April 21, 2010
If you want to get all hot and bothered about something it should not be global warming.
Global warming is taking place because the date of the Earth's perihelion (point of closest approach to the sun in a planet's elliptical orbit) is moving toward mid summer in the southern hemisphere so more and more of the energy of the sun is being stored in water evaporated from the south Atlantic and pacific oceans each year.
At present we are in an interglacial period. Florida has been inundated with water many times in previous interglacial periods. The glaciers in the north and south poles may eventually melt altogether. During the Cretaceous the great planes of North America were covered with water so that there was not only a north and South America but an east and west America as well.
When the date of the Earth's perihelion starts to move toward mid summer in the northern hemisphere we will be headed for another ice age because more and more of the sunlight will be reflected into space by the continental masses of Asia and North America. The tilt in the Earth's axis accentuates or attenuates this process
There have been over 60 advances and retreats of glaciers over the last 2 million years. That is about one glacial period every 33,333 years.
This is about midway between the 21,000 year cycle in the Earth's perihelion and the 41,000- year cycle in the rotation of the tilt in the Earth's axis
Both Mars and the Earth have elliptical orbits with their axis of rotation inclined so that seasons occur. Both planets undergo cyclical global warming for much the same reasons.
Water acts as a tremendous reservoir of energy and is a much more important source of global warming on the Earth than CO2. It may also play a greater role on Mars, which may be in an ice age at present. There is evidence that liquid water once existed on Mars and it may exist there again if Mars heats up enough.
What people really should be concerned about (if they care at all about the fate of the human race and the very existence of life in the Universe) is the Orion Arm theory of Mass Extinction.
Our sun passes back and forth across an arm of the Milky way where it encounters a dense populated area of debris which causes mass extinctions on Earth every 26 million years.
We have only 13 million years left to prepare for the next encounter!
The smooth areas on the moon are caused by encounters with this debris because of the very high kinetic energy of the impacts. Large chunks of both the moon and Mars have found their way to the Earth in this way.
Species extinction rates have reached as high as 95%. Not only mankind but the Earth itself may not survive another pass.
The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter may have once been a planet which was totally destroyed by a titanic collision during one of the 26 million year mass extinction cycles.
Yes, the Earth is getting warmer but not at a rate that need concern people.
There has been virtually no change in global temperature in the last 100 years.
The so called "Hockey Stick" increase in global temperature over the last century is based on biased sampling and fraudulent analysis of the improperly taken data.
Some call it "Junk science". Others call it the shake down of corporations for political donations, kick backs for corrupt politicians, and your general payola for not enforcing government regulations (which amount to extortion) by your typical corrupt government bureaucrat.
It is a tradition within the USA to award the highest political office to its most corrupt politicians.
The corrupt politics argument only shows a motive for cooking the data. It does not show how the data has been cooked. The "Land-Ocean temperature index" is only one example of how things can be done by people looking for cushy federal jobs where they can practice their skills at throwing paper wads into waste paper baskets and playing the party animal with interns and secretaries.
The land measurements were taken at weather stations which were located in urban and rural areas where people are. As the population density grows termperatures naturally go up. It has nothing to do with global warming but with people trying to keep warm during the winter.
The Peak Oil Hoax
Another Hoax based more on political science than on empirical science is that of "Peak Oil". The truth is that no one knows how much oil is in the Earth or how long it will last.
It has always been assumed that the reason why our atmosphere is 20% oxygen is because plants produce it as a byproduct of photosynthesis. But oxygen can be made by the photolysis of water vapor in the atmosphere through the action of UV light and by electrolysis through the action of lightning.
The assumption that all atmospheric oxygen comes from plants is based on an experiment by Joseph Priestly. Priestly found that a mouse could be kept alive in a sealed container longer if the oxygen in it was renewed by a plant. Plants produce oxygen, but only in the presence of light. During the night all of the plants in the world use oxygen and do not produce it. Decomposing organism such as fungi and bacteria use oxygen all of the time as do all animals.
Like oxygen, there is evidence that oil is of abiogenic origin, and that it is being continually renewed within the Earth.
There is enormous quantities of quantities methane hydrate ("fire ice") buried deep within the Earth. The energy stored within this methane hydrate may be many times greater than that stored in all the known petroleum reserves of the world.
It is assumed that the methane hydrate in the Earth is of biogenic origin, but methane hydrated is also present in vast amounts on Titan, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, and there is obviously nothing living on these planets.
Is it possible that vast quantities of methane hydrate were trapped in the Earth during the formation of the Earth from interstellar gases and debris? If so, could much of it have been converted into oil by high pressure and heat and formed the primodial ooze from which life evolved?
Back to Global Warming:
"According to scientist and inventor Markus Herrema, Cow "exhaust" accounts for "about 20% of global methane emissions, and atmospheric methane accounts for over twenty percent of planetary warming."
It is not enough that the global warming scammers want to torture cows with their insane schemes they also want to torture sane people with their absurd logic.
Methane accounts for zero percent of planetary warming as does CO2. Natural processes breakdown methane in the Earth's atmosphere to CO2 and H20. This is also true of the carbon monoxide produced by cars.
CO + 1/2 02 ---> CO2
Smog is a problem only in places like the San Fernando Valley where the mountains inhibit air flow so air pollution accumulates at a rate faster than natural processes can eliminate it.
It is, quite frankly, stupid to limit CO2 emissions. CO2 is required by plants for their growth. Plants also require sulfur. Plants can remove the CO2 from the atmosphere only if they have enough sulfur to grow, making it particularly stupid to put restrictions on the use of high sulfur coal if your goal is to keep the CO2 level down.
Although, I don't see why you would want to in the first place. The "greenhouse effect" observed on Venus has nothing to do with the weather on the Earth. The Earth revolves every 24 hours creating convection which distributes the heat throughout the planet.
By contrast, a Venusian day is longer than a Venusian year. One side of the planet is continually being baked by the Sun while the other side is in the dark.
Compared to the atmospheres of Earth and Mars there is virtually no convection in the atmosphere of Venus.
It is this lack of convection which creates the "greenhouse effect" on Venus.
Venus has active volcanoes spewing out sulfuric acid. Without convection the sulfuric acid gas, being heavier than CO2, sinks to the bottom of the atmosphere while CO2 rises upward creating a canopy of CO2.
The joint action of the absorption of heat by sulfuric acid and the reflection of infrared radiation back into the sulfuric acid clouds by the CO2 canopy makes the pressure on Venus so high that liquid water can exist on its surface despite the fact that the temperature there is hotter than the inside of an oven on clean.
Yes, Venus is a very strange world: completely unlike Mars and the Earth.
The atmosphere on Mars is close to 100% CO2 as on Venus, yet there is no global warming on Mars. Temperatures plummet during the night just as they do in a dry desert on the Earth, and Mars has seasons like the Earth. This would not be true if CO2 was causing global warming on Mars.
Mars has seasons because it rotates on its axis like the Earth. A Martian day is about the same length of time as a day on Earth.
We do not know how much of the heat on Venus is due to irradiation by the sun and how much of it is internally generated, but it is likely that if the planet ever started to rotate it would quickly cool down.
There is no greenhouse effect inside a greenhouse when the jalousies are open.
Even if the Earth was not rotating there would be no greenhouse effect on the Earth because the atmosphere of the Earth is practically all N2 and O2 which are both lighter than CO2. There is no greenhouse effect when the jalousies are on the floor of the greenhouse.
The reason why the concentration of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere is so low (only 0.04%) is because CO2 is continually being absorbed by the vast oceans on the Earth. What CO2 there is is probably due to the convection created by the Earth's rotation. If the Earth ever stopped rotating virtually all of the CO2 would sink to the bottom and eventually be absorbed by the Earth's oceans.
Venus has no oxygen, no nitrogen and very little water. This is probably because, unlike the Earth, it never encountered any comets in its history. Its proximity to the sun may account for this.
Since the pressure on Venus is high enough to allow liquid water to exist, liquid sulfuric acid must be present. This is because sulfuric acid has a much higher boiling point than water. This means that it must be raining sulfuric acid on Venus. And if it is raining sulfuric acid on Venus this means that the planet is releasing infrared radiation into space despite the canopy of CO2.
The sulfuric acid rain on Venus is not anything like the "acid rain" on the Earth as this video suggests:
It must be almost pure sulfuric acid. The narrator of the documentary does not know what he is talking about. Venus does not have a greenhouse effect because its CO2 is "trapped" but because a layer of CO2 gas is sitting on top of a layer of sulfuric acid steam in the lower atmosphere. Again, this is because the planet rotates so slowly that there is virtually no convection created by the rotation.
It is only in politically motivated computer models that CO2 can create a greenhouse effect in a rapidly spinning planet. In the real worlds of the Earth and Mars solar energy is not retained by any appreciable amount unless there is a change in the state of matter (e.g. solid to liquid, liquid to gas, etc.). On the Earth it is water that retains the heat caused by solar radiation. On Mars CO2 plays this role. On Venus it is the sulfuric acid which retains the heat.
In the case of sulfuric acid and water, heat energy is trapped by the breaking of hydrogen bonds. The boiling point of sulfuric acid is 3 times higher than that of water. The reason for this is that sulfuric acid can form more and stronger hydrogen bonds than water; hence it can store more heat energy.
CO2 does not boil. It sublimes. This means it goes directly from a solid to a gas. And this means that CO2 stores virtually no heat energy on the Earth at all. It is this lack in ability to store heat energy which makes CO2 such a good reflector of infrared radiation, like the glass in a greenhouse. Even so, there is virtually no greenhouse effect on Mars even though CO2 sublimes there. In other words:
February 17, 2014
Although my arguments are sound, there are some aspects of Venus which I was not aware of when I first posted this page; such as, what the cause of tremendous pressure on the surface of the planet is. I have since found out that the pressure is due to the enormous amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The atmosphere of Venus is 90 times more massive than the earth's atmosphere.
Ninety earth atmospheres translates to 90 times the pressure. The pressure is so high that the atmosphere of Venus is only 5 times the height of the earth's atmosphere. That is very a compressed state and points out the absurdity of trying to compare the conditions on the earth with it "sister planet."
There is convection in the upper part of the atmosphere of Venus which means that heat must be escaping from the planet. And observations from the earth have detected "infrared windows." As these "infrared windows" are open, how can there be a greenhouse effect? As state before, when a greenhouse has open windows there is no "greenhouse effect."
Nevertheless, there may a greenhouse effect in the lower atmosphere of Venus as the average wind velocity there is about 5 kilometers per hour - about the speed of strolling brontosaurus.
But is it the heat from the sun which is making Venus so hot? Some scientists don't think so because Venus is emitting more heat than it is receiving from the sun - which must be a considerable amount due to it closeness to the sun.
And what is the cause of this? One theory is that, unlike the earth, Venus is a very young planet and therefore a very hot planet as the earth was during the first few billion years of its existence. The earth is about 4.5 billion years old but the fossil record is only about 600 million years old.
The presence of sulfur gases in the upper atmosphere of Venus suggests active volcanism.
"New evidence from a satellite orbiting the planet suggests that its volcanoes may be active and could be the source of fluctuations in atmospheric sulphur dioxide. Most of the sulphur dioxide on Venus is hidden below the planet's dense upper cloud deck, because the gas is readily destroyed by sunlight. That means any sulphur dioxide detected in Venus upper atmosphere above the cloud deck must have been recently supplied from below."
"Taylor says that the high levels of sulphur dioxide in the venusian upper atmosphere are also almost certainly due to recent volcanic eruptions"
Venus may not be chronologically old. It may, instead, be a slow aging planet. It may have never received any water by colliding with comets as the earth presumably did. The lighter compounds such as ammonia (NH3), methane (CH4), and water (H2O), seem to be located further away from the sun - mainly in the gas giants such as Jupiter and Saturn. Mercury has no atmosphere at all, and like Venus, it does not rotate rapidly about its axis as does the earth and mars.
Theoretically, water can exist on the surface of Venus but the empirical evidence does not always agree with the theoretical calculation.
If Venus was not so hot the sulfuric acid in the atmosphere would most certainly be on the bottom of the atmosphere. But if it is kept aloft by evaporation then its heavier weight could be compressing the CO2 below. Unlike CO2, sulfuric acid can absorb heat due to the breaking of its strong hydrogen bonds. It most certainly releases heat when it condenses and false as rain.
The compressed CO2 on Venus may have acted like a thermos bottle, keeping the planet from cooling down. The only heat which can escape being the occasional eruptions of sulfur gases from volcanoes - which may account for the convection in the upper atmosphere.
But sulfuric acid is supposedly a "minor constituent" of the atmosphere of Venus...
"Early evidence pointed to the sulfuric acid content in the atmosphere, but we now know that that is a rather minor constituent of the atmosphere."
...which makes it rather puzzling why a volume of 90 earth atmospheres should be compressed into a volume only 4.77 times the volume of earth's atmosphere. Heat makes gases expand, not contract.
"The mass of the Venus atmosphere is about 90 times that of the Earth's atmosphere. 90% of the Earth's atmosphere is within 10 km of the surface, whereas you have to go to 50 km to capture 90% of the atmosphere of Venus."
Things do not add up folks!
If we let:
P1 = the pressure on the earth's surface = 1 atmosphere
V1 = the volume of the earth's atmosphere = 1 (earth atmospheric volume)
T1 = the temperature on the earth's surface = 14 degrees Celsius
We know that:
V = nRT/P
V1 = nRT1/P1
V2 = nRT2/P2
V1/V2 = (nRT1/P1) / (nRT2/P2)
V1/V2 = (T1/P1) / (T2/P2)
1/4.77 = (14/1)/(467/90)
0.209643605870021 = 2.69807280513919
So the atmosphere of Venus is 10 times more compressed than it should be if we are to believe NASA.
V1/V2 = (T1/P1) / (T2/P2)
V1 P1 / T1 = V2 P2 / T2
Which is the
CO2 is not an "ideal gas" but you would not expect the behavior of a non-ideal gas to deviate from an ideal gas by that much.
I don't believe in Moon landing hoaxes or squirrels in Mars photos which prove that NASA is a phony organization but I do believe in crooked politicians giving cushy FEMA and NASA jobs to their political cronies who "keep their mouth shut" about the crimes of their boss and who go along with their Boss’s political agenda.
The "NASA moon landing hoax" story always seemed to me to me to be a gimmick to discredit the report of Flight 93 passengers getting off at Cleveland Airport where they allegedly entered a NASA facility, never to be seen again.
In any case, rather than the heat being stored in sulfuric acid steam layer beneath a canopy of CO2 the heat may be in the liquid rock just beneath the surface of the planet.
Not to discount the sun's contribution to the heat of venus. But whenever the man-made global warming freaks try to make Venus sound like an aborted earth they point out that the distance from sun to Venus only about 75% the distance of the earth's distance from the sun - 72.33%, actually. What they never tell you is that what that means that the intensity of the sunlight on Venus is not 25% greater but 191% greater due to the inverse square law.
One final kicker in the man-made CO2 argument is an observation that blows out of the water the paranoia that cow farts and smoke stacks can turn the earth into another Venusian inferno.
According to the history channel, the dinosaurs of the Cretaceous period breathed an atmosphere which was 10% richer in oxygen than our own. The earth's atmosphere was at that time was 30% oxygen. It is now 20% oxygen.
So what happened to al that extra the oxygen? Well, according to the history channel's paleontologists an asteroid hit the earth burning up all of the forests in the world. Now, the last time I studied chemistry I seem to remember the equation:
O2 + wood + a lit match = carbon dioxide + water.
So, after the asteroid hit and burned up all the forests in the world we must have had an atmosphere which was at least 10% CO2. Our atmosphere is only 0.04% CO2 today.
Now, my question to the man made global warming freaks is: "where did all of that extra CO2 go to? And why did the earth not morph into another Venus?"
The obvious answere is that CO2 being heavier than N2 and O2 sank and was absorbed by the oceans and that much of it is now forms the coral reefs of the world which are teaming with life. Ecologists think these reefs so important they argue for he sinking of US navy ships to make more of them.
It is assumed that Venus and the Earth started out with the same atmosphere. This must be based on the soul criteria that they happen to be the about same size.
But the moon was originally part of the earth. It was a titanic collision with some celestial object which separated the moon from the earth. This object may have been the same cold icy comet which gave the earth its massive oceans.
The solar system is not uniform but quite heterogeneous. A day on Venus - which orbits the sun much more rapidly than the earth - with much greater inertia and centrifugal force* - is longer than a than a year on Venus. And these 2 planets revolve around their axes in different directions.
Therefore, the "models" which assume that Venus and the Earth started out with the same atmosphere sound more like models for political science (how to extort political contributions and bribes from industry 101) than models of astrophysics.
The old adage when in it comes to computer programming is "garbage in" -"garbage out." In the case of global warming it is the assumptions which is the garbage.
I don't know if you know it or not but CO2 is required for the survival of not just plant cells but many animal cells as well. Normally, in multi-cellular organisms, animal cells feed each other CO2. When they are placed in tissue culture at very low cell density they will die without CO2 being supplied to their environment.
In my own experiments I grew cells at about 1000 per dish in plastic modular incubator chambers gassed with 5% CO2 and 5% O2 (at low cell density high concentrations of oxygen are toxic to human cells) and placed into ovens kept at a constant temperature (37 degrees - body temperature)
Infrared radiation from the oven would enter them, pass through CO2 atmosphere, enter the culture media keeping it warm. When the incubators were removed from the ovens they quickly became equilibrated to room temperature - through the emission of infrared radiation - despite the 5% CO2 atmosphere and the fact that the media was saturated with CO2.
So when the "experts" with their computer models speak of a threat to life on earth due to minute changes in an atmospheric CO2 which is only 0.04% CO2 I know for a fact that they are being absurd. 5% is 125 times 0.04%! And yet at this concentration of CO2 my modular incubator chambers had no difficulty in releasing their heat once out the culture oven. Moisture from the media condensed on the inner surface of the plastic (as Moisture condenses in the clouds of the earth) and the chambers cooled off very rapidly. There was no green house effect even inside what amounted to a greenhouse - the plastic chambers - in which convection played no role in the release of heat.
October 19, 2015
This little experiment will not reproduce the conditions on Venus of course. Especially the highly compressed atmosphere almost which is almost 100% CO2 and under 90 times the pressure used in the experiment. And how did Venus acquire its atmosphere?
Venus may had its own titanic collision with an asteroid. Its surface appears to be relatively young as if it were covered with lava due collision with the same kind of asteroid which burnt up the earth at the end of the Cretaceous. But if Venus was an Earth twin at that time then what happed to all of its water? The answer may be that Venus did not have any water at that time.
NASA discovered that the earth is loosing its water in its upper atmosphere by UV photolysis – which is the splitting of the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen. The hydrogen is driven away the solar wind leaving only the oxygen.
This, of course, contradicts the idea that the earth acquired its oxygen rich atmosphere by photosynthesis and throws a monkey wrench into the reducing atmosphere theory of the origin of life on the earth.
Venus, being so much closer to the sun than the earth may have lost all of its water by photolysis. So by the time that it was struck by our hypothetical asteroid it may have had an atmosphere super rich in oxygen. When the asteroid struck it may have spewed out lava onto the surface of the planet and set it into the retrograde motion around the sun - very slowly rotating in the opposite direction as the Earth and Mars. The super rich oxygen atmosphere may have combined with the super-heated organic molecules which the asteroid threw into the Venusian atmosphere to form the massive compressed CO2 blanket that now envelopes the planet.