'We Are Entering a Deep Solar Minimum as the Sun Goes Unusually Quiet Despite What 'Third-Party' Non-Forecasting Fact-Checkers Say'
by Theodore White, astromet.sci
Facebook's so-called 'fact-checkers' have been going around telling people that the Earth is not entering a mini-ice age as the Sun enters a Grand Minimum.
I challenge that and call on those 'fact-checkers' to prove that they can forecast the climate and weather as I have been doing as an astrometeorologist.
According to Facebook,
"Their third-party fact-checkers on Facebook have applied to be signatories to the non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network Code of Principles.
Third-party fact-checkers investigate stories in a journalistic process meant to result in establishing the 'truth or falsity' of the story."
Now, as a professional journalist, I know something about fact-checking as I've done it tens of thousands of times in my 30-year career. I have fact-checked in great detail all kinds of stories, events, obituaries, science papers, and of course climate and weather events - thousands of times over three plus decades.
So, just so you all know that I know a little bit about fact checking myself.
Here are Facebook's so-called 'fact-checkers' on the Earth's climate.
Georg Feulner, senior scientist at Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Michael Lockwood, professor of Space Environment Physics, University of Reading.
I call on both Feuler and Lockwood to PROVE that they know what it is that they are 'fact-checking' and censoring by proving this quote from them is in fact - 'factual' - and true (which I can prove is certainly is not not factual at all.)
Here is their quote:
"Scientists cannot predict whether grand solar minimum, which is a decades-long period of lower solar activity, is coming. But even if one occurred, the consequences for average global temperatures would be minimal. Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions will continue to impact average temperatures much more strongly than solar activity cycles." ~ Unquote.
Really?
That quote is not only NOT a fact, but it is so far from the truth that just dreaming it would be considered to be a high crime of immense hubris based on ignorance of such depth that you would be up to your eyeballs in mind-numbing mud.
Moreover, I state that they cannot prove that what they say is true according to 'science' itself.
Fact-check 'that; while you are at it.
I remind both gentlemen and anyone who goes around claiming that 'man-made global warming' is real that in the final analysis, Science is about the ABILITY TO PREDICT.
That's it.
And this also states that Science means this:
'Put up or shut up.'
I choose to put up. For those interested in knowing the facts of how the Earth's climate and weather is governed, please go here and see ->>
https://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/…/global-cooling-fore…
Science is NOT about political ideology, personal peccadilloes, so-called scientific community consensus (don't make us laugh) raking in billions in government funds playing with climate computer models like video games (models that are always wrong and cannot forecast real-world climate conditions) or the man-made global warming scientists all jetting off to exotic locations cheating on their wives at home (before the coronavirus pandemic brought all those sneaky shenanigans to a screeching halt) while living high-on-the-hog on government handouts bullshitting one another on how 'man-made global warming' is going to make you all rich.
What you all are is this:
You are as dumb as dirt.
As a forecaster I know for a fact that all of you combined could not forecast a bowl of hot soup on a future globally-cooled day if all your lives depended on it.
But I can do that, and forecast well in advance and for those interested, I have proven it numerous times for many years and can prove it again and again and again.
So try me, go right ahead and we will see just who walks the climate talk and who does not.
I walk my talk.
Do you?
Now, the science editor of Climate Feedback, a Scott Johnson, also appears to be pushing propaganda and I challenge him as well to PROVE that what he says is actually 'factual' and 'true' and to please tell us all just how he is able to state that anthropogenic global arming is real when the laws of physics and thermodynamics prove that man-made global warming is literally IMPOSSIBLE to ever take place on Earth.
Now, this 'Climate Feedback,' which Facebook has been using as a 'third-party fact-checker' states, and I quote them - is this:
"...a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to science education. Our reviews are crowd-sourced directly from a community of scientists with relevant expertise. We strive to explain whether and why information is or is not consistent with the science and to help readers know which news to trust."
Really?
Anyone who reads this please contact them yourselves and let them know that astromet Theodore White challenges them to a climate forecasting contest to see who walks their talk and who does not walk their talk.
Let's see who is the real deal here by showing - in public and in front of everyone - just who can forecast to prove that they actually know what they are talking about when it comes to the Earth's climate/weather and who does not know what they are talking about.
I can assure you, I am ready and willing to also put my money where my mouth is, but the question is, are they?
While we all wait patiently for them to answer (with the sound of crickets in the background) to hear from these so-called 'fact-checkers' mucking up Science with their ideological crapola as we also wait to see if they can prove their roles as 'fact-checkers' by actually forecasting climate accurately - I offer some REAL FACTS that these so-called 'fact-checkers' need to learn before they go around telling everyone else what to think and what is 'true' and what is 'false.'
I am really sick and tired of these Goobers out there telling people that 'man-made global warming' is real (it is not) and that humans are changing the climate (untrue) as they lie to schoolchildren that polar bears are drowning (untrue) that sea-levels are rising (untrue) and that 'warm is bad' (also untrue.)
Every single 'prediction' over 25+ years made by those who push anthropogenic global warming on everyone has never come true.
Not a single prediction they've made has happened here in the real world.
Not one.
That means Zero.
Zip.
None.
Nada.
So, allow your friendly neighborhood Astro-Meterolrologist to state some facts - which are also FACT-CHECKED - and scientifically proven to be true - here, in the real world...
'LET'S LEARN SOME TRUE FACTS, SHALL WE?'
The Sun is at the heart of our solar system, where it is - by far - the largest celestial object.
The Sun holds 99.8% of the total mass of our solar system.
It is at the center of everything that allows life to exist and thrive on Earth.
Without the Sun there would be no life on Earth.
None.
The Sun is roughly 109 times the diameter of the Earth as one million Earths could easily fit inside of the Sun.
The visible part of the Sun is about 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit (that is 5,500 degrees Celsius) while temperatures inside the Sun’s core reach more than 27 million F (15 million C) and is driven by nuclear reactions.
To understand the immense power of the Sun, let's say you wanted to match the energy produced by the Sun?
So, if you wanted to match the Sun's output of energy then you would have to explode 100 billion tons of dynamite - every second.
The Sun is composed mainly of hydrogen, then followed by helium.
Nearly all the remaining matter consists of seven other elements – those being oxygen, carbon, neon, nitrogen, magnesium, iron and silicon.
For every 1 million atoms of hydrogen in the Sun, there are 98,000 of helium; 850 of oxygen; 360 of carbon; 120 of neon; 110 of nitrogen; 40 of magnesium; 35 of iron and 35 of silicon.
The Sun and its atmosphere is divided into several zones and layers.
The solar interior, from the inside out, is made up of the core, radiative zone and the convective zone.
The solar atmosphere above that consists of the photosphere, chromosphere, a transition region and the corona.
Beyond that is the solar wind, an outflow of gas from the corona.
The core extends from the Sun's center to about a quarter of the way to its surface.
Although it only makes up roughly two percent of the Sun's volume, it is almost 15 times the density of lead and holds nearly half of the Sun's mass.
Next is the radiative zone, which extends from the core to 70 percent of the way to the sun's surface, making up 32 percent of the Sun's volume and 48 percent of its mass.
Light from the core gets scattered in this zone, so that a single photon often may take a million years to pass through.
The convection zone reaches up to the Sun's surface, and makes up 66 percent of the Sun's volume but only a little more than 2 percent of its mass.
Roiling convection cells of gas dominate this zone. Two main kinds of solar convection cells exist - granulation cells about 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) wide and super-granulation cells about 20,000 miles (30,000 km) in diameter.
The photosphere is the lowest layer of the Sun's atmosphere, and emits the light we see here from Earth.
It is about 300 miles (500 km) thick, but most of the light comes from its lowest third.
Temperatures in the photosphere can range from 11,000 F (6,125 Celsius) at bottom to 7,460 F (4,125 C) at the top of the photosphere.
Next up is the Sun’s chromosphere, which is much hotter, up to 35,500 F (19,725 C), and is apparently made up entirely of spiky structures known as spicules typically some 600 miles (1,000 km) across and up to 6,000 miles (10,000 km) high.
After that is the transition region a few hundred to a few thousand miles thick which is heated by the corona above it and sheds most of its light as ultraviolet rays.
At the top is the super-hot corona, which is made of structures such as loops and streams of ionized gas.
The Sun’s corona ranges from 900,000 F (500,000 C) to 10.8 million degree Fahrenheit (6 million Celsius) and can even reach tens of millions of degrees when a solar flare occurs.
Matter from the corona is blown off into the solar system as the solar wind.
Yet, we have people out there in academia, government, the mainstream and social media who claim that human beings - and not the Sun - causes 'climate change.'
Are they outside of their own minds?
Human beings cannot cause the Earth's climate to change as emissions of CO2 does not and cannot raise the Earth's temperature.
Sea levels are NOT rising. Levels have not risen in 60+ years.
Moreover, any sea level rise in this century will not be more than 10 centimeters (that's four inches.)
Polar bears (sea bears) are NOT drowning.
Polar bears are the Earth's largest land-based carnivores and spend most of their lives around water and ice.
These marine mammals are the very best swimmers in the world.
Fossil fuels do NOT raise global temperatures and extreme weather is not caused by man-made global warming.'
The Arctic and Antarctic are not melting - but in fact their ice extents have been growing and expanding and this is because for years the Earth has been cooling - not warming - and that is caused by the activity of the Sun.
If you believe in 'man-made global warming' then you have been brainwashed to believe in something that does not exist.
This was confirmed by physicists Gerlich and Tscheuschner, who stated in their 2009 paper published in the International Journal of Modern Physics, titled: 'Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics,' that:
"The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824) Tyndall (1861) and Arrhenius (1896) and which is STILL supported in global climatology essentially describes a fictitious mechanism.
That mechanism is where a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system.
According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics - such a planetary machine can never exist.
That means that man-made global warming is impossible.
Nevertheless,
In almost all texts of global climatology and in widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such a mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation.
In this paper, the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified.
By showing that -
(a) There are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects.
(b) There are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet.
(c) The frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly.
(d) The formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately.
(e) The assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical.
(f) Thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero - the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.
A thorough discussion of the planetary heat transfer problem in the framework of theoretical physics and engineering thermodynamics leads to the following results:
1.) There are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effect, which explains the relevant physical
phenomena.
The terms “greenhouse effect” and “greenhouse gases” are deliberate misnomers.
2.) There are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet:
• With or without an atmosphere.
• With or without rotation.
• With or without infrared light absorbing gases.
The frequently mentioned difference of 33 Celsius for the fictitious greenhouse effect of the atmosphere is therefore a meaningless number.
3.) Any radiation balance for the average radiant flux is completely irrelevant for the determination of the ground level air temperatures and thus for the average value as well.
4.) Average temperature values cannot be identified with the fourth root of average values of the absolute temperature’s fourth power.
5.) Radiation and heat flows do not determine the temperature distributions and their average values.
6.) Re-emission is not reflection and can in no way heat up the ground-level air against the actual heat flow without mechanical work.
7.) The temperature rises in the climate model computations are made plausible by a perpetuum mobile of the second kind.
This is possible by setting the thermal conductivity
in the atmospheric models to zero - an unphysical assumption.
It would be no longer a perpetual mobile of the second kind, if the “average” fictitious radiation balance, which has no physical justification anyway, was given up.
8.) According to Schack (1972) water vapor is responsible for most of the absorption of the infrared radiation in the Earth’s atmosphere.
The wavelength of the part of radiation, which is absorbed by carbon dioxide is only a small part of the full infrared spectrum and does not change considerably by raising its partial pressure.
9.) Infrared absorption does not imply “back-warming." Rather it may lead to a drop of the temperature of the illuminated surface.
10.) In radiation transport models with the assumption of local thermal equilibrium, it is assumed that the absorbed radiation is transformed into the thermal movement of all gas molecules.
There is no increased selective re-emission of infrared radiation at the low temperatures of the Earth’s atmosphere.
11.) In climate models, planetary or astrophysical mechanisms are not accounted for properly.
The time dependency of the gravity acceleration by the Moon and the Sun (high tide and low tide) and the local geographic situation, which is important for the local climate, are not taken into account.
12.) Detection and attribution studies, predictions from computer models in chaotic systems, and the concept of scenario analysis lie outside the framework of exact sciences, in particular theoretical physics.
13.) The choice of an appropriate discretization method and the definition of appropriate dynamical constraints (flux control) having become a part of computer modeling is nothing but another form of data curve fitting.
The mathematical physicist Neumann once said to his young collaborators:
“If you allow me four free parameters I can build a mathematical model that describes exactly everything that an elephant can do.
"If you allow me a fifth free parameter...
The model I build will forecast that the elephant will fly.”
14.) Higher derivative operators (e.g. the Laplacian) can never be represented on grids with wide meshes.
Therefore a description of heat conduction in global computer models is impossible.
The heat conduction equation is not and cannot properly be represented on grids with wide meshes.
15.) Computer models of higher dimensional chaotic systems, best described by non-linear partial differential equations (i.e. Navier-Stokes equations) fundamentally differ from calculations where perturbation theory is applicable and successive improvements of the predictions - by raising the computing power - are possible.
At best, these computer models may be regarded as a heuristic game.
16.) Climatology misinterprets unpredictability of chaos known as butterfly phenomenon as another threat to the health of the Earth.
In other words:
Already the natural greenhouse effect is a myth beyond physical reality.
The CO2-greenhouse effect is a mirage.
It is a fact that the U.S. Government has known for a long time that human-caused global warming is not possible.
Most people do not know that a 1941 Department of Agriculture climate report stated - and I quote:
“That no probable increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide could materially affect either the amount of insolation reaching the surface, or the amount of terrestrial radiation lost to space."
Thirty years later, NASA’s two top climatologists reaffirmed that runaway greenhouse effect is not possible on Earth.
Meaning that it is impossible.
That all changed with the Al Gore-led ideology of 'man-made global warming' spread by ideologues in academia, government policy circles, the United Nations and its propaganda spread by a gullible and ignorant mass media.
As a forecaster, I continue to state that there is no such thing as 'man-made global warming,' that is, 'anthropogenic global warming (AGW) - it does not exist and cannot exist because of the laws of thermodynamics and physics say that it cannot exist.
It is literally impossible for the Earth to ever become a classic greenhouse because of human-based carbon dioxide emissions.
But, rather than to forecast they have mandated carbon dioxide restrictions to “fight climate change,” – which has been a farce from start to finish.
None of the predictions over 31+ years made by those pushing 'man-made global warming' has ever come true.
Not a single prediction.
Moreover, the propaganda of 'man-made global warming' has made 'warming' a bad thing when in fact climate warming is always good for the Earth.
The Sun is the cause of all 'climate change.'
And 'climate change' cannot be 'defeated,' as alarmists claim.
They obviously are in great need of mental health therapy to believe and claim that mankind causes the Earth's climate to change.
Only the Sun can accomplish that and does it very, very well.
Moreover, as the Sun begins its Grand Minimum, we already have seen the start of global cooling.
This is true climate change caused by Sun's weakening magnetic field and declining ultraviolet radiance.
The Earth has been and will continue to become colder and wetter with extreme weather and irregularity of the seasons becoming the norm as I have long forecasted.
The worst weather will be extremes of heavy torrential rains causing great urban flash flooding and rural floods.
That is the greatest threat in my analysis of the climate of the next three decades into the early 2050s.
During winters and early spring seasons, expect heavy precipitation of snow and dangerous icy conditions with bouts of polar vortex incursions bringing with it double-digit subzero temperatures will become more frequent.
Does anyone remember the extreme cold subzero temperatures of January 29th to February 2nd, 2019 throughout the American Upper Midwest?
That brief, but very extreme climate event was only a tiny taste of far worse to come in the years and decades ahead. People must be prepared.
If you want to know how the Sun's Grand Minimum and global cooling will affect you over the next 35 years while looking to relocate from your present geographic location to less high risk locations then contact me at astro730@gmail.com.
And remember,
The Sun's Grand Minimum and weather of global cooling IS coming to a neighborhood near you too.
Facebook's so-called 'fact-checkers' have been going around telling people that the Earth is not entering a mini-ice age as the Sun enters a Grand Minimum.
I challenge that and call on those 'fact-checkers' to prove that they can forecast the climate and weather as I have been doing as an astrometeorologist.
According to Facebook,
"Their third-party fact-checkers on Facebook have applied to be signatories to the non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network Code of Principles.
Third-party fact-checkers investigate stories in a journalistic process meant to result in establishing the 'truth or falsity' of the story."
Now, as a professional journalist, I know something about fact-checking as I've done it tens of thousands of times in my 30-year career. I have fact-checked in great detail all kinds of stories, events, obituaries, science papers, and of course climate and weather events - thousands of times over three plus decades.
So, just so you all know that I know a little bit about fact checking myself.
Here are Facebook's so-called 'fact-checkers' on the Earth's climate.
Georg Feulner, senior scientist at Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and Michael Lockwood, professor of Space Environment Physics, University of Reading.
I call on both Feuler and Lockwood to PROVE that they know what it is that they are 'fact-checking' and censoring by proving this quote from them is in fact - 'factual' - and true (which I can prove is certainly is not not factual at all.)
Here is their quote:
"Scientists cannot predict whether grand solar minimum, which is a decades-long period of lower solar activity, is coming. But even if one occurred, the consequences for average global temperatures would be minimal. Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions will continue to impact average temperatures much more strongly than solar activity cycles." ~ Unquote.
Really?
That quote is not only NOT a fact, but it is so far from the truth that just dreaming it would be considered to be a high crime of immense hubris based on ignorance of such depth that you would be up to your eyeballs in mind-numbing mud.
Moreover, I state that they cannot prove that what they say is true according to 'science' itself.
Fact-check 'that; while you are at it.
I remind both gentlemen and anyone who goes around claiming that 'man-made global warming' is real that in the final analysis, Science is about the ABILITY TO PREDICT.
That's it.
And this also states that Science means this:
'Put up or shut up.'
I choose to put up. For those interested in knowing the facts of how the Earth's climate and weather is governed, please go here and see ->>
https://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/…/global-cooling-fore…
Science is NOT about political ideology, personal peccadilloes, so-called scientific community consensus (don't make us laugh) raking in billions in government funds playing with climate computer models like video games (models that are always wrong and cannot forecast real-world climate conditions) or the man-made global warming scientists all jetting off to exotic locations cheating on their wives at home (before the coronavirus pandemic brought all those sneaky shenanigans to a screeching halt) while living high-on-the-hog on government handouts bullshitting one another on how 'man-made global warming' is going to make you all rich.
What you all are is this:
You are as dumb as dirt.
As a forecaster I know for a fact that all of you combined could not forecast a bowl of hot soup on a future globally-cooled day if all your lives depended on it.
But I can do that, and forecast well in advance and for those interested, I have proven it numerous times for many years and can prove it again and again and again.
So try me, go right ahead and we will see just who walks the climate talk and who does not.
I walk my talk.
Do you?
Now, the science editor of Climate Feedback, a Scott Johnson, also appears to be pushing propaganda and I challenge him as well to PROVE that what he says is actually 'factual' and 'true' and to please tell us all just how he is able to state that anthropogenic global arming is real when the laws of physics and thermodynamics prove that man-made global warming is literally IMPOSSIBLE to ever take place on Earth.
Now, this 'Climate Feedback,' which Facebook has been using as a 'third-party fact-checker' states, and I quote them - is this:
"...a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to science education. Our reviews are crowd-sourced directly from a community of scientists with relevant expertise. We strive to explain whether and why information is or is not consistent with the science and to help readers know which news to trust."
Really?
Anyone who reads this please contact them yourselves and let them know that astromet Theodore White challenges them to a climate forecasting contest to see who walks their talk and who does not walk their talk.
Let's see who is the real deal here by showing - in public and in front of everyone - just who can forecast to prove that they actually know what they are talking about when it comes to the Earth's climate/weather and who does not know what they are talking about.
I can assure you, I am ready and willing to also put my money where my mouth is, but the question is, are they?
While we all wait patiently for them to answer (with the sound of crickets in the background) to hear from these so-called 'fact-checkers' mucking up Science with their ideological crapola as we also wait to see if they can prove their roles as 'fact-checkers' by actually forecasting climate accurately - I offer some REAL FACTS that these so-called 'fact-checkers' need to learn before they go around telling everyone else what to think and what is 'true' and what is 'false.'
I am really sick and tired of these Goobers out there telling people that 'man-made global warming' is real (it is not) and that humans are changing the climate (untrue) as they lie to schoolchildren that polar bears are drowning (untrue) that sea-levels are rising (untrue) and that 'warm is bad' (also untrue.)
Every single 'prediction' over 25+ years made by those who push anthropogenic global warming on everyone has never come true.
Not a single prediction they've made has happened here in the real world.
Not one.
That means Zero.
Zip.
None.
Nada.
So, allow your friendly neighborhood Astro-Meterolrologist to state some facts - which are also FACT-CHECKED - and scientifically proven to be true - here, in the real world...
'LET'S LEARN SOME TRUE FACTS, SHALL WE?'
The Sun is at the heart of our solar system, where it is - by far - the largest celestial object.
The Sun holds 99.8% of the total mass of our solar system.
It is at the center of everything that allows life to exist and thrive on Earth.
Without the Sun there would be no life on Earth.
None.
The Sun is roughly 109 times the diameter of the Earth as one million Earths could easily fit inside of the Sun.
The visible part of the Sun is about 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit (that is 5,500 degrees Celsius) while temperatures inside the Sun’s core reach more than 27 million F (15 million C) and is driven by nuclear reactions.
To understand the immense power of the Sun, let's say you wanted to match the energy produced by the Sun?
So, if you wanted to match the Sun's output of energy then you would have to explode 100 billion tons of dynamite - every second.
The Sun is composed mainly of hydrogen, then followed by helium.
Nearly all the remaining matter consists of seven other elements – those being oxygen, carbon, neon, nitrogen, magnesium, iron and silicon.
For every 1 million atoms of hydrogen in the Sun, there are 98,000 of helium; 850 of oxygen; 360 of carbon; 120 of neon; 110 of nitrogen; 40 of magnesium; 35 of iron and 35 of silicon.
The Sun and its atmosphere is divided into several zones and layers.
The solar interior, from the inside out, is made up of the core, radiative zone and the convective zone.
The solar atmosphere above that consists of the photosphere, chromosphere, a transition region and the corona.
Beyond that is the solar wind, an outflow of gas from the corona.
The core extends from the Sun's center to about a quarter of the way to its surface.
Although it only makes up roughly two percent of the Sun's volume, it is almost 15 times the density of lead and holds nearly half of the Sun's mass.
Next is the radiative zone, which extends from the core to 70 percent of the way to the sun's surface, making up 32 percent of the Sun's volume and 48 percent of its mass.
Light from the core gets scattered in this zone, so that a single photon often may take a million years to pass through.
The convection zone reaches up to the Sun's surface, and makes up 66 percent of the Sun's volume but only a little more than 2 percent of its mass.
Roiling convection cells of gas dominate this zone. Two main kinds of solar convection cells exist - granulation cells about 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) wide and super-granulation cells about 20,000 miles (30,000 km) in diameter.
The photosphere is the lowest layer of the Sun's atmosphere, and emits the light we see here from Earth.
It is about 300 miles (500 km) thick, but most of the light comes from its lowest third.
Temperatures in the photosphere can range from 11,000 F (6,125 Celsius) at bottom to 7,460 F (4,125 C) at the top of the photosphere.
Next up is the Sun’s chromosphere, which is much hotter, up to 35,500 F (19,725 C), and is apparently made up entirely of spiky structures known as spicules typically some 600 miles (1,000 km) across and up to 6,000 miles (10,000 km) high.
After that is the transition region a few hundred to a few thousand miles thick which is heated by the corona above it and sheds most of its light as ultraviolet rays.
At the top is the super-hot corona, which is made of structures such as loops and streams of ionized gas.
The Sun’s corona ranges from 900,000 F (500,000 C) to 10.8 million degree Fahrenheit (6 million Celsius) and can even reach tens of millions of degrees when a solar flare occurs.
Matter from the corona is blown off into the solar system as the solar wind.
Yet, we have people out there in academia, government, the mainstream and social media who claim that human beings - and not the Sun - causes 'climate change.'
Are they outside of their own minds?
Human beings cannot cause the Earth's climate to change as emissions of CO2 does not and cannot raise the Earth's temperature.
Sea levels are NOT rising. Levels have not risen in 60+ years.
Moreover, any sea level rise in this century will not be more than 10 centimeters (that's four inches.)
Polar bears (sea bears) are NOT drowning.
Polar bears are the Earth's largest land-based carnivores and spend most of their lives around water and ice.
These marine mammals are the very best swimmers in the world.
Fossil fuels do NOT raise global temperatures and extreme weather is not caused by man-made global warming.'
The Arctic and Antarctic are not melting - but in fact their ice extents have been growing and expanding and this is because for years the Earth has been cooling - not warming - and that is caused by the activity of the Sun.
If you believe in 'man-made global warming' then you have been brainwashed to believe in something that does not exist.
This was confirmed by physicists Gerlich and Tscheuschner, who stated in their 2009 paper published in the International Journal of Modern Physics, titled: 'Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics,' that:
"The atmospheric greenhouse effect, an idea that many authors trace back to the traditional works of Fourier (1824) Tyndall (1861) and Arrhenius (1896) and which is STILL supported in global climatology essentially describes a fictitious mechanism.
That mechanism is where a planetary atmosphere acts as a heat pump driven by an environment that is radiatively interacting with but radiatively equilibrated to the atmospheric system.
According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics - such a planetary machine can never exist.
That means that man-made global warming is impossible.
Nevertheless,
In almost all texts of global climatology and in widespread secondary literature it is taken for granted that such a mechanism is real and stands on a firm scientific foundation.
In this paper, the popular conjecture is analyzed and the underlying physical principles are clarified.
By showing that -
(a) There are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effects.
(b) There are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet.
(c) The frequently mentioned difference of 33 degrees Celsius is a meaningless number calculated wrongly.
(d) The formulas of cavity radiation are used inappropriately.
(e) The assumption of a radiative balance is unphysical.
(f) Thermal conductivity and friction must not be set to zero - the atmospheric greenhouse conjecture is falsified.
A thorough discussion of the planetary heat transfer problem in the framework of theoretical physics and engineering thermodynamics leads to the following results:
1.) There are no common physical laws between the warming phenomenon in glass houses and the fictitious atmospheric greenhouse effect, which explains the relevant physical
phenomena.
The terms “greenhouse effect” and “greenhouse gases” are deliberate misnomers.
2.) There are no calculations to determine an average surface temperature of a planet:
• With or without an atmosphere.
• With or without rotation.
• With or without infrared light absorbing gases.
The frequently mentioned difference of 33 Celsius for the fictitious greenhouse effect of the atmosphere is therefore a meaningless number.
3.) Any radiation balance for the average radiant flux is completely irrelevant for the determination of the ground level air temperatures and thus for the average value as well.
4.) Average temperature values cannot be identified with the fourth root of average values of the absolute temperature’s fourth power.
5.) Radiation and heat flows do not determine the temperature distributions and their average values.
6.) Re-emission is not reflection and can in no way heat up the ground-level air against the actual heat flow without mechanical work.
7.) The temperature rises in the climate model computations are made plausible by a perpetuum mobile of the second kind.
This is possible by setting the thermal conductivity
in the atmospheric models to zero - an unphysical assumption.
It would be no longer a perpetual mobile of the second kind, if the “average” fictitious radiation balance, which has no physical justification anyway, was given up.
8.) According to Schack (1972) water vapor is responsible for most of the absorption of the infrared radiation in the Earth’s atmosphere.
The wavelength of the part of radiation, which is absorbed by carbon dioxide is only a small part of the full infrared spectrum and does not change considerably by raising its partial pressure.
9.) Infrared absorption does not imply “back-warming." Rather it may lead to a drop of the temperature of the illuminated surface.
10.) In radiation transport models with the assumption of local thermal equilibrium, it is assumed that the absorbed radiation is transformed into the thermal movement of all gas molecules.
There is no increased selective re-emission of infrared radiation at the low temperatures of the Earth’s atmosphere.
11.) In climate models, planetary or astrophysical mechanisms are not accounted for properly.
The time dependency of the gravity acceleration by the Moon and the Sun (high tide and low tide) and the local geographic situation, which is important for the local climate, are not taken into account.
12.) Detection and attribution studies, predictions from computer models in chaotic systems, and the concept of scenario analysis lie outside the framework of exact sciences, in particular theoretical physics.
13.) The choice of an appropriate discretization method and the definition of appropriate dynamical constraints (flux control) having become a part of computer modeling is nothing but another form of data curve fitting.
The mathematical physicist Neumann once said to his young collaborators:
“If you allow me four free parameters I can build a mathematical model that describes exactly everything that an elephant can do.
"If you allow me a fifth free parameter...
The model I build will forecast that the elephant will fly.”
14.) Higher derivative operators (e.g. the Laplacian) can never be represented on grids with wide meshes.
Therefore a description of heat conduction in global computer models is impossible.
The heat conduction equation is not and cannot properly be represented on grids with wide meshes.
15.) Computer models of higher dimensional chaotic systems, best described by non-linear partial differential equations (i.e. Navier-Stokes equations) fundamentally differ from calculations where perturbation theory is applicable and successive improvements of the predictions - by raising the computing power - are possible.
At best, these computer models may be regarded as a heuristic game.
16.) Climatology misinterprets unpredictability of chaos known as butterfly phenomenon as another threat to the health of the Earth.
In other words:
Already the natural greenhouse effect is a myth beyond physical reality.
The CO2-greenhouse effect is a mirage.
It is a fact that the U.S. Government has known for a long time that human-caused global warming is not possible.
Most people do not know that a 1941 Department of Agriculture climate report stated - and I quote:
“That no probable increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide could materially affect either the amount of insolation reaching the surface, or the amount of terrestrial radiation lost to space."
Thirty years later, NASA’s two top climatologists reaffirmed that runaway greenhouse effect is not possible on Earth.
Meaning that it is impossible.
That all changed with the Al Gore-led ideology of 'man-made global warming' spread by ideologues in academia, government policy circles, the United Nations and its propaganda spread by a gullible and ignorant mass media.
As a forecaster, I continue to state that there is no such thing as 'man-made global warming,' that is, 'anthropogenic global warming (AGW) - it does not exist and cannot exist because of the laws of thermodynamics and physics say that it cannot exist.
It is literally impossible for the Earth to ever become a classic greenhouse because of human-based carbon dioxide emissions.
But, rather than to forecast they have mandated carbon dioxide restrictions to “fight climate change,” – which has been a farce from start to finish.
None of the predictions over 31+ years made by those pushing 'man-made global warming' has ever come true.
Not a single prediction.
Moreover, the propaganda of 'man-made global warming' has made 'warming' a bad thing when in fact climate warming is always good for the Earth.
The Sun is the cause of all 'climate change.'
And 'climate change' cannot be 'defeated,' as alarmists claim.
They obviously are in great need of mental health therapy to believe and claim that mankind causes the Earth's climate to change.
Only the Sun can accomplish that and does it very, very well.
Moreover, as the Sun begins its Grand Minimum, we already have seen the start of global cooling.
This is true climate change caused by Sun's weakening magnetic field and declining ultraviolet radiance.
The Earth has been and will continue to become colder and wetter with extreme weather and irregularity of the seasons becoming the norm as I have long forecasted.
The worst weather will be extremes of heavy torrential rains causing great urban flash flooding and rural floods.
That is the greatest threat in my analysis of the climate of the next three decades into the early 2050s.
During winters and early spring seasons, expect heavy precipitation of snow and dangerous icy conditions with bouts of polar vortex incursions bringing with it double-digit subzero temperatures will become more frequent.
Does anyone remember the extreme cold subzero temperatures of January 29th to February 2nd, 2019 throughout the American Upper Midwest?
That brief, but very extreme climate event was only a tiny taste of far worse to come in the years and decades ahead. People must be prepared.
If you want to know how the Sun's Grand Minimum and global cooling will affect you over the next 35 years while looking to relocate from your present geographic location to less high risk locations then contact me at astro730@gmail.com.
And remember,
The Sun's Grand Minimum and weather of global cooling IS coming to a neighborhood near you too.
No comments:
Post a Comment