Climate Change: Myth Vs. Reality, Part 5 With Joe Olson
Western civilization made literal quantum advances in the nineteen century with collaboration and communication among top scientists from many nations. Science was a holistic effort by all branches, always with historical context.
By the mid-twentieth century, science had degenerated into compartmentalized specialties with no interdisciplinary oversite.
Mathematics was divorced from empirical reality and science history was abandoned, or morphed into the deification of monopolist-selected figureheads with stolen patents.
Edison did not invent the light bulb, Bell did not invent the telephone, Marconi did not invent the radio, and Samuel Langley did not invent powered flight.
In this vacuum of interdisciplinary oversight, climatology was concocted and nurtured with overt government spending as part of a trifecta attack on hydrocarbon thermal energy production.
There is NO carbon climate forcing, NO sustainable green energy, and NO peak oil. Unfortunately, the science is complex, there are few honest voices and the means of communication are threatened daily.
You have a duty as an Earthling to find and share the truth. You can start by watching this:
h/t JO
Trackback from your site.
Kevin Doyle
| #
Mr. Fetzer,
I agree entirely.
Although, I might point out the principles of ‘radiation’ are not that complex. In a nutshell, only warm objects can radiate energy to cooler objects. If two jelly donuts are the same temperature, then they simply swap photons of the same energy level. Thus, no change in either temperature.
The absurdity of ‘CO2 Greenhouse Gas Theory’ is it imagines cold gases on top of the Matterhorn are somehow warming the surface of the Earth.
Not only physically impossible, but laughable for complete stupidity and zero understanding of basic thermodynamics.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Kevin,
Energy is not only transferred by radiation but also conduction. A meteorite striking the Earth will transfer energy to the Earth even though the Earth has more kinetic energy, just as a gas molecule with high velocity but little mass will transfer energy to the Matterhorn. With conduction there is no transfer of mass so energy flows from the object with greater velocity (energy) to the object with less velocity, regardless of their masses.
Herb
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
Thank you, Herb, for the refreshment lecture on basic Newtonian Physics and basic Thermodynamics.
Glad you are on the team!
Reply
Alan Stewart
| #
The Fourier, Arrhenius, Tyndall nonsense. Simplicity, C02 is 0.04% of the atmosphere and Nitrogen, Oxygen and Argon are ~99% so what are they, ‘Nothing Burgers’?? Do those gases have ZERO effect, retentive powers, to trap outgoing irradiation?? Absolutely they do and this combination of gases, our position from the sun separates us from our sister planets. A MIRACLE.
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
Good points, Alan.
If we had a stadium for football, say 10,000 seats, then CO2 would occupy 4 seats.
If your really believe 4 people in the stadium, wearing sparkly cheerleader ßhirts are warming the football field, then you need psychiatric help.
Or, in the show Sienfeld, Jerry once lectured George by saying, “What is wrong with you?? You don’t need a psychiatrist. You need a team of psychiatrists!!”
Reply
Tom Anderson
| #
Right proportions, Kevin,
Put another way, if 0.04% of $1,000 is 40ȼ, people’s IPCC estimated 5% annual contribution to it is 2ȼ.
Reply
Carbon Bigfoot
| #
At what website can I get full picture of this video?
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
This is a nine part (so far) series of climate tutorials at BitChute, search “Joe Olson”
Kathy Lovves Physics, “History of the Light Bulb” > https://youtu.be/QIFN8_pQObo
Reply