This is a great comment taken from USAToday
Oral Deckard wrote: 8h 9m ago
As much fraud as the published Freedom of Information Act files reveals, many people are still left saying “One side says one thing. The other says another. How can I know what to think?”
The answer is to quit waiting for someone else to tell you what to think, and actually use that hat rack. It’s really not hard once you break out of the conditioning to leave it up to the experts.
After a brief look at the situation the average person grasps it quickly, and the dreadful scope of the scam starts to sink in.
First I want to very briefly restate their contention: Man made increases in CO2 is causing the Earth to become warmer by trapping solar heat.
HOW this so-called “trapping” occurs is treated like a clumsily guarded secret, but it’s done by CO2 not being quite as transparent to heat like it is to visible light. Instead of heat passing through to the ground, a very small part of it heats the CO2. Unfortunately for the Chicken Little’s out there, this microscopic effect can be calculated and measured. It is quantifiable. It doesn’t have to be treated like magic and accepted “Because We Say So.”
First, let’s look at the quantity: There isn’t nearly enough CO2 on Earth to even begin to warn the Earth.
Here’s how you know:
CO2 is a trace gas, measured in parts per million, 329 ppm according to Wikipedia.
That makes it 0.329% of the atmosphere at sea level.
If it were evenly distributed all the way to the top of the atmosphere it would be only 3/4 of an ounce for each square inch of the Earth’s surface. That’s not much.
(.00329×14.7 PSI x16 =.7738 ounces)
The amount of heat energy that 3/4 ounce of any gas can hold is minute. But CO2 is heavier than the two major gases, Nitrogen and Oxygen, which make up 99 percent of the atmosphere, and exists in only the lower two miles, making is much less than 3/4 of an ounce.
Now we get to the good part. From a conclusion you can tell what facts and assumptions produced it.
Here are the facts:
1. Oxygen and Nitrogen are transparent to heat, which passes through them without heating them.
2. Co2 is slightly opaque to heat, and is slightly heated by it. (This is described with complex crap about molecules vibrating, like CO2 is the only thing that vibrates when heated. Everything does.)
Now here are the assumptions that MUST be made to conclude that CO2 is causing a global temperature rise:
1. CO2 is the dominant Greenhouse gas.
2. There is enough CO2 to carry over heat from one day to the next, producing a build-up.
3. Only atmospheric gases are heated by the sun.
Yes, that’s right. Assumption #3 has to be made. You see, generally speaking, sunlight does not heat the air. It passes through the air and heats the ground. The ground then heats the air. And ground heat IS carried over to the next day, even doing some build-up. But it doesn’t get credit, because it isn’t man made.
When the ground is covered by snow, CO2 has its chance to prove its ability to trap heat from the sun. Instead, the air remains cold, with the snow melting slowly where it is clean and warmed only by the air. But where there is DIRT in the snow it melts much faster, because most heat passed through the CO2 and heated the dirt. When some ground is exposed the melting really speeds up, because the warmed ground warms the air. You can see it clearly in the melt patterns after this most recent blizzard not stopped by Global Warming.
Now consider the weight of 1 square inch of dirt extending down into the ground, and compare that with 3/4 ounce of CO2 extending upward, and how much heat energy can be retained by each. It’s no contest!
It is readily obvious that the ground has so much greater participation in the process that the CO2 doesn’t even deserve an honorable mention. Therefore, because CO2 gets all the credit, it has to be assumed that only atmospheric gases are heated by the sun.
Oh, for #1, do a search on Greenhouse Gases and click on Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas)
You will find the IPCC admitting that atmospheric water vapor has about four times the greenhouse effect of CO2.
Water vapor comes and goes. Sometimes more, sometimes less, and easily able to overwhelm the effect of CO2.
Now let’s go for an easy visual example:
In the fall when you are fearing your tomatoes will get frostbitten, you know if it will frost by checking the sky. If there is a little overcast, there cannot be a frost, because the slight cloud cover will block the heat trying to radiate out into space, and reflect it back. You never check the CO2 level, because you don’t even think of this super greenhouse gas having any effect..
But if there is a starry sky, the heat in your tomatoes can radiate out into space unimpeded, with CO2 just standing there with a dumb look on its face, not lifting a finger to help. Instead of blocking and retaining heat until dawn it lets it pass right on through, and lets the temperature drop like a rock.
Want another visual example? The same thing goes for frost on your car. If you depend only on CO2, you will be scraping in the morning. But if there is any cloud cover at all, you won’t.
These are things you already knew. So why did you let someone get away with blowing smoke up your backside? Assumption that they were the experts, and you weren’t qualified to think!
And when the ground heats up, more water evaporates, creating a cooling effect, carrying heat up with it for release into space, spreading out in a cloud that reflects heat from the sun back into space, and mops the floor with CO2’s but.
And when the temperature drops, the clouds fall as rain, once again letting sunlight in to warm the Earth. This is a natural regulating effect, so that no matter what CO2 might do, the clouds will adjust to make it not matter.
Want another example of CO2’s ability to absorb heat from sunlight vs. water vapor? Remember a hot summer day when the sun was hot on your skin, blocked by the trace gas CO2. Then remember when a cloud came over, showing what it could do. Case closed.
And for #2, the CO2 so-called theory does have to assume that there is enough CO2 to actually block and retain enough heat from day to day to heat the Earth. But by now it is clear that this is ridiculous.
What CO2 DOES do is become the physical body of our crops that feed the world’s hungry. The more CO2, the better the crops do, and the better people eat.
CO2 also helps trigger your next breath when you are not thinking about it, like when you sleep. Do a search on sleep apnea in relation to elevation (remember, it thins out at higher elevation.) Check out Boulder Colorado for instance.
And this trace gas is now listed as a pollutant? To be reduced?
But what about the thinning polar ice caps?
Well gee. Have you seen any photos of melt water standing on the surface of the ice?
If the ice were melting from warmer air, wouldn’t it melt from the top down?
Since it is not, it must be melting from the bottom up.
Can that be due to warmer air?
What about geothermal heat, like is melting the glaciers in Iceland.
Ah, but they don’t want to talk about that.
The real question should be how we ever allowed so much money to be spent researching CO2 for so many years, when we already knew everything I just told you.
And the answer is, drum roll please ….
Gullibility. Gullibility conditioned into us, and taken advantage of, by those who assume themselves to superior that we are “a sucker born every minute.” And why?
Money! And Power!
By pretending they are too ignorant to wipe our own buts they can con the public into putting them on perpetual welfare, at a gravy train rate, taking many years and hundreds of billions of dollars to research and discover … even when the truth is obvious at a glance. Sure beats working for a living. Right!
And maybe a nice fat juicy treaty, you know, the thing the US Constitution says supercedes all law, including the Constitution itself. A treaty that would severely limit how much energy we could use, thereby preventing an economic recovery, and taxing us to ruin, to be used to finance the UN’s new permanent authority over us.
As Benjamin Franklin said “Those who expect to be both ignorant and free, expect what never was, and never will be.”
Is Global Warming really so complex that you have to leave it up to the experts?
Oral Deckard
Terre Haute, IN
Oral Deckard wrote: 8h 9m ago
As much fraud as the published Freedom of Information Act files reveals, many people are still left saying “One side says one thing. The other says another. How can I know what to think?”
The answer is to quit waiting for someone else to tell you what to think, and actually use that hat rack. It’s really not hard once you break out of the conditioning to leave it up to the experts.
After a brief look at the situation the average person grasps it quickly, and the dreadful scope of the scam starts to sink in.
First I want to very briefly restate their contention: Man made increases in CO2 is causing the Earth to become warmer by trapping solar heat.
HOW this so-called “trapping” occurs is treated like a clumsily guarded secret, but it’s done by CO2 not being quite as transparent to heat like it is to visible light. Instead of heat passing through to the ground, a very small part of it heats the CO2. Unfortunately for the Chicken Little’s out there, this microscopic effect can be calculated and measured. It is quantifiable. It doesn’t have to be treated like magic and accepted “Because We Say So.”
First, let’s look at the quantity: There isn’t nearly enough CO2 on Earth to even begin to warn the Earth.
Here’s how you know:
CO2 is a trace gas, measured in parts per million, 329 ppm according to Wikipedia.
That makes it 0.329% of the atmosphere at sea level.
If it were evenly distributed all the way to the top of the atmosphere it would be only 3/4 of an ounce for each square inch of the Earth’s surface. That’s not much.
(.00329×14.7 PSI x16 =.7738 ounces)
The amount of heat energy that 3/4 ounce of any gas can hold is minute. But CO2 is heavier than the two major gases, Nitrogen and Oxygen, which make up 99 percent of the atmosphere, and exists in only the lower two miles, making is much less than 3/4 of an ounce.
Now we get to the good part. From a conclusion you can tell what facts and assumptions produced it.
Here are the facts:
1. Oxygen and Nitrogen are transparent to heat, which passes through them without heating them.
2. Co2 is slightly opaque to heat, and is slightly heated by it. (This is described with complex crap about molecules vibrating, like CO2 is the only thing that vibrates when heated. Everything does.)
Now here are the assumptions that MUST be made to conclude that CO2 is causing a global temperature rise:
1. CO2 is the dominant Greenhouse gas.
2. There is enough CO2 to carry over heat from one day to the next, producing a build-up.
3. Only atmospheric gases are heated by the sun.
Yes, that’s right. Assumption #3 has to be made. You see, generally speaking, sunlight does not heat the air. It passes through the air and heats the ground. The ground then heats the air. And ground heat IS carried over to the next day, even doing some build-up. But it doesn’t get credit, because it isn’t man made.
When the ground is covered by snow, CO2 has its chance to prove its ability to trap heat from the sun. Instead, the air remains cold, with the snow melting slowly where it is clean and warmed only by the air. But where there is DIRT in the snow it melts much faster, because most heat passed through the CO2 and heated the dirt. When some ground is exposed the melting really speeds up, because the warmed ground warms the air. You can see it clearly in the melt patterns after this most recent blizzard not stopped by Global Warming.
Now consider the weight of 1 square inch of dirt extending down into the ground, and compare that with 3/4 ounce of CO2 extending upward, and how much heat energy can be retained by each. It’s no contest!
It is readily obvious that the ground has so much greater participation in the process that the CO2 doesn’t even deserve an honorable mention. Therefore, because CO2 gets all the credit, it has to be assumed that only atmospheric gases are heated by the sun.
Oh, for #1, do a search on Greenhouse Gases and click on Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas)
You will find the IPCC admitting that atmospheric water vapor has about four times the greenhouse effect of CO2.
Water vapor comes and goes. Sometimes more, sometimes less, and easily able to overwhelm the effect of CO2.
Now let’s go for an easy visual example:
In the fall when you are fearing your tomatoes will get frostbitten, you know if it will frost by checking the sky. If there is a little overcast, there cannot be a frost, because the slight cloud cover will block the heat trying to radiate out into space, and reflect it back. You never check the CO2 level, because you don’t even think of this super greenhouse gas having any effect..
But if there is a starry sky, the heat in your tomatoes can radiate out into space unimpeded, with CO2 just standing there with a dumb look on its face, not lifting a finger to help. Instead of blocking and retaining heat until dawn it lets it pass right on through, and lets the temperature drop like a rock.
Want another visual example? The same thing goes for frost on your car. If you depend only on CO2, you will be scraping in the morning. But if there is any cloud cover at all, you won’t.
These are things you already knew. So why did you let someone get away with blowing smoke up your backside? Assumption that they were the experts, and you weren’t qualified to think!
And when the ground heats up, more water evaporates, creating a cooling effect, carrying heat up with it for release into space, spreading out in a cloud that reflects heat from the sun back into space, and mops the floor with CO2’s but.
And when the temperature drops, the clouds fall as rain, once again letting sunlight in to warm the Earth. This is a natural regulating effect, so that no matter what CO2 might do, the clouds will adjust to make it not matter.
Want another example of CO2’s ability to absorb heat from sunlight vs. water vapor? Remember a hot summer day when the sun was hot on your skin, blocked by the trace gas CO2. Then remember when a cloud came over, showing what it could do. Case closed.
And for #2, the CO2 so-called theory does have to assume that there is enough CO2 to actually block and retain enough heat from day to day to heat the Earth. But by now it is clear that this is ridiculous.
What CO2 DOES do is become the physical body of our crops that feed the world’s hungry. The more CO2, the better the crops do, and the better people eat.
CO2 also helps trigger your next breath when you are not thinking about it, like when you sleep. Do a search on sleep apnea in relation to elevation (remember, it thins out at higher elevation.) Check out Boulder Colorado for instance.
And this trace gas is now listed as a pollutant? To be reduced?
But what about the thinning polar ice caps?
Well gee. Have you seen any photos of melt water standing on the surface of the ice?
If the ice were melting from warmer air, wouldn’t it melt from the top down?
Since it is not, it must be melting from the bottom up.
Can that be due to warmer air?
What about geothermal heat, like is melting the glaciers in Iceland.
Ah, but they don’t want to talk about that.
The real question should be how we ever allowed so much money to be spent researching CO2 for so many years, when we already knew everything I just told you.
And the answer is, drum roll please ….
Gullibility. Gullibility conditioned into us, and taken advantage of, by those who assume themselves to superior that we are “a sucker born every minute.” And why?
Money! And Power!
By pretending they are too ignorant to wipe our own buts they can con the public into putting them on perpetual welfare, at a gravy train rate, taking many years and hundreds of billions of dollars to research and discover … even when the truth is obvious at a glance. Sure beats working for a living. Right!
And maybe a nice fat juicy treaty, you know, the thing the US Constitution says supercedes all law, including the Constitution itself. A treaty that would severely limit how much energy we could use, thereby preventing an economic recovery, and taxing us to ruin, to be used to finance the UN’s new permanent authority over us.
As Benjamin Franklin said “Those who expect to be both ignorant and free, expect what never was, and never will be.”
Is Global Warming really so complex that you have to leave it up to the experts?
Oral Deckard
Terre Haute, IN
1 comment:
Since you quoted wikipedia check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
"Greenhouse gases greatly affect the temperature of the Earth; without them, Earth's surface would be on average about 33 °C (59 °F) colder than at present"
Post a Comment