The Climate Crap
Who wants to eat crap? Yet every day we are all force-fed – we are forced to swallow Climate crap.
Let me ask you a question. What is Carbon? Do I insult your intelligence? Carbon is a very abundant element of the Periodic Table.
It is a chemical element like lead, like hydrogen, like Oxygen. Yet, scientists everywhere and scientific journalists of all kinds inundate us with bilge – we are all forced to eat climate crap. Let me prove my point.
May I ask you a very simple question? Is there one World Climate? Let me explain. Is the climate the same in Florida as in California? They both can be hot, but I think Florida is a lot more humid. Is the climate in Washington State the same as the climate in Washington DC?
Far from it. Is the climate in Santa Monica the same as the climate just over the mountain in the San Fernando Valley? Not when I was there, selling Real Estate for Gribin von Dyl – the climates there were distinctly different.
In the UK is the climate in Yorkshire the same as in Lancashire, separated as they are by the Pennines? No, their climates are as vastly different as is the character of a Yorkshire man and a Lancastrian.
Let us travel a bit farther afield. How would you compare the climate in Sydney, Australia, with Invercargill on the south of South Island, New Zealand? They have climates as different as chalk and cheese. And what about Moscow? How does it compare with Jakarta in Indonesia?
Jakarta is amazingly hot and humid, which is hardly the case with Moscow. How does Delhi, India, compare with Lhasa, Tibet?
The former is insufferably hot and the latter insufferably cold.
I could go on and on, just to labour the point. There is no such entity as a Global climate, so that all talk of fighting Climate Change is just so much gibberish and an assault on the English language. And as to trying to halt the multiple changes in millions of microclimates by cutting emissions of a trace gas, it is laughable, risible, and pitiful.
The trouble is that our kids and our grand kids have been force-fed a lot of garbage for so long, so that when a little hobgoblin from Sweden begins to regurgitate such rubbish she gains as much notoriety as Joan of Arc.
Any half intelligent person will know that there are 29 major climate systems in the world and hundreds, nay millions of microclimates. Ask any Meteorologist, who is not afraid that he might lose his job, should he speak truth.
Here’s another question for you? Which is the principal Greenhouse gas?
It is Water Vapour, by a huge margin. Now here is something else with which we are force-fed. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases are supposed to make us hot; they are supposed to make the whole world warmer and warmer and hotter than we have ever been. Does not that strike you as strange?
How does water vapour occur?
When the sun shines on the oceans of salt water, evaporation occurs. Tell me, is evaporation warming or cooling?
Right in one – it is cooling. When Water Vapour condenses into clouds, is that warming or cooling? Right again.
Clouds are cooling in more than one way, as they reflect back the rays of the sun, as well as masking sunlight.
When rain falls, that is a cosmic miracle, since Great Nature or God – your choice – has turned salt water into pure fresh water for lakes and rivers. Without fresh water there would be no agriculture, there would be no trees, no forests, no jungles, there would be no grass, no steppes, no savannahs, no veldt – in fact there would be no animals and no birds either and no humans. When rain falls the atmosphere is washed and it cools.
The scientists cannot deal with clouds, so they are fixated on a very minor gas that is only 0.04{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} of our atmosphere and claim Carbon Dioxide is absorbing infrared. Well that is a joke, isn’t it, since just about every substance under the sun absorbs infrared, including all of you, my friends.
Only Nitrogen and Oxygen in the atmosphere are transparent to infrared. Only Nitrogen and Oxygen are the exceptions to the rule.
So the theory goes that Carbon Dioxide traps heat and therefore makes the whole world hotter. If we don’t stop emissions we will all be extinct by the end of this century, so the theory goes. We must stop the Global temperature from increasing by more than one and a half degrees centigrade. Hullo! Do any of you guys know the Global temperature today? Has it been broadcast on CNN?
No, it has not, nor has it been broadcast on the BBC in England. Why not? Answer: because there is no such entity. It is garbage, it is crap, it is ordure.
Heat is not a substance. You can trap a Polar Bear, but in no way can anyone trap heat, since heat is defined as a transfer of kinetic energy from one system to another. Anybody here caught a transfer of energy? Has anyone ever in the history of mankind trapped heat? Nobody.
We can generate heat in a variety of ways, but heat by itself always flows from hot to cold – that is law conformable. However hard we try to insulate a house, say, with lagging, with double-glazing, the heat that our boilers generate simply slips away.
I recently wrote that Carbon Dioxide, far from warming anything whatsoever, is a major refrigerant for the transport and preservation of perishable foodstuffs. Some doubt was cast upon my claims, so I looked it all up again. So I repeat now with confidence that Carbon Dioxide is a major refrigerant. The transport of perishable foodstuffs depends upon this major refrigerant.
Who is responsible for all this crap, this climate crap? Who was it that started the idea that the world was getting hotter and hotter, while we know that the sun is burning out and that the whole solar system is inching away from the Sun?
Ok, it will take a few million years yet, but Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth becomes more and more inconvenient. The claims that the Globe is getting hotter and hotter become ever more strident. I have to say it – it is the ex Vice President Al Gore who is largely responsible for the hysteria around the climate crap.
Do you like eating crap? As for me, I cannot stomach it.
Now here is a delightful and simple illustration, entitled Photosynthesis. What do we know about Photosynthesis? We know that green plants feed on Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere and produce for us humans and all the animal kingdom Oxygen. We cannot live without Oxygen. Therefore to demonise Carbon Dioxide which is food for green plants is the height of insanity.
So I am a Green, but not one of those hysterical Greens who want to secrete Carbon Dioxide somewhere deep in the bowels of the earth. Can you imagine anything more self-destructive? It is like a blueprint for the annihilation of the human species.
Let us be clear. The Greenhouse Gases are major coolants. The Greenhouse gases cool the earth. The Sun warms the earth, but the Greenhouse Gases regulate that heat. Those who demonise the Greenhouse gases are in fact contributing to the warming.
It is time for us humans to ‘cool it’ – it is time for us to let Great Nature do its job. The Greenhouse gases are the thermostats of the earth. Thank God for the Greenhouse gases.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
John Doran
| #
A rather good article, thank you, but it’s a tad too simple: trying to blame a global fraud on Al Gore is a bit of a stretch.
Gore did lie his face off in his film, but he’s had plenty of help: most govts, many “scientists” & ALL of the 1%s owned fake news MSM. Gore is a mere profiteer. Climatologist Dr. Tim Ball names the Bankster Rockefellers & the gangster Soros as among the multi-billionaires pushing the fraud. He names Naomi Oreskes & John Cook as the perpetrators of the 97% “consensus” lies. If he was wrong, these clowns would sue him in an instant. They do not sue.
Cook runs the crooked skepticalscience climate disinformation site.
Dr. Tim Names the motives: Depopulation, De-industrialisation & a Totalitarian World Govt.
His 2016 booklet for the layman is only 121 pages: the science & scandals, the politics & profiteers. An easy weekend must read:
Human Caused Global Warming The Biggest Deception In History.
The worthy cause of environmentalism has been hijacked & the science of climate completely perverted. Over 100 million people have been slaughtered already, in the depopulation program. Safe & clean nuclear power has been demonised by the 1%s fake news MSM: 2013 book by nuclear PhD engineer Robert Zubrin: Merchants Of Despair.
The groundwork for the fraud has been laid in three books.
Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, 1962. The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich, 1968.
The Limits To Growth, 1972, by The Club Of Rome’s Donella Meadows, et al.
All three are distinguished by massive fraud posing as science.
All three were vastly hyped by the 1%s MSM.
All three were bestsellers.
All three are demolished in: Global Warming And Other Eco-Myths, by The Competitive Enterprise Institute with editor Ronald Bailey.
Gore did lie his face off: there are 35 lies plus 25 exaggerations in his crooked film.
The odds are billions to one against them all being alarmist by accident.
The best demolition I have read of Gore & the fraud factory UN IPCC is in geology Prof. Ian Plimer’s great book: Heaven And Earth Global Warming: The Missing Science.
This is no easy weekend read: 500+ pages, 2,000+ ref’s to peer-reviewed papers etc, includes a top chapter on History. Mucho recommended.
The plotters reveal themselves out of their own mouths. Click on Quotes:
http://www.c3headlines.com
JD.
Reply
Pam
| #
Gore had the loudest stage – the spotlight, so that is not a stretch. He was poisoning minds everywhere while he raked in a fortune via fools.
Reply
Pam
| #
Sorry, I did forget to say that the article was great! I enjoyed it and passed it along.
Reply
Tom O
| #
Very good. And I tend to agree with the article regarding Gore as the “father of the scam.” Although others predate him in getting into the act, basically, you have to put a “face” on something to make people sit up and notice, and the inconvenience of Gore’s movie “put a face on climate change,” his face.
What I haven’t figured out is how this article was refused because it mentions that CO2 is a major refrigerant. Anyone with an iota of actual science, one would think, would understand that as a liquified gas decompresses, it cools, and yes, it would be used to refrigerate fresh produce, as an example, since it crowds out the oxygen as well and prevents the produce from decomposing. Hard to believe that an editor of a major journal wouldn’t know that. Then again, maybe I’m wrong about that since I have been wrong at times about just about everything!
Reply
T. C. Clark
| #
Al Gore lies 97% of the time….but the dictator of Russia, Vlad Putin, has signed the Paris Accords…..why? That sly dictator no doubt considers it politically beneficial…..see?……Vlad may poison a few dissidents with polonium…but he’s really a swell guy looking out to protect Mother Nature….see?
Reply
A Thorpe
| #
Radiation does interact with nitrogen and oxygen through collisions. The photons lose energy with each collision and therefore these gases gain energy. The evidence for this is seen during a total solar eclipse. The air temperature drops rapidly and regains the temperature rapidly. This is the 99% of the atmosphere which gains heat from the sun and loses it when there is no sun.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi A,
The radiation that interacts with O2 and N2 is the high energy UV light from the sun. It transfer energy (490 kjoules/mole and 940 kjoules/mole respectively) to the molecule’s bonds and breaks them converting UV into IR. This action is what the creates the elemental atoms in the ionosphere and the oxygen atoms that create the ozone layer. Oxygen and nitrogen convert UV into kinetic energy.
Herb
Reply
JaKo
| #
I do have a little quarrel with the following:
“When the sun shines on the oceans of salt water, evaporation occurs. Tell me, is evaporation warming or cooling?
Right in one – it is cooling. When Water Vapour condenses into clouds, is that warming or cooling? Right again.”
Doesn’t that imply “cooling” rather than the correct “warming”?
OTOH, I may be over-sensitive…
Reply
ЯΞ√ΩLUT↑☼N
| #
Any time you get condensation or evaporation it’s a transfer of energy. Early trravellers on horseback used to carry water in something similar to tightly woven hessian bags. Water slowly evaporating off the saturated hessian cooled the water inside the bag. Even in slightly more modern times the bag would be carried hanging off the front of a Jeep. trust me, it works.
Clouds form through thermal activity in a sufficiently humid and cool atmosphere, causing condensation of the water vapour carried upward by the thermal. The condensation requires energy and cools the thermal through transfer of energy as it creates the cloud.
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Revolution:
Clouds form through thermal activity in a sufficiently humid and cool atmosphere, causing condensation of the water vapour carried upward by the thermal. The condensation requires energy and cools the thermal through transfer of energy as it creates the cloud.
Uplift in storms has nothing to do with convection/thermals:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329&start=360#p125466
I discovered the empirical shortcomings of meteorology after I discovered them in climatology. My reasoning was very simple. Knowing that the origins of climatology are in meteorology, I reasoned that if AGW is as bad as it appears then meteorology must also have skeletons in its closet. So I did something that nobody has done before, I looked at the convection model of storm theory with scrutiny. I found numerous fatal flaws and I found that meteorologists have long ago established a tradition of ignoring these fatal flaws.
My point is that you/we cannot defeat a conversational science based on empiricism because conversational sciences are based on allegories that appeal to the base sensations of the public. The only way to defeat a conversational science is to reveal it as such to the public. And the best way to reveal it to the public is to start with meteorology since this is the spring from which it sprang (or is it sprung?). The conversational tradition is the problem and its roots are in meteorology, not climatology.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Jako and Rev,
Condensation, like crystallization, is the result of energy loss where matter forms a more stable structure. The normal progression with decreasing energies gas > liquid > solid while with increasing kinetic energy it goes from solid > liquid > gas.
Evaporation causes loss of kinetic energy or cooling. Water, however, is a strange substance and doesn’t follow the usual pattern because of the unique structure of its bonds. Evaporation of water is not the conversion of a liquid to a gas but the transformation of the water into micro droplets that remove energy from the main body water. In order to convert 0 C ice to a liquid you must add 80 calories/gram. In order to convert 0 C water to a gas you must add 640 calories/gram (Boiling point 913 K not 373 K).
Cloud formation at the troposphere/stratosphere boundary is not from condensation. The saturation point of water in air at -10nC is 2 grams/kilogram of air.At-20 C it is less than 1 gram/kg. The thermometer says the temperature at the troposphere/stratosphere is -30 C which means there would be less than 1 gram of water for every 4000 cubic meters of air. Not much of a cloud. If condensation was what formed clouds they would form lower in the atmosphere where the concentration of both water and nuclei were greater.
Herb
Reply
Radical Rodent
| #
I became suspicious of the whole global warming/climate change scam when I realised that the claim that the entire planet’s temperature was determined by a trace gas over which – surprise, surprise! – it just so happens to be the ONLY gas that we can fool ourselves into believing that we might have some control over.
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
Anthony Bright-Paul is entirely correct. Basic chemistry and thermodynamics supports him.
First, The specific molar heat capacities of atmospheric gases (units J/K.kg): Nitrogen – 20.6, oxygen – 21.1, argon – 12.5, CO2 – 28.2, and H2O vapor – 40.8. Adding either CO2 or H2O will increase the total specific molar heat of the mixture. Thus, with equal sunlight each day, it will take more time for the air to heat during the day, and more time to cool at night. This reality is observed in humid climates, as opposed to dry climates.
Second, with increasing altitude gases are cooler. It is thermodynamically impossible for freezing cold CO2 at 3,000 meters to warm the surface of the Earth.
Reply
JDHuffman
| #
Absolutely correct, Kevin: “It is thermodynamically impossible for freezing cold CO2 at 3,000 meters to warm the surface of the Earth.”
And the timing coincides with my evening temperature readings (remote sensing):
High clouds, dark sky but no stars visible, directly overhead –> -34.1F, -36.7 C
Ground –> 41.4 F, 5.2 C
The surface warms the sky, as usual.
Reply
geraint hughes
| #
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-capacity-gases-d_159.html
Specific heat capacity of CO2 is less than that of air. I dont know where you got your figures from, check the link above. CO2 needs less heat than air to make it rise by 1 degree.
Reply