Shock News : Global Warming Is A Fraud

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

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Shock News : Global Warming Is A Fraud

  1. Karl W. Braun says:

    Too much of what passes for ‘climate science’ we used to call in school a ‘dry lab.’

  2. Andy Oz says:

    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

  3. Edmonton Al says:

    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

  4. Scott says:

    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?

  5. Scott says:

    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?

  6. 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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *