The Mercator projection is a cylindrical map projection presented by the Flemish geographer and cartographer Gerardus Mercator in 1569. It became the standard map projection for nautical purposes because of its ability to represent lines of constant course, known as rhumb lines or loxodromes, as straight segments which conserve the angles with the meridians. While the linear scale is equal in all directions around any point, thus preserving the angles and the shapes of small objects (which makes the projection conformal), the Mercator projection distorts the size and shape of large objects, as the scale increases from the Equator to the poles, where it becomes infinite.
The Mercator projection is all about the problem of how to transform a physically 3-dimensional object into a two-dimensional representation. The problem is that this can’t be done without distorting the intrinsic physical properties of the 3-dimensional object, when viewed in the 2-dimensional representation.
What does this have to say about the greenhouse effect? Simple. A flat Earth is not a physically correct approximation to the true 3-dimensional nature of the planet. Just like a 2-D map of the planet Earth is not a true representation of the 3-D planet.
Not only do things like day and night disappear, and rotation stops, but the physics numbers themselves get modified by this physically incorrect mathematical transformation to make the Sun twice as far away as it really is and its energy four times less intense (far below “freezing cold” in fact).
And since the greenhouse effect only exists in these 2-D maps of the planet, such as the IPCC K&T and related energy budgets, and it comes about only in order to reconcile the difference in the physics between the false 2-D and real 3-D planet, then the greenhouse effect is demonstrated as a fiction invented to fix a fiction.
It’s like if we took a Mercator map projection of the Earth and chose to believe it was absolute fact, and then found that the Northern and Southern continents weren’t the size and shape the map said they were, and so we just invented some idea that swamp gas is the explanation for the difference, because we can’t stop believing in the 2-D map, and we can’t figure out that the planet is actually 3-dimensional.
If scientists were anywhere remotely actually thinking about their science, and thinking about other things they already know, the greenhouse effect would have never been tricked into the mass consciousness. The truth is that most scientists don’t actually like knowledge and aren’t actually intellectuals or interested in reason – they just like to make a salary talking about other people’s ideas, and never going beyond them. The last thing they might do is question or analyse any known limitations of these ideas, for their career is based on trusting them and talking about them. The trick is merely to control the appearance of authority…that’s all the academic science game is. It is also about doing completely useless and irrelevant work that never gets noticed because it benefits no one and doesn’t even hold the promise of benefiting anyone ever, just as long as your dean and department head are told that you wrote 3 papers this year. Not that they would understand them or care whether or not they’re correct.
You all realize that science is over and we’re heading into a zombie apocalypse, right? These animals are about to get so stupid, that they’ll kill you for stating that cold doesn’t heat hot. Please help me prevent this. How do we effectively communicate to people that cold doesn’t heat hot?
Here’s the thing… Is it even possible to communicate such a thing, if you have to? That’s disturbing as all heck. Wow…that’s the most disturbing thought I’ve ever had.