Why global warming science is nothing but fraud
03.12.2013
In actuality, the number which should represent the amount of heat produced by additions of CO2 in the atmosphere is zero. This means the starting point for all modeling should be zero, while secondary effects do not exist for zero.
The reason for the number zero is saturation. It means radiation travels a short distance before being totally absorbed by CO2. At the center of the main absorption peak for CO2, radiation travels 10 meters before being totally absorbed (http://nov79.com/gbwm/hnzh.html#ten). Farther down on the absorption peak, where there is one tenth as many CO2 molecules, the distance for total absorption is ten times as far, which is 100 meters. Where there are one thousandth as many CO2 molecules, the distance is 10 kilometers.
Doubling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere reduces these distances to one half. Reducing the distance is not increasing the heat.
Alarmists have three rationalizations for saturation. At first, they said saturation does not occur on the shoulders of the absorption peaks, which is where the increase in heat occurs (http://nov79.com/gbwm/equations.html#ipcc). That argument would not stand up to criticism (http://nov79.com/gbwm/satn.html#nrs); so they changed the story and said the effect occurs high in the atmosphere, variously 5 or 9 km up, where saturation does not occur. Both effects are absurd, because they require extremely thin distribution of CO2 molecules, while spreading the heat thin reduces the temperature to irrelevance.
So alarmists said satellites show that saturation is not occurring, because they pick up key radiation showing that it is not being absorbed. Sometimes, the radiation is said to be emitted from 9 km up, which is where the heating is supposed to be occurring. Satellites cannot produce such information. They cannot determine the height from which narrow bands of radiation come from.
Satellites are said to show the height from which total heat comes from, but the height is determined by shift in wavelength. Shorter wavelengths do not travel as far through the atmosphere. But CO2 only absorbs very narrow bands of radiation, which means shift in wavelength will not indicate the height. In other words, satellites will pick up something from the top of the stratosphere regardless of saturation, and there is no indication of saturation in the result.
If scientists were simply wrong about saturation, there would be no problem. Science is designed to deal with errors. Errors are held as tentative assumptions until verification methods are developed. But the problem is that there is nothing in the science of global warming which is not in error. All scientific knowledge shows that there is no effect. The entire subject is contrived.
The worst problem is that the methodology including communication standards is so corrupt that errors cannot be dealt with as errors are dealt with in science. Pretending to model a result while there is no starting point is total fraud, regardless of the unreliability of modeling. Covering up the absence of a real starting point is additional fraud.
Why global warming science is nothing but fraud – English pravda.ru
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
- Nothing Nuclear Winter Can’t Fix
Recent Comments
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
Excellent piece.
Too much of what passes for ‘climate science’ we used to call in school a ‘dry lab.’
Excellent piece.
Meanwhile in Australia, we have gone full order Chicken Little.
Moron Alarmists are alarmed the carbon tax will be repealed.
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-03/nrn-warming-prediction/5131530
Actually, Dr Phil can identify dangerous sociopaths with his 9 warning signs.
I think Obama, everyone in DC and Wall Street, and especially the alarmists like Gore, Hansen et al would tick most boxes.
http://youtu.be/WIx4nZWvxkE
I sent this to the Canadian Gov’t. The Environment Minister; the Energy Minister and the Prime Minister.
I feel that the Canadian Coservative Gov’t. in Canada is gradually distancing itself from the UN IPCC fraud. We have a new Minister of the Environment. Leona Aglukkaq.
http://ec.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=B6832638-1
The mean free path for a Infared ray in CO2’s absorbtion band is considered a short distance (10 to 100) because these values are very small in comparison to the thickness of the earth’s atmosphere. I think this little talk above is excellent for gaining an understanding of the situation. Especially understanding that doubling the CO2 exactly halves the mean path length of the radiation. How much more likely is a ray going to make it out of the atmosphere if it is typically absorbed in 5 meters instead of 10?
Sorry,
How much LESS likely is a ray going to make it out of the atmosphere if it is typically absorbed in 5 meters instead of 10?
In some areas, namely the yorkshire moor and durham moors there is a distinct feel of something being “experimented” on, wear feeling and bizarre cloud formations.. than everything goes back to normal?…recently though everything is back to normal, great feeling of open spaces and clear air.