What (the hell) is Going on Here?
The real title is “Hell is Going on here.” Because the hiding of all the facts on any given matter of importance is an invitation to get on the highway to societal hell
So here we go. Yet more, this time from Reuters, on the idea I have been trying to get across. The warming is largely natural and a likely culprit is natural geothermal input, independent of man.
See this article here.
It is happening in the Pacific too.
Again ask yourself. If Water Vapor is the number one GHG, and we can correlate WV to temps, and can not with co2 except for the handwaving argument CO2 is going up so that has to be the cause, why are we not quantifying water vapor increase?
Where would that increase come from? (The oceans)
How are the deep oceans warming if not from geothermal sources? The deception would be laughable if it was not the driving mechanism for what some estimate to be a. 300 trillion dollar expenditure by 2050 to wean us off fossil fuels.
You don’t think that would be hell? So we switch from a known successful source of energy that has led to an exponential rise in the quality and length of life over the past 100 years, with America leading the way, to what?
If you are so darned concerned, why not nuclear power, NG and shock, continue to green the planet more? Its as if you are hellbent on something and hence the title of this.
We still don’t have the technology to even get close to what the Green Dealers are pushing, and relying on minerals that are mainly from other countries and that are likely limited, at least compared to the proven US Oil reserves of 400 years, is insanity.
Who the heck comes up with this stuff unless it is a purposeful design to stratify the social order in a way where freedoms are curtailed and people are controlled? AKA SHARED MISERY.
What is Hell? Create your own definition. But here is what I know. If you are not free to do as you please, think as you please, come and go as you please you can’t be that far from it for it runs EXACTLY OPPOSITE of the teachings that a mighty and merciful God gave us free will.
It is anti-human progress, an attempt to stop man from reaching beyond his grasp to see what a heaven is for. It seems like it is not the stairway to heaven this agenda has us on, but a highway to Hell.
Since 75 percent of the earth’s volcanoes are underwater, and we know next to nothing about them, it is a convenient way for a Wizard of Oz, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, strategy.
I have no ”peer review” on my contention. Just observation and reasoning. But they have no peer review it is not, because they will not push funding toward that research. Everything is to prove it’s CO2.
A familiar strategy and we are becoming aware of it in what is going on with Covid. But you can look at any issue ( in my lifetime all the way back to the Gulf of Tonkin incident to stir up support for more involvement in Vietnam.. I think RFK jr is channeling thru me ha ha).
And what about the Meteorologist and Climatologist that simply go along to get along? How do sea surface temperatures hold steady for 50 years and then jump the last 35-40 years coinciding with the increase in seismic activity? THINK.
If you could quantify the total energy of the air, vs the total energy of the ocean, how much more energy is there in the ocean? So why would the warming air which takes much less energy to warm, then somehow force the oceans to warm in tandem?
Isn’t it far more likely that the oceans warm, and due to the constant exchange with the air, warm the air? If the oceans had not warmed, would the air have warmed? And given the relationship of WV to temperatures, with the oceans the prime source of WV, what is the source?
And now the kicker. Given co2 needs more Outgoing Longwave radiation from a warming planet to in turn help warm the planet if the ocean was not warming co2 would be a moot point. ( which it may very well be in the first place)
But here is what you do. Quantify the increase in water vapor the past. 40 years. Correlate that to the temperature rise, Since there is more warming where it’s cold and dry the relationship is right there for all to see.
And since that warming is factored into the missive that the planet is on fire, people will then see what is causing the warming, What is leftover, attribute to man, BUT WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT IF WE WERE NOT NATURALLY WARMING, the CO2 feedback would be limited even further!
Again why do we track CO2 increase, but somehow water vapor is ignored?
Consider this: How many things have you seen come out in your life that you did not question, but simply went along with what you were told, that over the years turned out different?
And how arrogant do you have to be, or ignorant of history, to think that what you are pushing now may not suffer the same fate? It’s the typical Marxist idea, That Marxism is perfect, it is just that everyone else did it wrong, but now we will do it right.
It fails to take into account a vital aspect, that Marxism and its control runs opposite of what nature and natures God designed man for, to be: FREE.
I wrote in my book about the Covid climate link (basically the Covid lockdowns were a warm-up for what would happen with the climate missive), and that means Climate is the mechanism for the control that is craved by those who though they may not deny God, are in a way seeking to play God.
One man playing God over another leads to hellish results. So before we go down that road, perhaps we ought to stop and demand from our leaders, all the information on matters of importance where a government supposedly BY THE PEOPLE becomes a government that RULES THE PEOPLE.
Look I don’t know if I have the answers. But I darn sure have the questions, And what I have observed with the oceanic warming can not be explained by the air warming the ocean.
Given the US contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere is .00000125 and CO2 to do what its purported to do needs a warmer surface radiating in the first place, it seems to me that its at least something we should be looking at rather than dismissing or labeling people that question it as crackpots. How many times have we seen that before?
It is not that they have to be wrong, but there is plenty to look at to suggest they are not right.
And asking us to all get in on what may be a highway to hell should have any rational person not willing to be in the vehicle that would do it.
See more here cfact.org
About the author: Joe Bastardi is a pioneer in extreme weather and long-range forecasting. He is the author of “The Climate Chronicles: Inconvenient Revelations You Won’t Hear From Al Gore — and Others” which you can purchase at the CFACT bookstore. His new book The Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate war can be found here. phonyclimatewar.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Tom
| #
The global warming thugs have it right. The earth will melt …in about 3-4 billion years when the sun dies and goes into a nova.
Reply
Charles Higley
| #
Our Sun has already gone supernova, which is why our inner planets are so rocky, being remnants of an asymmetric core explosion. This explains the neutron-rich nature of Earth’s core and the fact that out oil and gas are abiotic, derived from the core as hydrogen (H) and carbon (C), percolating upward and forming CH compounds on the way. This also explains why we find gas and oil anywhere we drill deep enough. 12,000 feet down could NEVER be fossil. The only fossil fuel is coal, which has also been subjected to oil and gas from below for millions of years.
This supernova event also explains sunspots, which are black inside; NASA has even detected water clouds in some sunspots. If the Sun was a fusion engine, then it should be brighter than the surface if the surface is blown back, which makes no sense if it is black inside; not just lit up, but cold enough to be black.
Thus, the Sun is not fusion engine as we were taught. Scientists have known for decades that the gamma ray flux from the Sun is wrong for a fusion engine. The core is a neutron-rich core doing the same thing Earth’s core is doing, expanding with the production of many smaller atoms which take up more space. Earth by the way is also expanding due to the smaller breakdown elements in the core that take up more room—NASA has even noted this. All the other rocky planets and moons show the same expansion.
So, what heats the Sun’s surface? Sun’s surface is about 6–7000 deg C but a million miles out from the surface, the temperature is a million deg C. How can this be? The only thing that can give a gas that kind of kinetic energy (temperature) is an electromagnetic potential (voltage) gradient. The Sun is being heated by a thin but huge current from our nearest star, proving power for the voltage gradient.
This interstellar current also works like a resistor/capacitor (R/C) circuit, in which no current flows while charging and then current flows (discharges) until the voltage drops to a certain level and recharging starts. During discharge, the resistor heats up and current increases (a characteristic of resistors) to an early peak and then decreases gently until the voltage shuts it off. Amazingly, this is the same pattern of our glacial and interglacial periods. 85,000+ years of charging, with the Sun relatively cool and Earth cool, and then ~12,0000 years of discharge, which warms the planets. The Holocene Optimum was the resistor heating peak and we have been on a linear decrease in peak warm period temperatures ever since By the way, the fluctuation temperatures of our Warm and Cold Periods are typical of fluctuations of current discharge in R/C circuits. We just do not know when the voltage reaches a minimum and the next glacial period starts.
We also have a long series of ice ages (comprised internally of glacial and interglacial periods), roughly lasting about 12 million years (we are 2 million years into this one). This could be explained by our moving in and out of current exchange with our nearest star and how our recent glacial/interglacial periods have slowly evolved from short to long of the last 2 million years, possibly as our solar system has drawn nearer to the powering star.
We also now know that we live in an electric universe with huge currents moving between stars and galaxies. Thus, there is no need for dark matter and dark energy, as electromagnetism is 10^34 times stronger than gravity and can explain everything we see out there.
We should be preparing for the next glacial periods and not destroying our reliable energy sources—oil and gas being renewable, as we know know—the powers that be are setting us up for food shortages in the near future and serious starvation and malnourishment in the long term.
Reply
Charles Hagley
| #
As the CO2 in the air is always colder than the surface, no downward IR radiation can be absorbed by the surface—a cold object cannot warm a hotter object. This is particularly true for the climate models which do sunlight 24/7, no night time.
The upper tropical troposphere is -17 deg C and the surface 15 deg C. All of the surface energy levels are full up to 15 deg C, such that IR from -17 deg C gases will be reflected back upward—no effect.
For that matter, no gas at any concentration can warm the surface when they are all that cold.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Charles,
You’ve got it wrong. The atmosphere is heated by the sun as N2 and O2-convert UV to IR. In the troposphere the transfer of energy is done by convection, not radiation. According to the law of Conservation of Momentum the object with the greater velocity will transfer energy to the object regardless of their masses and kinetic energy.
The reason people think the atmosphere is colder at higher altitudes is because the thermometer is measuring the total momentum of the gas molecules striking it, not their kinetic energy. A look at the graph pf temperature and the fact that density decreases with increase altitude show this is not how energy flows and to get an accurate picture of the energy of the molecules you must divide the temperature at an altitude by the density at that altitude. Cold can add energy (heat) a hotter object (more ,mass).
Herb
Reply
JD
| #
Excellent piece, Joe – but, please, get an editor or some second set of eyes. Typos really detract from the professional job you did laying out your case.
Reply