most people, including many
scientists, quantum physics is a mystery especially because many
things that occur are not intuitive. When explained and proven by
experiments, it can be understood. As with any mystery; what are the
real clues and what are the red herrings?
It is desirable that anyone that can
read be able to understand the experiment documented herein and what
it means. This paper is for everyone – from the man on the street
who would suffer the most by government “1984 Big Brother”
control to the Ph. D. holders in social sciences, finance and
otherwise unrelated branches of science, law and politics.
At the outset, having communicated with
real people and some Ph. D’s, I realized that my mission appeared
to be a veritable “Mission Impossible”. Being able to read does
not mean that the reader can comprehend the inner workings of
science. While having a Ph. D. in one field does not give someone
sound knowledge or judgment in unrelated fields (although many are
increasingly taking the time to study in other areas to accumulate
the knowledge needed). Each person may possess an area of expertise
but only a few can extend this knowledge to analyze clues within
totally unfamiliar mysteries.
We need to start with a very brief
definition of the greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) – an effect where
certain gases have the molecular composition to absorb Infrared
(heat) radiation – and what happens afterward is important because it
is not intuitive but is proven by basic physics. The Bohr model shows
this millions of times each day by our use of Infrared heaters in
homes, restaurants (food warmers), factories, bus stops, etc. This
process of absorbing Infrared radiation (IR) is supposed to cause the
earth to be warmer than a planet without carbon dioxide (CO2), or any
other atmosphere. Yet here is just one example of a recent paper that
gives us insight into the real causes of “climate change”:_
hyperlink
“http://notrickszone.com/2011/12/30/the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
By _ HYPERLINK
“http://notrickszone.com/author/admin/”__P
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
I totally agree with Walt Cunningham that Mann-made global warming does not exist. Here is the first part of an experiment that shows that the Hypotheses of Greenhouse gas effect has been proven wrong.
Albert
Einstein once said, “No
amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single
experiment can prove me wrong.”
Einstein’s words express a foundational principle of science
intoned by the logician, Karl Popper: Falsifiability. In order to
verify a hypothesis there must be a test by which it can be proved
false. A thousand observations may appear to verify a hypothesis, but
one critical failure could result in its demise. The history of
science is littered with such examples.
The
Experiment that Failed which can save the World Trillions:
Proving the “greenhouse gas effect”
does not exist!
By Berthold Klein P.E (January 15, 2012)
Edited by John O’Sullivan,
incorporating comments by Dr. Pierre Latour, Professor Nasif Nahle,
Edward J. Haddad Jr. P.E, Ganesh Krish, and others.
Dedication
To Professor Robert W. Wood (1909), the
first scientist to demonstrate that the Hypothesis of the “Greenhouse
effect in the atmosphere” was unscientific. To all other scientists
since Professor Wood who have added sound technical and scientific
knowledge in many related fields to strengthen the case against the
greenhouse gas effect hoax.
To protect my grandsons JJ and BA plus
their generation and all the generations that follow – because we
finally got it right. For the generations that would otherwise suffer
extreme economic harm if the Hoax of (Michael) Mann-made global
warming – AKA the “greenhouse gas effect” (GHGE) is not stopped
now and forever.
Table of Contents:
Preamble
Section 1: The Hypotheses
Section 2: The Definitions – The Clues
Section 3: The Experiment
Section 4: Numbers
Section 5: Holding the gases –
“containment”
Section 6: Setting up the Experiment
Section 7: Results: Examining the Clues
Section 8: Water – liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
References
Appendix
Preamble:
This paper endeavors to solve a
188-year-old mystery that has eluded many scientists. It merely takes
a cogent, specialist application of science that has been in the
books of physics and thermodynamics for over 100 years. To solve the
mystery of why “The greenhouse gas effect (GHGE)” does not exist,
one certainly has to have an understanding of quantum physics and the
basic laws of conservation of energy. To most people, including many
scientists, quantum physics is a mystery especially because many
things that occur are not intuitive. When explained and proven by
experiments, it can be understood. As with any mystery; what are the
real clues and what are the red herrings?
It is desirable that anyone that can
read be able to understand the experiment documented herein and what
it means. This paper is for everyone – from the man on the street
who would suffer the most by government “1984 Big Brother”
control to the Ph. D. holders in social sciences, finance and
otherwise unrelated branches of science, law and politics.
At the outset, having communicated with
real people and some Ph. D’s, I realized that my mission appeared
to be a veritable “Mission Impossible”. Being able to read does
not mean that the reader can comprehend the inner workings of
science. While having a Ph. D. in one field does not give someone
sound knowledge or judgment in unrelated fields (although many are
increasingly taking the time to study in other areas to accumulate
the knowledge needed). Each person may possess an area of expertise
but only a few can extend this knowledge to analyze clues within
totally unfamiliar mysteries.
We need to start with a very brief
definition of the greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) – an effect where
certain gases have the molecular composition to absorb Infrared
(heat) radiation – and what happens afterward is important because it
is not intuitive but is proven by basic physics. The Bohr model shows
this millions of times each day by our use of Infrared heaters in
homes, restaurants (food warmers), factories, bus stops, etc. This
process of absorbing Infrared radiation (IR) is supposed to cause the
earth to be warmer than a planet without carbon dioxide (CO2), or any
other atmosphere. Yet here is just one example of a recent paper that
gives us insight into the real causes of “climate change”:_
hyperlink
“http://notrickszone.com/2011/12/30/the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
By _ HYPERLINK
“http://notrickszone.com/author/admin/”__P
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
Section 1:
The Hypotheses:
To demonstrate the existence of
“greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) it is necessary to define it. We are
told the Hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process
involving a combination of “Infra-red absorbing gases” (IRag),
including Water/liquid/vapor/solid (H2O/lvs), CO2, CH4, NO2 and
others are super insulation which cause the atmosphere to be 33
degrees C warmer than would be explained by the “black body
temperature” (a theoretical perfect radiator of electomagnetic
energy).” -The earth along with its atmosphere is not one of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of
the magic caused by the “greenhouse gas effect” as has been said
the truth is in the details. Regarding this see the Commentary by
Professor Nahle and Dr. Latour
To begin to define “The
greenhouse gas effect” let’s start with the “features that
should be testable.” Because water/liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
physically reacts differently than other IRag gases
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
these IRag gases will be dealt with first.
“***//notrickszone.com/2011/12/30/the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
By _ HYPERLINK
“***://notrickszone.com/author/admin/”__P
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
Section 1:
The Hypotheses:
To demonstrate the existence of
“greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) it is necessary to define it. We are
told the Hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process
involving a combination of “Infra-red absorbing gases” (IRag),
including Water/liquid/vapor/solid (H2O/lvs), CO2, CH4, NO2 and
others are super insulation which cause the atmosphere to be 33
degrees C warmer than would be explained by the “black body
temperature” (a theoretical perfect radiator of electomagnetic
energy).” -The earth along with its atmosphere is not one of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of
the magic caused by the “greenhouse gas effect” as has been said
the truth is in the details. Regarding this see the Commentary by
Professor Nahle and Dr. Latour
To begin to define “The
greenhouse gas effect” let’s start with the “features that
should be testable.” Because water/liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
physically reacts differently than other IRag gases
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
these IRag gases will be dealt with first.
**/2011/12/30/the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
**notrickszone.com/author/admin/”__P
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
Section 1:
The Hypotheses:
To demonstrate the existence of
“greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) it is necessary to define it. We are
told the Hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process
involving a combination of “Infra-red absorbing gases” (IRag),
including Water/liquid/vapor/solid (H2O/lvs), CO2, CH4, NO2 and
others are super insulation which cause the atmosphere to be 33
degrees C warmer than would be explained by the “black body
temperature” (a theoretical perfect radiator of electomagnetic
energy).” -The earth along with its atmosphere is not one of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of
the magic caused by the “greenhouse gas effect” as has been said
the truth is in the details. Regarding this see the Commentary by
Professor Nahle and Dr. Latour
To begin to define “The
greenhouse gas effect” let’s start with the “features that
should be testable.” Because water/liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
physically reacts differently than other IRag gases
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
these IRag gases will be dealt with first.
the-suns-impact-on-earths-temperature-goes-far-beyond-tsi-new-paper-shows/”__The
Sun’s Impact On Earth’s Temperature Goes Far Beyond TSI – New
Paper Shows_
Gosselin_ on 30th
December 2011 (TSI=total solar irradiance)
There are several words or terms used in
this paper that need some explanation; a Glossary of terms is
provided within the Appendix.
Section 1:
The Hypotheses:
To demonstrate the existence of
“greenhouse gas effect (GHGE) it is necessary to define it. We are
told the Hypotheses of the “greenhouse gas effect” is the process
involving a combination of “Infra-red absorbing gases” (IRag),
including Water/liquid/vapor/solid (H2O/lvs), CO2, CH4, NO2 and
others are super insulation which cause the atmosphere to be 33
degrees C warmer than would be explained by the “black body
temperature” (a theoretical perfect radiator of electomagnetic
energy).” -The earth along with its atmosphere is not one of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of
the magic caused by the “greenhouse gas effect” as has been said
the truth is in the details. Regarding this see the Commentary by
Professor Nahle and Dr. Latour
To begin to define “The
greenhouse gas effect” let’s start with the “features that
should be testable.” Because water/liquid, vapor, solid (H2O /lvs)
physically reacts differently than other IRag gases
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
these IRag gases will be dealt with first.
Section 2: The
Definitions – The Clues
Here are those critical features claimed
(yet unproved) in the Standard Model “greenhouse gas effect”:
Infrared absorbing gases (IRag)
absorb IR radiation and thus they inhibit such radiation from
escaping into space, thereby reducing the rate of atmospheric
cooling i.e. causing air to be warmer.
IRag’s will “back radiate” IR
radiation to earth causing increased heating of the surface.
IRag’s will heat up by the
absorption of the IR radiation thus heating the air. (Oxygen,
Nitrogen, Water vapor and trace gases).
IRag’s have different levels of
“back-forcing”. Thus CH4 (methane) is supposed to deliver 23 to
70 times more “back radiation “ than CO2. NO2 delivers 289 times
that of CO2. (Alarmist ‘experts’ have yet to explain these
numbers). Evidently, it is assumed that someone quantified the
amount of IR that a particular sample of gas absorbs utilizing IR
spectrophotometer analysis and then compared this data to the
absorption of CO2. This is a very important feature of the “GHGE”
The higher the concentration of
IRag’s the greater the amount of “back-radiation” and the
higher the temperature of the earth which in turn results in an
increase in the global atmospheric temperature.
The concentration of CO2 found in
million-year-old ice cores can be utilized as proof that the “GHGE”
exists.
Where
does this standard model greenhouse gas effect lead?
We all know that there is one true kind
of “greenhouse” effect. Engineers have built real greenhouses
for decades for a useful purpose (growing plants). Anyone that has
gotten into a hot car on a sunny day (either in summer or winter),
experiences this. We see temperatures that are much higher in the car
than in the shade. This is caused by confined space heating. This was
established in 1909 by R.W. Wood a professor of Physics and Optics at
John Hopkins University from 1901 to 1955 an expert in IR and UV
radiation. Professor Nasif Nahle famously confirmed Professor Wood’s
worth in 2011.
So what experiment could be performed to
“prove” that the “greenhouse gas effect exists?
Section 3: The
Experiment
A believer in the man-made global
warming theory (AGW) point out it is impossible to simulate what
actually happens in the atmosphere. They propose using computer
models to predict these effects. The primary problem with “computer
models” is that unless all the relevant factors that effect the
atmosphere are included in the program algorithm it becomes: “garbage
in equals garbage out”.
There are no computers or modelers yet
available that have sufficient capacity to handle all of the factors
driving our complex climate. There will be contributory factors not
even known yet. Then the big guess for modelers is what are the
factors to include, which are really of minor importance, can be left
out to still obtain usable results; which factors are “red
herrings”. As such, to date no one has come up with the “right
model”.
More than 20 different models of weather
/climate programs have been published and not one has been successful
in predicting the weather a year from now, let alone a hundred years
ahead. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has
just started the installation and start up of a Cray AMD 16-core
Intrago processor in 16 cabinets array of 26 cabinets to create a 1.1
petaflops supercomputer. That’s a good start. But until they can
define the real facts about climate it is yet another super
supercomputer creating “garbage in equals garbage out” at super
fast speed.
Using the list of “critical factor-the
Clues” lets see if there are some ways of indicating if the concept
may exist. Utilization of the concentration of IRag’s in the
atmosphere for testing does not work otherwise there would not be the
controversy that exists today.
The fields of engineering and research
employ “scale models,” or models with similar properties that can
be either sized up or down to relate a test to the factors being
studied. “Model studies” or “bench tests” are either similar
in behavior or can be proportioned to larger or smaller series of
events and relate to an actual set of events. They generate data (the
evidence) that can be compared to known conditions or events.
Chemical engineers and others build pilot plants from lab experiments
before finalizing sizing design of a full-scale commercial process
plant. Scale-up is a serious engineering art.
An example of down sizing is the use of
the super collider at CERN to study what happens in a nuclear
explosion. Because the amount of heating that is supposed to be added
by the “greenhouse gas effect” is on the order of fractions of a
degree per year (some claim the change to be 1 to 3 degrees C/ year),
we need a more dramatic experiment to show that the concept actually
exists.
However if the effect is vanishingly
small, it will be hard to prove or disprove. This is one of the UN
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) tricks to fool
mankind. They employ wide ranges and invent probabilities out of very
thin air.
If the experiment at very high
concentration does demonstrate the effect then the “Concept” does
exist. If the concept does works at high concentration then it can
be tried with lower and lower concentrations until a threshold of
effects is reached. It might be linear or logarithmic to zero.
However if the concept does not work at High Concentrations of IRag’s
then the concept of the theoretical “greenhouse gas effect “has
been proven to be a fraud.
Section 4: Numbers
Some numbers are needed now. By
definition 10,000 ppm (parts per million) is 1%, therefore 100 %
equals 1 million parts per million (1×10+6). The atmosphere is
supposed to contain 400 ppm of CO2 (round Number) therefore a
concentration of 100% CO2 is 2500 time that of what is in the
atmosphere. (Volume concentrations are per high school chemistry).
If the GHGE exists it should be much
easier to measure and demonstrate that “back radiation” is
causing a heating effect on the earth.
Now it is claimed that CH4 is from 23 to
70 time the effect of CO2, thus using the lowers figure by using a
concentration of 100 % CH4, the effect should be 57,500 time stronger
that using CO2.
It is claimed that NO2 is 290 times more
powerful that CO2 thus 100% NO2 should cause 725,000 times the effect
of CO2 in the atmosphere.
As CH4 is found to be present at about
2ppb (parts per billion) (2 X 10 -9) in the atmosphere, a
concentration of 100 % CH4 should give results that is 5 X 10 + 10
times what exists in the atmosphere.
Now if CH4 is 23 times the effect of CO2
another longer chain hydrocarbon molecule (more complex C4H10-butane)
will be even more powerful thus the proposed experiment shown below
was done with 100 % butane (C4H10) available in pressure cylinders
with regulators as Butane torches for soldiering pipe. A small flow
of gas from the torch was used to fill the balloon.
The experiment substituted “natural
gas” a mixture of 70% CH4, 29% CO2 and the remainder being H2 and
other trace gases. This is readily available for test purpose from
any natural gas stove.
Now 100 % CO2 is available from several
sources, but one that is not too expensive is from any paint ball
supply store, a regulator is needed to reduce the flow and the
pressure while filling the balloon.
Do not use Alka Seltzer (from an
ineffective test promoted by some groups at NASA) as you have to put
this in water to get the CO2 thus you have a mixture of CO2, water,
water vapor, and air – you are not testing the effect of CO2 only.
The natural gas mixture should have a
combined effect of less that 100% CH4 by a weighted average of 70%
CH4+ 29% CO2 or 3.500000725X10+9 times the effect of CO2 in the
atmosphere. If this occurs the temperature increase must be
measurable. Discussion of H2O/lvs in the atmosphere will follow
later.
Section 5: Holding
the gases – “containment”
How does the experiment contain the high
concentration of the IRag’s for this test? Having reviewed several
experiments that “contain” the IRag’s is glass containers then
radiate them with a heat lamp (IR source) . These “experimenters”
measure the increase in temperature of the gas. They claimed this
increase was due to the “GHGE”. But they are absolutely wrong.
The cause of the temperature increase
was due to the heating of the glass by its absorbing the IR and the
glass heating. (A Master’s thesis (peer reviewed) including this
information is available on request with about 100 other references).
Another failure of these tests was their
including a black cardboard inside the containers, thus heating the
IRag’s from conduction of heat from the black cardboard. Black
objects absorb most of the light including IR & UV and then
converting the energy to “heat” which is conducted to the gas in
the container. (These “experiments” created a Greenhouse effect
– quite simply – merely a confined space heating). That seems unfair.
Why would an impartial scientist do that?
Another experiment painted the inner
surfaces of the boxes to capture more thermal radiation and avoid
high reflection from these surfaces. Corrugated cardboard walls have
a higher thermal resistance than glass, additionally, for enhancing
thermal resistance of cardboard, we wrapped their outer surfaces with
aluminum foil, which has a very low absorptive potential (0.03). It
is true that conduction and convection on the inner walls was carried
towards the inner atmosphere and exaggerated by painting the inner
surfaces of the containers with flat black paint because the coat had
a very high absorptivity and emissivity potentials. (Identified by
the experimental work of Professor Nasif Nahle: see references).
The proper way to contain the high
concentration of IRag’s is in a thin walled material that will not
absorb the IR and heat. Important note: The thin walled material is a
better conduction of thermal energy. A factor to be considered is the
thermal conductivity of Mylar, which is 0.154808 W/m K by Dr. Nahle
based on his experiment verifying the work of R.W. Wood. The
experiment used crystal clear Mylar balloons about 3mil thick. They
are available in various sizes. Several 20-inch major diameter
balloons were chosen for this study
Section 6: Setting
up the Experiment
STEP ONE: Fill the balloons with the
various IRag’s and one balloon with dry air as a control.
STEP TWO: Let the balloons reach ambient
temperature. If you are going to use sunlight let balloon temperature
adjust outside in the shade (minimize IR absorption ahead of
testing). (a clue).
STEP THREE: Use an IR thermometer to
check the temperatures of each balloon, use a digital thermometer
that reads to 0.1 degree C to check air temperature in the shade.
Record data. Do not forget this measures two different phenomena.
[Note: Digital thermometers measure thermal energy, while IR
thermometers measure thermal radiation emitted by the system].
STEP FOUR: Take a large black mat board
or a large black cloth or sheet, and lay it on the ground in the sun.
Use the IR thermometer to check the temperature rise in the sun.
Record the data. When it appears to reach a maximum then go to step
5. [Note: DuPont Duco #71 wrought iron black paint has an
absorptivity of 0.98. It would make a very good absorber]. The black
mat board is used to absorb as much IR as possible that supposedly
“back-radiates” from the IRag in the balloon. This is not to
simulate a “black-body”. Having done some IR measuring of objects
in a hot car, the color of the object has a significant effect on the
IR readings. Use of bi-metal digital thermometers has to be set so
they do not absorb IR and heat, because of the IR radiation
absorption.
STEP FIVE: Suspend the balloons over the
black background (about 1 foot above) and measure the temperature of
the balloons’ surface and internal gases with the IR thermometer.
Dr. Latour explains that this is doubly necessary to measure both
because the properties of IR thermometers are to “see” the IR
impinging on the sensor bases on the optic of the instrument. The
sensor integrates the IR energy to a reading. Thus both the Mylar,
and the contents are projecting IR radiation in all directions .The
instrument which reads a range of IR frequencies is not able to
differentiate between IR from the surface, from the gas inside the
balloon and the background IR passing through the balloon. Thus it
is necessary to determine IR reading based on the instrument “seeing”
through the balloon for one set of readings. Another set of readings
would be from an adjacent position but not through the balloon.
Note: In multiple tests there were no
differences in the readings. This indicated that the IRag’s in the
balloons stayed at ambient air temperature. The IRag’s did absorb
IR but did not “heat” the gas (an important clue!).
To put a bi-metal digital thermometer
either on or inside the balloons would give erroneous readings
because the metal of the thermometer would absorb IR and heat up no
mater what the temperature of the IRag was.
The study by Anthony Watts of weather
stations throughout the US shows how easy it is to get junk readings
from improperly constructed temperature recording devices.
STEP SIX: Measure the temperature of the
black background in the “shadow” of each of the balloons also
measure the temperature of the black background outside of the
“shadows”(projection) of the balloons.
Section 7: Results:
Examining the Clues
Now lets repeat the Critical factors-The clues and note the
result of the test:
Item 1.The IRag’s absorb the IR
radiation and thus prevent it from escaping into space reducing the
rate of earth and atmospheric cool- it causes the air to be warmer.
Results
and explanation:
The air between the balloons and the black background did not change
temperature. It did not get hotter thus normal IR radiation cooling
of the black mat was occurring. The 100% CO2 or the high
concentration of other IRag did not “hinder” normal cooling by
the loss of energy to space. This has been confirmed by the work of
Dr. Roy Spencer and satellite IR measurements showing significant
losses of “heat”/radiation to space. Far more IR radiation
escapes than is stated by the IPCC in any of their reports.
Item 2.The IRag’s will “back
radiate” IR radiation to earth to cause increased heating of the
surface.
Results
and explanation:
The black background did not change temperature either in the
“shadow” or outside the “shadow”. The temperature of the
black background heated to 20 to 30 degrees F above ambient before
the balloons were placed over the black background. When this was
done outside in bright sunlight the black background heated to 130 to
140 degrees F. Similar temperature can be measured from black
asphalt. Air temperatures were 90 to 95 degrees F.
The experiment was also performed
indoors with a 500-watt power shop light (see below; the black
background showed the temperature increased from 70-72 degrees
Fahrenheit to 100 -110 degrees Fahrenheit. Again when measuring the
temperatures of the black background with the IR thermometer there
was no measurable temperature difference anywhere along the surface
of the black mat: no sign here of “back-radiation”.
Item 3. The IRag’s will heat up by the
absorption of the IR radiation thus heating the air.
Results
and explanation:
The balloons did not warm any warmer than ambient. The IRag’s in
the balloons will not warm because that would be a violation of the
basic physics described by the Bohr Model. A statement of basic
physics that shows that absorption of IR by CO2 or other IRag does
not increase the kinetic energy of the molecules (heat). (See note in
Preamble)
Item 4. The IRag’s have different
levels of “back-forcing”. Having asked believers in greenhouse
gas “physics” I’ve had no answer as yet). It is merely assumed
that “someone” has reviewed the amount of IR that a particular
molecule (CH4, NO2,) absorbs by a spectrophotometer analysis then
comparing this to the absorption of CO2. (I have not seen any
experimental data that the “back-forcing” relates to absorption).
Results
and explanation As
there was no temperature difference under any of the balloons, there
was no stronger “back-forcing” caused by the IRag’s absorbed
more IR radiation thus “back-forcing” more radiation. An IRag
has an emissivity characteristic of the molecule not the absorption
of more IR radiation.
Item 5.The higher the concentration of
IRag’s the greater the amount of “back-radiation” the higher
the “global atmospheric temperature will become.
Conclusion
of test results:
Based on the failure of all the previous portions of these tests
which were done with very high concentrations of IRag’s to
demonstrate the GHGE, it is valid to say that increasing CO2 or other
IRag’s in the atmosphere will have NO
temperature EFFECT.
Item 6.The concentration of CO2 found in
million year old Ice cores can be used as proof that the “GHGE”
exists.
Conclusion:
The use of ICE core data is at best circumstantial evidence but it is
not proof of anything. This is a “red Herring” as so much of the
supposed evidence of “GHGE”.
Climate change is measure in
centuries not minutes or years.
Note:
As an alternate light source the experiment has been performed with
an incandescent light using a 500-watt shop power light. This is
because the temperature of the filament approaches the spectral
characteristics of sunlight but contains more” long wave IR”
because of a lower temperature. The light was placed one (1) meter
away from the balloons to avoid conduction and convection heating of
the balloons. As is stated above there was no difference in the final
results, No extra heating of the atmosphere or the background.
Section 8: Water – liquid, vapor,
solid (H2O /lvs)
Now lets talk about water (H2O/lvs).
Why? Everybody seems to acknowledge H2O dominates the atmosphere in
complex ways, swamping any CO2 effect. AGW promoters just ignore H2O.
We may suppose that when CO2 (GHGE) collapses they will declare
DI-hydrogen monoxide a pollutant, too. And so it goes.
Yes, H2O/lvs has a major effect on
weather conditions, where I’m at in Northern Ohio it just started
to rain. If it gets any colder we will have snow or sleet. As is
said in the Great Lakes region, if you don’t like the weather wait
15 minutes and it will change.
Examining H2O/lvs in the atmosphere: if
it’s clear the humidity can be from near 0 % relative humidity to
100%. Now if it ‘s cloudy the “relative Humidity” can vary from
30 to 100% depending on temperatures. We know that the air
temperature, where the clouds are forming, is at or below the “dew
point”.
As the H2O vapor cools to form clouds
there is a release of energy (Heat of condensation – also a
significant reduction of volume). If the general air temperature is
low enough (below freezing) more energy is released as ice or snow is
formed. This energy has to be dissipated either as IR radiation, as
lightning, probably high winds, as a tornado or convection.
This is only one phase of the complex
weather conditions when H2O/lvs is being evaluated.
Another phase is the solar heating of
clouds both day and night. During the day the warming of the top of
clouds is obvious. It is also relevant that in spite of significant
solar energy absorption, the “clouds“ have not absorbed enough
radiation to convert the water or solids back to vapor i.e. there is
probably a rapid turbulent exchange of energy in both directions from
evaporation/ sublimation to condensing, to freezing. This is why
“climatologists” cannot get the correct “sign” on the
“forcing” – it is a constantly changing set of conditions; none
are wrong and none are correct.
Now lets add the next variable – solar
heating at night of the clouds. Having taken IR radiation
measurements at night for the last year at many different times by
solar time it is apparent that when the sun goes down below the
visible horizon, the clouds are still receiving solar energy. Both
actual measurements and visible lighting (multiple colors) of the
clouds have confirmed this fact. The clouds and the atmosphere cool
until about 2:00 am (solar time) when there are measurable increases
in cloud temperatures and air temperatures. This warming continues
until daylight is visible. The degree of warming is related to the
time of year and what is happening with the jet stream and Arctic
storms.
There are other factors that are being
monitored by astrophysics researchers that are showing that solar
flares, and different types of radiation, including cosmic particles,
have an effect on cloud formation. This is only a beginning of
mankind’s learning about another aspect of our atmosphere and
weather and we have yet to see any real world empirical proof that
carbon dioxide plays any role, let alone a role as preponderant as
solar forcing. Indeed, with natural climatic variability accepted as
being substantial anyway, when I see thermal temperatures in my back
yard cycling at +- 8C daily, why should you or I care if average
“heat” temperature increases 1C over a 100-year period?
The nice thing about this described
experiment is that high school physics classes or Freshmen College
physics lab classes can perform the tests. It would teach a very
important lesson in that not all experiments have to have a
“positive” end result to be meaningful.
What we can demonstrate is that
the “science is not settled”. Indeed, just look at CERN,
the European
Organization for Nuclear Research,
for the newest real science done by experiment and re-tested until
they have 6 sigma confidence levels. They use computers to analyze
the data but “computer models” are not the end only the
beginning. Science
is not done by consensus.
As Dr. Pierre R Latour advises,
“Everybody has a different point of view; but (real) scientists and
engineers learn how to agree on how nature works. What you see in the
man-made greenhouse gas theory hoax is what happens when untrained,
incompetent people attempt to do science and engineering. It’s a
mess.”
But should we be surprised at how
readily the myth of the GHGE can be exposed? No, especially when
considering the following footnote from the IPCC’s 4th
Edition. It declares its science is premised on what had been
“suggested” and “speculated” in the previous century (before
the time of quantum mechanics). By plain reading we see it signals no
subsequent evidence to prove that the GHGE effect actually exists:
“In the
1860s, physicist John Tyndall recognized the Earth’s natural
greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the
atmospheric composition could bring about climatic variations. In
1896, a seminal paper by Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius first
speculated that changes in the levels of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere could substantially alter the surface temperature through
the greenhouse effect.”
The work of
Arrhenius was shown to be significantly in error by Angstrom in1903.
Arrhenius changed his career shortly after. Readers are encouraged to
question why and conduct their own research.
Engineering
is applied science.
Berthold Klein P.E. (Edited &
Revised by John O’Sullivan: February 5, 2012)
References
‘NASA in Shock New Controversy:
Two Global Warming Reasons Why,’ John O’Sullivan, (May 27th
2010) Climate Realists: _ hyperlink “http://climaterealists.com/5783”
n _blank__http://climaterealists.com/5783_
_ Hyperlink
“http://climaterealists.com/5783”
n _blank___’Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effect
within the frame of physics’, Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
Tscheuschner (Version 4 2009), Electronic version of an article
published as International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No.
3 (2009) 275{364, DOI No: 10.1142/S021797920904984X, c World:_
hyperlink
“http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb”__http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb_
Readers are advised to search and read
the Report of Alan Carlin of US-EPA (March 2009) that shows that CO2
does not cause global warming. http://www.carlineconomics.com/
‘Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis Violates
Fundamentals of Physics’ by Dipl-Ing Heinz Thieme
R.W.Wood from the London, Edinborough
and Dublin Philosophical Magazine, 1909, vol 17, p319-320. Cambridge
UL shelf mark p: 340.1.c.95
‘The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse
Theory’, Alan Siddons (March 2010), American Thinker.
_ Hyperlink
“http://www.americanthinker.com/alan_siddons/”__from:http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/the_hidden_flaw_in_greenhouse.html
at March 01, 2010 – 09:10:34 AM CST _:___
Paraphrasing Albert Einstein after the
Publishing of “The Theory of Relativity” –one fact out does 1
million “scientist, 10 Million politicians and 20 Million
_environmental whachos-that don’t know that “the Second law of
thermodynamics is an absolute law of physics.
University of Pennsylvania Law School_
ILE
INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND
ECONOMICS
A Joint Research Center of the Law
School, the Wharton School,
and the Department of Economics in the
School of Arts and Sciences
at the University of Pennsylvania
Jason Scott Johnston,’ Global
Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination’, (May 2010) RESEARCH
PAPER NO. 10-08, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA (This paper can be
downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network
Electronic Paper Collection:_ hyperlink
“http://ssrn/”__http://ssrn_).
Israeli Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv
declared: “There is no direct evidence showing that CO2 caused 20th
century warming, or as a matter of fact, any warming.” link to this
paper on climate depot.
Slaying the Sky Dragon – Death of the
Greenhouse Gas Theory (2010), available on Amazon.com
_ Hyperlink
“http://www.americanthinker.com/”__www.americanthinker.com_
_ Hyperlink
“http://www.americanthinker.com/”__Ponder
the Maunder “
_ Hyperlink
“http://wwwclimatedepot.com/”__wwwclimatedepot.com_
_ Hyperlink
“http://icecap.us/”__icecap.us_
_ Hyperlink
“http://www.stratus-sphere.com/”__www.stratus-sphere.com_
Science
and Public Policy Institute
(SPPI)
Hyperlink
“http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org
Hyperlink: Anthony Watt’s
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/12/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-41/
Many others references are available.
Hyperlinks had to be removed to get some of these references posted
references
‘NASA in Shock New Controversy:
Two Global Warming Reasons Why,’ John O’Sullivan, (May 27th
2010) Climate Realists: _
_
n _blank___’Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effect
within the frame of physics’, Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
Tscheuschner (Version 4 2009), Electronic version of an article
published as International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No.
3 (2009) 275{364, DOI No: 10.1142/S021797920904984X, c World:_
hyperlink
“http://www.worldscinet.com/ijmpb”__
Readers are advised to search and read
the Report of Alan Carlin of US-EPA (March 2009) that shows that CO2
does not cause global warming. http://www.carlineconomics.com/
‘Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis Violates
Fundamentals of Physics’ by Dipl-Ing Heinz Thieme
R.W.Wood from the London, Edinborough
and Dublin Philosophical Magazine, 1909, vol 17, p319-320. Cambridge
UL shelf mark p: 340.1.c.95
‘The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse
Theory’, Alan Siddons (March 2010), American Thinker.
Paraphrasing Albert Einstein after the
Publishing of “The Theory of Relativity” –one fact out does 1
million “scientist, 10 Million politicians and 20 Million
_environmental whachos-that don’t know that “the Second law of
thermodynamics is an absolute law of physics.
University of Pennsylvania Law School_
ILE
INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND
ECONOMICS
A Joint Research Center of the Law
School, the Wharton School,
and the Department of Economics in the
School of Arts and Sciences
at the University of Pennsylvania
Jason Scott Johnston,’ Global
Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination’, (May 2010) RESEARCH
PAPER NO. 10-08, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA (This paper can be
downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network
Electronic Paper Collection:_ hyperlink
“http://ssrn/”__http://ssrn_).
Israeli Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv
declared: “There is no direct evidence showing that CO2 caused 20th
century warming, or as a matter of fact, any warming.” link to this
paper on climate depot.
Slaying the Sky Dragon – Death of the
Greenhouse Gas Theory (2010), available on Amazon.com
_
_ Hyperlink
_
“http://icecap.us/”__icecap.us_
_”__www.stratus-sphere.com_
Science
and Public Policy Institute
(SPPI)
Many others references are available.
Hyperlinks had to be removed to get some of these references posted
references
‘NASA in Shock New Controversy:
Two Global Warming Reasons Why,’ John O’Sullivan, (May 27th
2010) Climate Realists: _
_
’Falsification of the Atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effect
within the frame of physics’, Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D.
Tscheuschner (Version 4 2009), Electronic version of an article
published as International Journal of Modern Physics B, Vol. 23, No.
3 (2009) 275{364, DOI No: 10.1142/S021797920904984X, c World:_
_
Readers are advised to search and read
the Report of Alan Carlin of US-EPA (March 2009) that shows that CO2
does not cause global warming. http://www.carlineconomics.com/
‘Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis Violates
Fundamentals of Physics’ by Dipl-Ing Heinz Thieme
R.W.Wood from the London, Edinborough
and Dublin Philosophical Magazine, 1909, vol 17, p319-320. Cambridge
UL shelf mark p: 340.1.c.95
‘The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse
Theory’, Alan Siddons (March 2010), American Thinker.
Paraphrasing Albert Einstein after the
Publishing of “The Theory of Relativity” –one fact out does 1
million “scientist, 10 Million politicians and 20 Million
_environmental whachos-that don’t know that “the Second law of
thermodynamics is an absolute law of physics.
University of Pennsylvania Law School_
ILE
INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND
ECONOMICS
A Joint Research Center of the Law
School, the Wharton School,
and the Department of Economics in the
School of Arts and Sciences
at the University of Pennsylvania
Jason Scott Johnston,’ Global
Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination’, (May 2010) RESEARCH
PAPER NO. 10-08, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA (This paper can be
downloaded without charge from the Social Science Research Network
Electronic Paper Collection:_
Israeli Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv
declared: “There is no direct evidence showing that CO2 caused 20th
century warming, or as a matter of fact, any warming.” link to this
paper on climate depot.
Slaying the Sky Dragon – Death of the
Greenhouse Gas Theory (2010), available on Amazon.com
_
_
_icecap.us_
__www.stratus-sphere.com_
Science
and Public Policy Institute
(SPPI)
Many others references are available.
APPENDIX
IR= infrared radiation is a form of
electromagnetic radiation (invisible light also know as heat rays)
that is present in sunlight and is also radiated by every body of
mater whether it is a gas, a liquid or a solid. If it is a living
thing it will radiate more IR that if it is an inanimate object
because of its temperature.
Animals radiate IR from exothermic
oxidation and plants do so from endothermic photosynthesis.
_ Hyperlink
http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/infrared.html”__http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/infrared.html_
Photosynthetic organisms also have a thermoregulatory system that
permits them to radiate the excess of absorbed thermal radiation and
the heat generated from metabolic processes. Professor Nahle
conducted an experiment related to this mechanism of thermoregulation
in melons and spearmint:
http://www.biocab.org/Biophysics.html#anchor_36
IRag= certain gases will absorb
different wavelengths of IR radiation (a characteristic of the light)
depending on the construction of the gas. Some gases do not absorb
IR; their construction will not allow them to absorb the IR. They may
absorb other forms of radiation but as was said above they still
radiate IR. Many other materials including water will absorb IR.
These should not be included in the term IRag’s. The words
“greenhouse gas effect” have never been proven by credible
scientific experiments and therefore will only be used when
absolutely necessary. Atoms and molecules absorb according to their
unique absorption spectrum and emit according to their unique
emission spectrum. They emit an amount of radiation as watts per
square meter (w/m2), the measure of energy that they absorb.
The Bohr model is the work of Dr. Niels
Bohr a physicist that studied the behavior of gasses when they absorb
IR and other forms of radiation. This is much more complicated than
presented here. It is a branch of science called Quantum physics. The
basic studies resulted in Dr. Bohr receiving a Nobel Prize in physics
in 1922. The important part of the Bohr model is that when the gas
absorbs IR radiation it does not “heat” the gas. It does not
increase the kinetic energy of the molecule, which is the velocity of
the gas molecule in the atmosphere. The IR (photon) energy is
converted to inter-molecular activity. The explanation is a concept
that is beyond the scope of this experiment. It has an important
part in proving that the GHGE does not exist. Many volumes of
experiments are available and can be explained better by Quantum
physicists; the subject is being studied continually -”The science
is not settled.”
Water/l/v/s=Water has some very
important characteristic that are important to earth and to live on
earth. Because of earth’s fortunate location in the universe, it’s
temperature varies from a low of-90 F to a high 130 F+. But in the
majority of the earth temperatures are between 0 F to 100 F. and
water (liquid/solid) can change to a gas at all temperature, to a
liquid at 32F(0C) or above, and a solid below 32 F.(0 C). Many
commentators on GHGE fail to characterize these differences and call
Water /l/v/s a “greenhouse gas” In fairness H2O can indeed be a
gas, steam or humidity. As we go through this experiment it will
become clearer that water or any other IRag is not a “greenhouse
gas”
CO2= a gas that is breathed out by every
living mammal and most other living creature, it is absorbed by
plants and algae and is them converted back to oxygen which we need
to live. [Carbon dioxide also is processed by species of
photosynthetic bacteria, i.e. cyanobacteria, green sulfur bacteria,
purple sulfur bacteria, green non-sulfur bacteria and purple
non-sulfur bacteria] Most process that produces mechanical movements
and electrical energy convert fossil fuels to CO2 (carbon dioxide) a
very important and necessary part of life on this planet.
CH4= methane a part of “natural gas”
used to heat homes, cook food and run engines.. It is present in the
ground along with oil but is only present in the air (atmosphere) at
very tiny amounts (parts per billion). While millions of tons of this
gas escape into the atmosphere (only a guess as to the total) most of
this is destroyed by interaction with Ozone (O3) and UV a very active
radiation present in sunlight. (A paper in the EPA library documents
this reaction if they have not erased it) The Methane that is formed
by bacteria is almost everywhere. It’s from swamps, rice paddies,
bottom of oceans, lakes and streams, decaying leave piles etc. It is
a part of nature’s process of recycling. Its oxidation is
protecting the earth from the next ice age
NO2= a gas formed by nature when there
is lightening. It is also formed in any high temperature burning
including engines. The gas is washed out of the atmosphere in every
rainstorm. It is used by plants, and is very necessary for their
growth. NO2 is a toxic gas but also known as laughing gas and an air
pollutant, along with other oxides of nitrogen, NOx. They are major
components of smog.
. _ Hyperlink
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide”__http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrogen_dioxide_
Specifications of the IR thermometer:
model: MTPRO laser-Micro Temp; temperature range: -41degree C/F to
1040 degrees F. IR range 5 to 16 nm. Angle of view D:S =11:1. Cost
about $60.00. Many other IR meter models are available.
Addendum: Water
Structure and Science http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html
APPENDIX
IR= infrared radiation is a form of
electromagnetic radiation (invisible light also know as heat rays)
that is present in sunlight and is also radiated by every body of
mater whether it is a gas, a liquid or a solid. If it is a living
thing it will radiate more IR that if it is an inanimate object
because of its temperature.
Animals radiate IR from exothermic
oxidation and plants do so from endothermic photosynthesis.
_
Photosynthetic organisms also have a thermoregulatory system that
permits them to radiate the excess of absorbed thermal radiation and
the heat generated from metabolic processes. Professor Nahle
conducted an experiment related to this mechanism of thermoregulation
in melons and spearmint:
IRag= certain gases will absorb
different wavelengths of IR radiation (a characteristic of the light)
depending on the construction of the gas. Some gases do not absorb
IR; their construction will not allow them to absorb the IR. They may
absorb other forms of radiation but as was said above they still
radiate IR. Many other materials including water will absorb IR.
These should not be included in the term IRag’s. The words
“greenhouse gas effect” have never been proven by credible
scientific experiments and therefore will only be used when
absolutely necessary. Atoms and molecules absorb according to their
unique absorption spectrum and emit according to their unique
emission spectrum. They emit an amount of radiation as watts per
square meter (w/m2), the measure of energy that they absorb.
The Bohr model is the work of Dr. Niels
Bohr a physicist that studied the behavior of gasses when they absorb
IR and other forms of radiation. This is much more complicated than
presented here. It is a branch of science called Quantum physics. The
basic studies resulted in Dr. Bohr receiving a Nobel Prize in physics
in 1922. The important part of the Bohr model is that when the gas
absorbs IR radiation it does not “heat” the gas. It does not
increase the kinetic energy of the molecule, which is the velocity of
the gas molecule in the atmosphere. The IR (photon) energy is
converted to inter-molecular activity. The explanation is a concept
that is beyond the scope of this experiment. It has an important
part in proving that the GHGE does not exist. Many volumes of
experiments are available and can be explained better by Quantum
physicists; the subject is being studied continually -”The science
is not settled.”
Water/l/v/s=Water has some very
important characteristic that are important to earth and to live on
earth. Because of earth’s fortunate location in the universe, it’s
temperature varies from a low of-90 F to a high 130 F+. But in the
majority of the earth temperatures are between 0 F to 100 F. and
water (liquid/solid) can change to a gas at all temperature, to a
liquid at 32F(0C) or above, and a solid below 32 F.(0 C). Many
commentators on GHGE fail to characterize these differences and call
Water /l/v/s a “greenhouse gas” In fairness H2O can indeed be a
gas, steam or humidity. As we go through this experiment it will
become clearer that water or any other IRag is not a “greenhouse
gas”
CO2= a gas that is breathed out by every
living mammal and most other living creature, it is absorbed by
plants and algae and is them converted back to oxygen which we need
to live. [Carbon dioxide also is processed by species of
photosynthetic bacteria, i.e. cyanobacteria, green sulfur bacteria,
purple sulfur bacteria, green non-sulfur bacteria and purple
non-sulfur bacteria] Most process that produces mechanical movements
and electrical energy convert fossil fuels to CO2 (carbon dioxide) a
very important and necessary part of life on this planet.
CH4= methane a part of “natural gas”
used to heat homes, cook food and run engines.. It is present in the
ground along with oil but is only present in the air (atmosphere) at
very tiny amounts (parts per billion). While millions of tons of this
gas escape into the atmosphere (only a guess as to the total) most of
this is destroyed by interaction with Ozone (O3) and UV a very active
radiation present in sunlight. (A paper in the EPA library documents
this reaction if they have not erased it) The Methane that is formed
by bacteria is almost everywhere. It’s from swamps, rice paddies,
bottom of oceans, lakes and streams, decaying leave piles etc. It is
a part of nature’s process of recycling. Its oxidation is
protecting the earth from the next ice age
NO2= a gas formed by nature when there
is lightening. It is also formed in any high temperature burning
including engines. The gas is washed out of the atmosphere in every
rainstorm. It is used by plants, and is very necessary for their
growth. NO2 is a toxic gas but also known as laughing gas and an air
pollutant, along with other oxides of nitrogen, NOx. They are major
components of smog.
.
“
Specifications of the IR