Thermodynamics 101: Socrates Debunks Climate Alarm Science

You may read my blog post about the same events discuss in the video here:

Rebranding the Simulacrum with Sophistry https://climateofsophistry.com/2021/09/19/rebranding-the-simulacrum-with-sophistry/

This entry was posted in Fraud of the Greenhouse Effect and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

323 Responses to Thermodynamics 101: Socrates Debunks Climate Alarm Science

  1. ilma630 says:

    Good to see Joe still on the ball with all this, and making a mockery of all the ‘climate change’ belie ers.

  2. Peter BURNS says:

    Joeseph…… It’s great to see common sense …… The only pandemic thats going on is stupidity

  3. boomie789 says:

    Man, if the ice core data is wrong, I have to rethink some stuff.

    I think it correlates nicely with solar cycles. Hmm.

  4. Joe, In this context the best antonym for restricted is probably unqualified,
    Sort of sums it up nicely.

  5. CD Marshall says:

    Someone asked me if we had no CO2 in the atmosphere would the T be any different. I would have to say no it would not change the surface T. As it stands, I don’t even see it changing the atmospheric T for any contribution would be overridden.

    During the day convection rules and at night it gets too cold w/o water vapor for CO2 to warm it. The CO2 “flux” contribution would not be missed as I see it.

  6. boomie789 says:

    C02 is only .04% of the atmosphere after all.

  7. TEWS_Pilot says:

    Joe, I share your blog posts on some of the more political blogs and chat sites that I visit. Responses are overwhelmingly positive. Keep up the research, you are arming many who want to join the fight but lack the education, training, and ability to present the case the way you do

  8. CD Marshall says:

    Tyndall wasn’t the “father of modern day climate science” he was the father of modern day activism.

  9. CD Marshall says:

    Joe this guy posting on your last video is out there…Another one who thinks the Earth is heated top down.

    Mark Wadsworth
    3 hours ago (edited)
    it’s not “belief”. It is basic undisputed physics and matches up with observations, also applies to Venus. The sunlight mainly hits the clouds. The effective temp 255k is (largely) based on albedo of clouds and hence a good first estimate of actual temp of clouds. Only one third of sunlight hits earth at sea level so adds minor complications only. And the theory is 100% consistent and coherent with very few tweaks needed.

  10. Herb Rose says:

    The energy emitted by the sun is greater than its energy reaching the Earth, the result of an increasing distance and increasing area. Since energy cannot be created or destroyed, space must be absorbing that energy but because there is no mass to transfer that energy to, there is nothing to re-radiate that energy making it detectable. It is the energy emitted by an object that determines its size, not its mass.

    [JP Edit: Guys look at this program…I see it posts on my articles on PSI too. Does anyone know if this is a real person? It seems like it’s actually a BOT, still probing to pass the Turing Test, or at least, a BOT designed to inflict the negative dialectic i.e. sophistry and obfuscation and the creation of new illogics.

    Look at how it gives the answer which is the inverse square law:

    “the result of an increasing distance and increasing area”

    but then, it follows up with an inversion deflection:

    “Since energy cannot be created or destroyed, space must be absorbing that energy”

    No, the energy is simply being diluted by the inverse square law, which was its previous sentence. See how this thing operates!? Gross.

    This is a weapon, guys…this is a SOFTWARE CYBERSPACE PSYCHOLOGICAL WEAPON, designed to destroy knowledge, reason, comprehension, understanding, definitions, etc. It is a negative dialectical weapon. Very relevant to this and the previous post about redefinitions.

    After the previous quoted sentence, it follows with what can only be described as gibberish, word salad to create the pretense or façade of a commanding use of scientific language, but which has no meaning at all. I mean this is demonstrating precisely what I discussed regarding Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems – the BOT can form syntactically correct and readable sentences, but they contain no semantic meaning at all.]

  11. CD Marshall says:

    Joe this is what we fight…
    https://climateclock.world/

  12. CD Marshall says:

    Joe,
    I think you need to reason with Mark Wadsworth on your latest post, I could go on with him but it seems pointless at the moment. He is obsessed with clouds doing things clouds do not do. If albedo is around 30% clouds are not absorbing 2/3 of the solar input and our atmosphere is not a trickle down heating mechanism.

  13. I can spot when it’s pointless…lol

  14. CD Marshall says:

    Yeah I get you.

  15. CD Marshall says:

    Speaking of pointless why ask a question when the answer is given in the question?

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FALH3VyXsAIzm-7?format=jpg&name=large

  16. CD Marshall says:

    This kid on Twitter is a piece of work…
    Brandon Daly
    @brandondaly2018
    ·
    1h
    Replying to
    @MarshallCd
    and
    @ChrisMartzWX
    No, because a grad student would understand how the greenhouse effect works.

  17. A grad student would never question it because they don’t have the incentive.

  18. CD Marshall says:

    Yeah that Tom guy and James West are gaining up on me trying to prove liars are the authority of physics and what liars they are!

  19. Philip Mulholland says:

    @CDM
    “Speaking of pointless why ask a question when the answer is given in the question?”
    Ask him how many light years away is the “thermal radiant heat sink”.

  20. boomie789 says:

    Link didn’t come out right. Copy paste if interested.

  21. boomie789 says:

    The cosmic background radiation can get a perfect blackbody to 2.7K.

  22. CD Marshall says:

    @Philip Mulholland
    “Ask him how many light years away is the “thermal radiant heat sink”.

    I have to ask, expound on that one please. 🙂

  23. Philip Mulholland says:

    @CD Marshall In his lecture Joe shows that because space has no mass it therefore does not have a temperature. Therefore the whole concept of a mass less “thermal radiant heat sink” is meaningless, (note that the thermal radiation to space in the diagram is unidirectional). If the “thermal radiant heat sink” has mass and is say 15 billion light years away then something that distant cannot be responding to the planetary system in real time.

  24. CD Marshall says:

    LOL I didn’t catch that. These Twitterheads are pushing the “slows cooling=more surface T” non sense.

  25. CD Marshall says:

    Joe,
    More from Tom.
    “He got that from an Astrophysicst that calculated Venus atm with the same opacity of Earth without taking account of Earths blackbody.

    Non technical errors in his lapse rate calc. And many more non-technical errors that go unnoticed to a layman.”

    Referring to your paper I’m assuming? This is his explanation of “slows cooling”.

    You should just invite him to post here.

  26. CD Marshall says:

    Tom’s shorthand Twitter version of “global warming”. It is Twitter so keep that in mind.

    TOM:
    “CO2 change the rate of cooling. Sun bombarding us (Xj/s). Internal energy builds up.

    Open system.

    RATE OF COOLING dont increase T, only a small portion gets back radiation. Most of it interacts in the atm. KE.

    Now interactions slow the cooling rate, while the sun doesn’t stop bombarding us. Those kinetic interactions are the vibrations in molecules. Like CO2.”

    My replies: (Twitter shorthand)
    ” That doesn’t change the original T of the surface. The troposphere is not in TE. Slowed cooling by CO2 does not exist, nowhere in the atmosphere is it shown. What does show is the tropics are warmer from solar forcing. Again, rate of cooling does not increase the original T.”

    “Have you see our atmosphere? Freezing is freezing. Where is the warmer atmosphere slowing the cooling? I’ve asked climate scientists, other than expletives, they don’t answer. What is it 6 feet off the ground?”

    “Secondly, obviously the whole planet is not being warmed by the Sun at the same time. Thus you have an entire nocturnal cooling process.”

    My thoughts
    “Most of it interacts in the atm. KE. T, only a small portion gets back radiation. Most of it interacts in the atm. KE.”

    I do not understand why they treat the system like it is static. For any climate related scientist dealing with a dynamic system as static is dishonest or incompetent. I get that you can for mathematical purposes but that is not reality.

  27. Philip Mulholland says:

    @CD Marshall A couple more comments on that diagram:
    1. Because there is no direct radiation shown to be passing from the “Thermal Radiation Heat Sink” back to the model it follows that there is no information coming back from the “Heat Sink”. So, in the absence of information the model cannot be “aware” of the presence or temperature of these “heat sinks”.
    2. Once again they confuse heat with energy. The sinks are Energy Sinks and as such this leads to the paradox of the dark night sky in an infinite universe of stars. An expanding universe has an increasing volume into which radiant energy is stored. Radiation energy that has been in existence since the origin and is as old as the universe has not interacted with matter during the eons of its existence, so as the universe ages and increases in size it stores more photons.

  28. CD Marshall says:

    That’s poetic science, Philip. I thought the heatsinks were just to throw you off from the question.

  29. CD Marshall says:

    This site is great surprised they haven’t tried to shut it down yet.
    http://temperature.global/

  30. boomie789 says:

  31. CD Marshall says:

    That’s good Joe I’m passing it to Dawn.

  32. Rosco says:

    All of these clowns forget the obvious conflict in their ridiculous fantasy:

    The Sun is only capable of inducing minus 18 °C on average – so they claim; and,
    GHGs slow down the cooling rate so the temperature must increase.

    Therefore the thing to worry about is the accumulation of solar energy even though it can’t induce more than minus 18°C.

    Anyone who cannot visualise this argument is stupid beyond belief is obviously – well you know – stupid beyond belief !

    You can’t argue with people who lack fundamental cognitive capacity – first law of reality !

  33. CD Marshall says:

    Well said again, Rosco.

  34. CD Marshall says:

    Joe, Dawn already posted it.

  35. Rosco says:

    On the COVID side how come no-one ever mentions that the number of people infected in virtually every society on Earth is less than 10%.

    So, simplistically, of every ten people you meet one is statistically infected, and in every one hundred of these one or 2 is likely to die.

    That is what the statistics tell you.

    Australia for example has an infection rate of 3,829 per million – divide that by 10^4 and the percentage is 0.4% – 4 people in 1,000 have been infected and of those 0.08% may have died from COVID – 8 in 100,00 may have died. Factor in cardio pulmonary disease, obesity, stroke, hypertension, smoking and the simple fact that people actually die then what are you left with questionable fear mongering.

    I always tell people that wearing a mask in the open is medieval ignorance and that you have a better chance of winning the lottery than of dying from COVID but unfortunately you can’t argue with people who lack fundamental cognitive capacity – first law of reality !

    If people truly understood the maths and researched what they are relentlessly fed they would fight against the MSM Pan (dem) ic !

    I organised vaccine clinics as part of my employment as an Environmental Health Officer for 25 years so I am most decidedly not an anti vaxer.

    However I believe the mRNA vaccines are unproven genetic engineering. The other non mRNA vaccines have not undergone significant trials except as part of the massive “trials” now ongoing.

    Time will tell if they prove efficacious and safe in the long term but preliminary evidence indicates that they do not confer long lasting immunity.

    I also suspect forcing your body to produce the “spike protein” may be the cause of the rapid emergence of the variants when vaccinated become exposed.

    Vaccination does not prevent infection or spreading – it reduces personal risk.

    So there are ~90% of people who have no naturally acquired immunity “protected” by vaccines which appear to confer at best temporary immunity.

    Disaster waiting to happen ?

  36. CD Marshall says:

    She is great, a real Canadian firecracker you know all of these idiots who troll you on Twitter? They block her. Her pinned post is hilarious. DawnTJ90

  37. CD Marshall says:

    “Precise measurements of the CMB are critical to cosmology, since any proposed model of the universe must explain this radiation. The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057 K.”

    Are these guys trying to claim space has a temperature?

  38. No. That’s background radiation. Not the radiation of space. Radiation left over from the Big Bang.

  39. boomie789 says:

  40. CD Marshall says:

    The “Black Guard” police in Aussie are not the regular cops, they are global police funded by the Elite, in this case the Rockefeller Foundation apparently has direct ties.

  41. SamMich says:

    Joe, the equation dU=m cp dT in your video is not part of the first law, and usually is not true. In general, for a constant volume process, one has dU=m cv dT — note this is cv, not cp. For a constant pressure process, one has dH=m cp dT, but not dU=m cp dT, because the body does work on its surroundings, losing some energy. For a process that is neither constant volume nor constant pressure, none of these are accurate.

    Only for incompressible materials do you have cv=cp, and all processes are constant volume. In that case the equation you give would be correct.

    [JP: Yes, Sam, I’m using it as an example where it would apply. Thanks for the useless comment which supports and explains the physics which proves my point!]

  42. oregonmatt says:

    @CD, do you have any links or documentation showing these “direct ties”? I actually spent some time trying to find some, but everything seems to point back to Jamie McIntyre, who is saying this very loudly. I don’t really doubt it, but some detail would be nice.

  43. Brian says:

    Hello Joseph,
    I’ve been following “Climate Sophistry” for a while now and I really appreciate your clear explanations and your courage. I am an organic chemist and I also was initially taken in by the claims about the dangers of CO2 until I really thought about it. I initially became suspicious because the proportions didn’t seem reasonable to me. I didn’t think CO2, a minor component of a diffuse gas could cause significant warming of the solid earth and liquid oceans, both of which have significantly higher specific heats and both of which reside beneath the atmosphere. It didn’t seem reasonable to me as a chemist and as someone who has sat around many campfires on cool evenings. Also, I have performed calorimetry and I know how difficult it is to accurately determine quantities of energy even in a small, controlled environment. That people claimed to know that the earth or atmosphere increased or decreased it’s temperature by 0.1 degrees seemed ridiculous. I didn’t think it would be possible to know this to anywhere near the degree of accuracy reported. In addition, such small atmospheric temperature changes did not seem to me to be a valid proxy for energy since the energy associated with a large increase in atmospheric temperature could be nullified by the energy associated with a small decrease in land or ocean temperatures. Since the oceans, much of the earth, and atmosphere (and sun) are all fluids that influence our environment, it would be incredibly difficult and likely impossible to really know with much accuracy the overall energy attributions and/or contributions based on small temperature changes measured at the earth’s surface. The problem got much worse when I thought about that fact that none of the fluids are uniform and therefore have heat capacity gradients in all directions. For example, our atmosphere is neither uniform vertically nor horizontally. Also, water molecules are moving back and forth in huge quantities between liquid and gaseous form, and this can involve massive amounts of energy with little if any temperature change. I can’t imagine studying a collection of these interacting fluid materials in a controlled lab environment not to mention an open earth. In short, I concluded that nobody really knows if the earth has gained or lost a small amount of energy based on some dubious compilation of surface temperatures and if that is not known that certainly we can’t attribute what we don’t know to CO2.
    Since arriving at this conclusion, I have read much more and now believe the situation is tremendously more difficult than I originally imagined. Anyway, I have a question. In some of your videos, you talk about flat earth science and specifically about dividing by 4 in the calculations which I understand is being done to move from surface area of a sphere to surface area of a circle. Is this division the primary reason the calculation yields an unrealistically cold earth thereby creating the need for the greenhouse effect? If so, what surface temperature would the calculation produce if this division is not performed? Or are there other systemic problems with the calculations? I recall your discussion of the atmospheric adiabatic lapse rate and the difference between the average observed temperature being confused for the surface temperature.
    Thanks
    Brian

  44. CD Marshall says:

    oregonmatt
    https://www.australiannationalreview.com/global-issues/australia-under-attack-by-rockefeller-funded-globalised-police/

    Now knowing Boomie being such a sleuth he might have found out more than that since I linked it to him.

  45. boomie789 says:

    (https://files.catbox.moe/rqp3en.pdf)

    “COVID CRIMINAL NETWORK HAS BEEN MAPPED OUT AND EXPOSED! SHARE THIS

    A German IT project manager who chooses to stay anonymous has dropped this bombshell document exposing the entire covid criminal network. It connects the complex relationships between Governments, NGOs, big pharma, private companies, documents, universities and key people. The document is 170 pages long. There are 6,500 objects and over 7,200 links, including the financial flows.”

    In case you missed this.

  46. CD Marshall says:

    boomie
    These people are hilarious.
    The 1st Law can be used to write out a litany of equations.
    This is out of a meteorological course:
    Summary of Forms of the first Law of Thermodynamics
    Q= Cv dT/dt + p dV/dt
    Q -Cp dT/dt – V dp/dt
    Q- dU/dt + P dV/dt
    Q= dH/dt – V dp/dt

  47. CD Marshall says:

    Wrong place!

  48. Brian, what an absolutely insightful, intelligent, and knowledgeable comment – this is what I would expect from a real actual scientist. I would almost post your comment as a new OP.

    “Is this division the primary reason the calculation yields an unrealistically cold earth thereby creating the need for the greenhouse effect?”

    YES. 100% precisely. This is perfectly it. You got it.

    Please see this model for insight to your other questions:

    Given that the Earth is rotating beneath the solar input, and variations of clouds, weather, etc., the surface temperature is always changing. There is no fixed single temperature one can really assign to the whole system.

    There is a single caveat though in the concept of “radiative effective temperature”, which comes from astrophysics. Via the Stefan-Boltzmann Law for emission from a blackbody which is an ideal Planck-Law emitter, F = sigma*T^4 (W/m^2), one can determine the “fictional” effective temperature that a blackbody would have to hold to emit an energy flux F. We use this for stars.

    For Earth, though, given that we expect the solar input to equal the terrestrial output energy from Earth, then we can use that expected output from Earth in that S-B equation to get Earth’s fictional effective temperature too. This is the -18C.

    What climate science then stupidly does is think that this should be the actual physical surface temperature on Earth which you find at the bottom of the atmosphere! It also treats that temperature as if this is the actual solar heating potential on the entire Earth! THAT DOES NOT FOLLOW AT ALL. Due to the lapse rate, the bottom of the atmosphere must be the warmest part of the whole atmosphere, and therefore the actual average temperature of the atmosphere has to be found at altitude.

    If you want to treat the effective temperature as an actual physical average temperature, then you can’t find it at the surface, and you must find it at the average of the atmosphere, not at an extremity of the atmosphere. The troposphere (where ideal gas laws apply) has an average temperature of -18C at 5km, and then via the lapse rate of -6.5K/km, you get

    surf_temp = -18C + 6.5 * 5 = +15C.

  49. CD Marshall says:

    Well I was replying to Boomie’s comment that seems to have disappeared.

  50. CD Marshall says:

    Joe you were right about that Mark guy on your latest video posts, he’s a bit off.

    ” more mistakes. It is the potential/thermal energy trade off and the gas laws which dictate the lapse rate. “Radiative flux” is a made up term that has nothing to do with basic physics.”

  51. boomie789 says:

    LOL, Brain. 🧠

    fruedian slip.

  52. J Cuttance says:

    JP, would you be able to put an image of the Earth, as seen from the north pole, rotating underneath your energy budget as a gif or something? It would make people’s mental image of what’s going on clearer.

  53. hah, oh shite boomie…logged back in and edited…lol

  54. @J Cuttance: if I had funds/time I could get all sorts of graphics produced. But I think that people can conceptualize that well enough? Would be nice to do though!

  55. boomie789 says:

    I think I just said what Postma tried to tell him already. Semantics and arguing things that are not really relevant.

  56. Joseph E Postma says:

    They just come in to sophize.

    And your response is exactly correct:

    “You are just using semantics and not arguing anything relevant.

    What does this have to do with “Back radiation”, the “Greenhouse effect”, the colder atmosphere transferring heat to the warmer surface.

    Postma is just saying space can’t have a temperature, therefore it can’t receive heat, by the strict definition of heat described in thermodynamics textbooks. I don’t understand why you are so stuck on that.

    I completely understand someone saying that in common parlance.”

  57. CD Marshall says:

    “Barring asteroids, meteoroids, planets, moons, and other celestial bodies, most of space is a vacuum, wherein there is no matter. And whenever we say outer space, we generally mean vacuum. A perfect vacuum has no temperature, as there is nothing in a vacuum whose temperature could be measured. So, in essence, you cannot technically measure the temperature of outer space.” Wasn’t hard to find just Googled “What is the Temperature in Outer Space.”

  58. CD Marshall says:

    I just had this argument with someone who said the T of space is 2.7K which is cosmic background which is NOT space but photons traveling through space from the beginning of time.

  59. CD Marshall says:

    Or at least what we perceive as the beginning of time.

  60. CD Marshall says:

    People literally make things up to defend the GHGE. The Space Station is “matter” in space receiving the same solar energy and converting it as the Moon, Earth or meteor would.

  61. boomie789 says:

  62. boomie789 says:

    College fag here. Mere minutes ago, the NHS sent this form out to a majority of Primary and secondary schools (this is from my brother’s) in the country for vaccination and tried to retract it minutes later, after they realized an Anti-Vaxx insider at the NHS had dumped a fuck-ton of redpills on the consent form. This shit is gonna be irreversible, which ever one of you behind this covert OP did this, God fucking speed.

    https://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/341097336

    @AltSkullMirror

  63. SimCS says:

    Great comment Brian. Keep up the excellent thinking.

    As Joe says, the divide by 4 is a false mathematical trick.

    His explanation of the altitude of the supposed average temperature is also so obvious when you think about it – the average value of a range/set of numbers is never at the extremities. If it was, then by definition, every value is the average and the average is therefore meaningless. It’s blatantly clear the atmosphere doesn’t exhibit a constant temperature profile across altitude.

  64. Wow that’s awesome Boomie!!!

  65. Philip Mulholland says:

    @SimCS When the Vacuum Planet equation with its divide by 4 algorithm was presented to us as part of the Environmental Science degree course at Lancaster University in the early 1970s it was made explicitly clear by the lecturer that this was a mathematical trick, and the sole purpose of the equation was to establish the value of the outgoing thermal radiative flux from a rapidly rotating terrestrial planet.

  66. CD Marshall says:

    From the Penn State Meteorological courses:
    “Since downwelling IR is a second source of income for the surface, we need to add it to downwelling solar. Let’s designate the surface’s IR income as + downwelling IR. That covers the major sources of radiation “income” for the surface.”

  67. CD Marshall says:

    More:
    “Did you know that the amount of infrared radiation the earth receives from the atmosphere over a 24-hour period is, on average, comparable to (if not greater than) the incoming solar radiation during the day?”

  68. CD Marshall says:

    “Downwelling solar, however, isn’t the only source of incoming radiation. Indeed, downwelling infrared radiation is also a major source of radiation absorbed by the surface of the earth.”

    WTF?

  69. CD Marshall says:

    Magic E that is not counted as solar E.

  70. CD Marshall says:

    And now they are counting fluxes…
    “net gain or loss of radiation = 800 W/m2 + 270 W/m2 – 410 W/m2”

  71. CD Marshall says:

    John Crowley
    Why would you want to expose Mr Postma to ridicule by reposting such embarrassing tweets?

  72. J Cuttance says:

    P Mul. …important point. It seemd as if physics has literally regressed since then.

  73. Joseph E Postma says:

    Great comments above you guys! Wow!

    @CD your last comment: Invite them here to embarrass me then…hahaha.

    Maybe I’ll go log in to twatter…

  74. CD Marshall says:

    You should invite Tom who thinks he’ s a genius.

  75. CD Marshall says:

    Joe,
    Just emailed you a link from William Happer great read. Might be useful?

  76. boomie789 says:

    I think youtube actually recommend this guy.

  77. It’s all so ridiculous

  78. CD Marshall says:

    So this is what academia teaches as climate science from the Penn State (home of the Mann himself) METEO:3 4 Laws of Radiation. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/meteo3/l2_p3.html

    Planck’s Law:
    Planck’s Law can be generalized this way: Every object emits radiation at all times and at all wavelengths.

    Wien’s Law:
    So, Planck’s Law tells us that all matter emits radiation at all wavelengths all the time, but there’s a catch: Matter does not emit radiation at all wavelengths equally.

    Stefan–Boltzmann Law:
    …as temperature increases, so does the total amount of energy per unit area emitted by an object (hotter objects emit more total energy per unit area than colder objects). This relationship is particularly useful when we want to understand how much energy the earth’s surface emits in the form of infrared radiation.

    Kirchhoff’s Law:
    Kirchhoff’s Law states that for an object with constant temperature, an object that absorbs radiation efficiently at a particular wavelength will also emit radiation efficiently at that wavelength.

    “So, of the solar radiation reaching Earth’s atmosphere, about half never even makes it to the surface.”

    “Obviously, for us here on Earth, the sun is a major source of radiation, but it’s not the only important source. Indeed, clouds and atmospheric gases are sources of radiation, too, and they play a critical role in the flow of energy through the earth-atmosphere system. “

  79. CD Marshall says:

    It must be so nice to make ups science as you need it to justify a theory. and know your “peers” will approve whatever ridiculous conclusion you come up with.

  80. CD Marshall says:

    So if you feel like you are turning green, cut down on your gamma rays.

  81. Check this out you guys

  82. George says:

    Joe, I thought I posted that Happer link several years ago. I have it bookmarked. Another of his links is this:

    Click to access Statz67-lifetimes.pdf

    He gave that link to show the proof of the first link. CO2 gives up any energy absorbed by conduction about a billion times quicker than a photon being released. It puts a knife through the AGW “back radiation” garbage!

  83. Joseph E Postma says:

    Science has become such complete garbage.

    What a crazy world. Some people sure seem like they’re really happy and doing well for themselves by lying about every possible thing that they can. I mean…lying about stuff isn’t a big deal, it happens all the time…but they have the media system at their disposal and literally unlimited funding to promote their lies, and all that funding and media empire is needed just to quell a few people online trying to talk about true things. What a funny war going on.

    Imagine that guys: it takes a global media industry empire, a global academic apparatus, and unlimited funding, just to stop a few of us from having a voice.

  84. SimCS says:

    Joe, back on the (non) temperature of space subject. As space doesn’t have a temperature, do you assume it’s 0K when looking at the temperature difference between earth and space for rate of earth’s radiation emission, or do you need a different understanding for how earth regulates its temperature when looked at as a single body from space? [I hope I’ve framed the question correctly, but please do reframe it if necessary.]

  85. Joseph E Postma says:

    SimCS: well the only thing that’s there is the cosmic microwave background radiation, at 2.7K; this is an independent energy field left over presumably from the creation of the universe. But the flux from this is negligible and is why it was never discovered until the advent of very sensitive radio receivers…and so it doesn’t factor in at all to the emission from Earth. So yes, Earth emits freely to space…0K is indistinguishable from 2.7K in terms of radiant flux density.

  86. CD Marshall says:

    So by flat out lying about physics, they can claim clouds are a heat source and therefore justify “cloud radiative forcing” which is peppered in many “scientific peer reviewed papers”.

  87. CD Marshall says:

    So far from reality into a narrative it’s insane. Clouds help maintain a temperature longer over night, they are not “creating” energy. Climate science perverts all that is natural and good in nature and conforms it to lucrative propaganda and blatant fearmongering.

    Did you ever think academia would brazenly teach: “Every object emits radiation at all times and at all wavelengths.” Which is therefore used to claim “forcing” for all that is happening is “changing” the structure of the “flux”, that (they claim) already emits in that wavelength anyway. Climate is just “forcing” it to a greater energy level in that spectrum.

    Therefore frequency is only the result of peak emissions, not the requirement to achieve that peak emission. In this perverted version of science they made it it to justify adding fluxes.

    So subtle and loathsome.

  88. Exactly right CD. This is all just the strangest thing.

    It only starts to make sense, really, if you consider it in terms of an absolute attack against humanity and even planet Earth itself from what must amount to an outside force.

  89. CD Marshall says:

    Just now on Twitter from an atmospheric scientist regarding fluxes…
    “Yes, they do. By your logic if you had one heat source with radiative flux F, and you then add another identical one, the total heat flux would still just be F (the average), not 2F (the sum). That makes absolutely no sense.”

  90. Joseph E Postma says:

    You see CD…they have no idea what the hell they’re doing, talking about, or even of the language that they’re using at all.

    Note how they said “heat fluxes”. Also, two identical ones. Is that the situation for the atmosphere at all?

    The atmosphere 1) has no heat, and its thermal radiation is not heat for a warmer surface, and 2) it is not identical to either the Sun or the surface. And 3) the atmosphere is not an independent source of energy…it is downstream of the heat absorption on the surface from sunlight.

    They literally have no clue.

    It is all just made up word sophistry divorced from physics, mathematics, thermodynamics. This is all exactly what I’ve been talking about in the last post and video.

    Two heaters with independent power sources at some high temperature actually sending heat is not the same thing as one independent power source heater at high temperature with a block of ice beside it instead of another identical heater.

    And guess what: two hot blocks will not combine to produce a hotter third object.

    Ask it how many ice cubes must be combined to make a hot cup of coffee!! lol

  91. CD Marshall says:

    He just asked what does frequency have to with radiative fluxes. Good grief.

  92. CD Marshall says:

    Amazing how they can mix some real science to get the narrative result by changing other rules on the fly.

    An increase in T requires W or Q. E can exchange until no heat is added and the system is in TE. The in a steady state you are maintaining a T not increasing it.

  93. Joseph E Postma says:

    Great responses there Boomie!!!

  94. CD Marshall says:

    “You must sum the up and down arrows to get heat” even after (if I read it right), correctly identifying the heat flow laws. Then this out of nowhere and not even being supported by his previous explanation of heat flow.

    It would be like saying to meet an increase in T you need Q or W so all fluxes add to heat. Makes no sense.

  95. CD Marshall says:

    Anything to add?

    The surface is only heated by the Sun during diurnal hours. Rate of cooling does not change the original surface temperature.

    These radiative fluxes do not add they merge and average.

  96. tom0mason says:

    Just a couple of thoughts about solar averaging. Global artifacts such as Atmospheric composition are assumed to be within normal operating limits of today.

    Consider what would happen if the Earth was to stop spinning as it does now, and instead always has one side permanently facing the sun. The flat earther’s incoming solar energy flux average would be the same, would it not ?(same energy over the same area!) However now we have a forever warm/hot side to the planet, and a forever cold side. The poles would still be there but much warmer on the sunlit side, much cooler on the dark side of the planet.
    Consider this time that the rotation is normal but the Earth up-ends itself, and the sun shines only on the spinning top of the Norther hemisphere, with the North pole as the most solar irradiated spot. So (again) the flat earther’s incoming solar energy flux average would be the same, would it not? but the distribution of energy from hot North pole to very cold South pole be very different. But climate ‘science’ sophistry indicates that the average solar energy hitting the planet is the same!

    Do not these extreme examples show that so called incoming solar energy flux average made by the flat earther’s is just an effect of wrongly portraying the solar energy in 2D instead of 3D?
    And that the fictional re-radiation from CO2 heating the atmosphere to change the climate is little more than a guess for the Earth is oriented as it currently is, and to hide the fact that their figures are wrong! This guess also has to minimizes the effects of the solar input, cosmic rays, ocean currents and movement, 3D atmospheric movement, clouds and the effects of atmospheric water (see https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/147822/potent-atmospheric-rivers-douse-the-pacific-northwest), volcanic effects, ionization and electrical effects, natures’ very evident effects on rocks, soils, landscapes, seas and oceans, and the short to medium term variability of atmospheric chemistry and particulates and Earth’s albedo affecting long term outcomes.

  97. CD Marshall says:

    One thing for sure, the lit side of the planet would be much hotter and the dark side freezing. No winds no ocean currents, no gyres and no wind currents? We’d have one atmospheric cell per hemisphere going from the tropics to the poles. The warmer side would probably be nearly isothermal (night side too I’d imagine).

    The sweet spot of Earth would probably be a little sliver between the lit and dark side. What a huge change it would be.

  98. CD Marshall says:

    “A cold front adds kinetic energy, not thermal energy. Whether the surface becomes warmer depends on the radiative, latent, and sensible heat fluxes between the atmosphere and surface. I still don’t understand why you think it averages.” Modern day climate scientist.

    Thermal Energy
    The average translational kinetic energy possessed by free particles given by equipartition of energy is sometimes called the thermal energy per particle. It is useful in making judgements about whether the internal energy possessed by a system of particles will be sufficient to cause other phenomena. It is also useful for comparisons of other types of energy possessed by a particle to that which it possesses simply as a result of its temperature.

    Kinetic Energy
    Kinetic energy is energy of motion. The SI unit for energy is the joule = newton x meter in accordance with the basic definition of energy as the capacity for doing work. The kinetic energy of an object is the energy it possesses because of its motion.

  99. CD Marshall says:

    I didn’t even catch he used heat flux again instead of flux.

  100. boomie789 says:

    They want a pandemic but they want it under their control so they can use it to scapegoat for depopulation and societal degradation. Along with more and more “emergency measures” to deal with the “pandemic” they are the ones actually perpetuating. They control the depopulation rate over time, decades I’m assuming. The vector to control the depopulation rate(The Pandemic) is through the vaccines and the known(to them) relations to the virus.

    Destroying the economies and trade on purpose. Destroying the value of money on purpose.

    To bring about long pre-determined solutions.
    something something transhumanism.
    If we are in agreement that the same people pushing the vaccine are the same people who funded the lab that made the chimera virus in Wuhan.

    something like that….

  101. CD Marshall says:

    Did anyone see the pathetic Aussie PM video where he claims he will “look into” claims of brutality and violence from the police.

    Meanwhile someone sent a snippet of hospitals being flooded with serious injuries, including broken bones, from “the brutality and violence of police”.

  102. CD Marshall says:


    “The True North, strong and free;
    And stand on guard, O Canada,
    We stand on guard for thee.”

  103. boomie789 says:

  104. Joseph E Postma says:

  105. CD Marshall says:

    Science has become fiction we are truly entering another Dark Age of mankind. The 6th Extinction?

  106. CD Marshall says:

    Twitter comment from a bloated frog
    Chris Taylor
    @ammocrypta
    Professor and Conservation Ecologist. Here to fight and discredit pseudoscience and anti-science, but sometimes I post some cool stuff

    to me: “Do you have any experience publishing scientific research?”

    Which as always was an attempt at trying to silence me.

  107. CD Marshall says:

    NASA has created “cloud greenhouse forcing” https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Clouds

    “This trapped energy will increase the temperature of the Earth’s surface and atmosphere until the longwave emission to space once again balances the incoming absorbed shortwave radiation. This process is called “cloud greenhouse forcing” and, taken by itself, tends to cause a heating or “positive forcing” of the Earth’s climate. Usually, the higher a cloud is in the atmosphere, the colder is its upper surface and the greater is its cloud greenhouse forcing.”

  108. Joseph E Postma says:

    Clouds which reflect nearly 100% of incoming solar heating…cause heating…right…ugh.

  109. CD Marshall says:

    That’s basically what that guy on your latest YT post was trying to say and claiming “it was physics’.

  110. CD Marshall says:

    I’ve read often enough the belief is clouds keep the night warm by “trapping” Ir from leaving or something like that. I don’t even think they know anymore what they are trying to say.

  111. CD Marshall says:

    Clouds do not increase T, insulation does not increase T, IR moving off of clouds back to the surface or wherever else does not increase T. This is really subtle and clever word play.

    “increase the temperature of the Earth’s surface” No it certainly does not. Clouds are not a heat source and inversely radiative forcing from a freezing cloud?

    “balance of E” of what? Forcing implies T increase where none exist, and TE where none exists.

  112. Joseph E Postma says:

    Exactly right CD.

  113. Rosco says:

    Half of Earth’s surface lies between 30°N and 30°S.

    This area is continually irradiated by at least 1184 W/m2 depending on weather (1368 x Cos30°). 1184 W/m2 can induce temperatures up to 380 K depending on absorption.

    This of itself demonstrates how stupid the divide by 4 idiocy is.

    How about solar panels – mine have an area slightly more than 1 metre squared and are rated at 200 W and 15.6% efficiency. This is impossible with the stupid insolation prescribed by climate f’wits.

    The Moon with no GHGs has a 16 K higher blackbody temperature than Earth – aren’t GHGs supposed to keep us toasty ??

    That Herb Rose comment is absolutely astounding in its stupidity.

    The Sun’s radiation at Earth is reduced because the “sphere” of the emitted wavefront from the Sun is increasing in area – there is no “space must be absorbing that energy” !

    This is like all the fuckwits that claim near Earth orbit space is cold !

    Just how is it possible to claim that an area of space is “cold” when there is a permanent field of radiation with a power of 1368 W/sqm passing by ?

    I just cannot get over the stupidity of so many people – especially those journalists who continually whine about a climate emergency ! They haven’t the IQ of a paramecium – which are really highly successful organisms.

    I truly believe the world is fucked and I’m glad I’ve lived most of my life in the relatively free pre-fucked era.

  114. CD Marshall says:

    Does anyone have any RW Wood information to his original experiments? Someone on Twitter was asking.
    I know someone duplicated it and was burned a the stake by the climate clown brigade.

  115. boomie789 says:

    https://www.rt.com/news/536304-australia-nsw-gladys-resigns-corruption/

  116. boomie789 says:

  117. boomie789 says:

    They are nationalizing everything, just doing it sneaky and slow. They just want the control and the power, they don’t care about the competency.

  118. boomie789 says:

  119. CD Marshall says:

    These people on Tw@tter
    “ot just the Arctic.
    Its indicative of the earth finding it harder to cool down at night, ie something is preventing heat loss”

  120. CD Marshall says:

    So this is the official new add on to the GHGE “cloud forcing”

    Clouds Don’t Act Like Blankets
    There are situations when I emphasize clouds in a nighttime weather forecast. Obviously, clouds at night are important when they produce precipitation. Moreover, an overcast or broken cloud cover, particularly when the clouds are stratus, insures that nighttime surface temperatures will be higher than they otherwise would be. And a clear sky paves the way for a chilly night, assuming light winds. So what’s up with nighttime clouds?

    Clouds emit infrared radiation to the efficiently absorbing ground, keeping the ground (and thus the overlying air) warmer. As a disclaimer, please keep in mind that clouds emit infrared energy in all directions, but, as far as surface-air temperatures are concerned, we’re only interested in the downward direction. Meteorologists sometimes refer to infrared energy that’s emitted downward by clouds (and also the air) as downwelling

    So clouds are a source of infrared radiation. In this light, think of clouds as “space heaters”, emitting energy toward the ground. In turn-about fair play, the ground emits infrared radiation to absorbing clouds, keeping their bottoms warmer (especially low clouds). In effect, there is a synergy (give-and-take) between clouds and the ground at night. This synergy results in warmer cloud bottoms and, more importantly to us, higher surface-air temperatures. There is a synergetic exchange of radiation between clouds and the ground, as there is the misconception that “clouds act like a blanket” at night. Blankets simply limit the transfer of heat energy away from our skin by convection.

  121. CD Marshall says:

    It’s official a cold cloud can heat a warmer atmosphere. This science is only available in clown world.

  122. CD Marshall says:

    LOL heat a warmer surface.

  123. If you turn off the TV, stop reading the news, put it all out of your mind, and watch this with the volume cranked…the world is as perfect and benign as it could possibly be. We’re under attack by an alien force that wants to destroy this:

    And WE are the ones who are being marshaled into it destroying it for them. Their aim is to leave this planet as barren as the moon.

  124. Zelator says:

    Not sure if you guys have seen this yet, but it’s worth highlighting. Please share:

    https://rumble.com/vn12v1-attorney-thomas-renz-we-got-them.-fact-check-this-all-new-whistleblower-inf.html

    There is becoming a divide in the human population almost on tribal grounds, between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, as is reported on by whistleblowers in the video above who are stating some medical institutions are purposedly treating patients on a 2 tier system. One where the vaccinated get Ivermectin which is proven to be a cure and the unvaccinated are given Remdesivir that is shown to lead to kidney failure.

    Not to mention that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are cheap as chips per course/dose were as Remdesivir is between $2,500-$3,000 dollars per course, and I wonder if that difference in monetary gain is a factor of the institution carrying out the vaccination? Just saying ! (8 mins) in the video above.

    It seems some health care workers are also complicit in this deceit. Bring on the Nuremberg style trials, because “just following orders” will NOT be a defence.

    The vaccinated say they need to be vaccinated to be safe from us ( the unvaccinated), and we say they need to be unvaccinated for us to be safe.

    However in the above video (19.40 mins) it shows a document saying that if you get the Pfizer vaccine you are more likely to catch Covid than the unvaccinated, and also the unvaccinated are becoming sick due to the provable shedding factor of the vaccinated as shown in the document below.

    Pfizer has it seems let the cat out of the bag …IT IS Gene Therapy!! the documents below calls it RNA Vaccine in its title.

    The title of the document is “..Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy OF SARS-COV-2 RNA Vaccine”, and the other document is titled “Design and Analysis of Shedding Studies for Virus or Bacteria-Based “Gene Therapy”…”

    https://www.fda.gov/media/89036/download

    https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pd(f) remove brackets for document.

  125. Zelator says:

    Have you noticed in China recently they have brought in a law that restricts how much time the children are allowed to use their phones for such things as gaming and social media. Have you also noticed that they are phasing out physical products like DVD’s and CD’s.

    You can now pick them up second hand for pennies. All replaced by streaming services.

    They are actively pursuing policies to eliminate owning property by their use of Reverse mortgages introduced by Ronald Reagan. Also equity release in UK are part of the illuminati’s concept to buy back cheap housing, and reduce inheritance.

    Why do illuminists always want a weak economy and want to destroy a good economy to bring in a NWO?

    They crash economies and then start wars to make money. That is their strategy. They make nothing in buoyant economies where entrpreneurs are creating wealth for themselves and their families.

    They want you to own nothing, and for them to own everything. And that means your property, your children, your education and your whole life event…. ultimately they want to possess your soul.

    You know, they let us see what they are doing so that when they do something and you have free will and do it anyway, like taking the vaccine, then they win.

    He (Satan) has a deal with God, it’s called “Free will”. Those that follow like a sheep to slaughter are his to take.

    Be careful what you allow via your free will as the devil is cunning. I believe that is why Trump mentions taking the jab, it’s sifting wheat from the chaff. It’s all about free will. Discernment.

    By our complacent apathetic nature we are seen as complicit. And that is registered as a BIG deal, a nod that the momentum to go forward with the plan for humanity is to proceed.

    This cabal want you to own nothing. The future will be you will recieve a digital wallet, and you will have to spend credits to access a movie or a song or an hour online.

    If you break the law your credits will be diminished and you wont be able to pay for food or shelter.

    This is the brave new world of technocracy, where we all live in smart cities, in exact cubic capacity.

  126. Zelator says:

    Free Will, is actually a spiritual law. Here is a document that explains what I mean:

  127. Zelator says:

    “And when the broken-hearted people
    Living in the world agree
    There will be an answer
    Let it be

    For though they may be parted there is
    Still a chance that they will see
    There will be an answer
    Let it be”

  128. Truthseeker says:

    Excellent video debunking the “Greenhouse Effect” …

  129. boomie789 says:

    loud

  130. Truthseeker says:

    The first video reply to this tweet is even scarier …

  131. boomie789 says:

    Seems a little sketch idk. Too movie like.

  132. boomie789 says:

    https://odysee.com/@TimTruth:b/Dr-nate-autoimmunity:2

    Alt link (https://files.catbox.moe/65ssfy.mp4)

    Another whistle blower video. Showing evidence the jab makes your immune system go haywire.

  133. Destroy it to make you have to pay for it.

  134. Pierre-D Bernier says:

    Climate Crisis does not exist ! Saint Greta said it !!!
    https://newtube.app/TonyHeller/byMeSo0

  135. CD Marshall says:

    Joe,
    If you don’t mind check out my tat for tat with EF M. Leaving a comment is optional.
    I closed it he’s a lying sack of shite who keeps lying about physics so it is pointless. Naturally other activists congratulate him on his lies. These people are bots.

  136. CD Marshall says:

    If you can just make up science as you please what the hell is the point of being a scientist? Tolerating this trash has gone on for far too long.

  137. CD Marshall says:

    FactCheck.org funded by…
    Annenburg Foundation=Gates.

  138. CD Marshall says:

    We are indeed being played for fools.

  139. @CD Marshall

    There are some real gems in there. Take this one with its assumption that the daytime lit surface does not radiate thermal energy to space because the sun is shining:
    “Once night hits, the Earth would be facing 2.7K, near absolute zero. Everything would freeze solid.”

  140. CD Marshall says:

    Yup but somehow the atmosphere is a thermo storage of endless recycling heat.

  141. Philip Mulholland says:

    @CD Marshall

    The core truth of what Joseph is saying distills to this simple statement:
    “Heat is difference in temperature”.
    Stand your ground 😉

  142. boomie789 says:

  143. Joseph E Postma says:

    Gosh that is vile, boomie.

    CD, see here:

  144. Joseph E Postma says:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/ag-garland-weaponizes-doj-against-dissenting-parents-after-school-board-association-pleas

    Now, they’ll send in operatives to commit acts of violence and threats of violence, so that they can then stop school board meetings altogether.

  145. boomie789 says:

    Sending your kids to public school at all is the paradigm we need to break.

    Especially when the public educational institution is controlled by hostile parasites. Public school is nothing but a state indoctrination center where you are exposed to and influenced by kids with aweful parents. Which is going to be a lot of them.

    You should have your kids socialize with other kids with good loving mentally sounds parents.

    Don’t send your kid to public school it could ruin their mind.

  146. Joseph E Postma says:

    Absolutely Boomie!

  147. oregonmatt says:

    https://phys.org/news/2021-10-nobel-prize-physics-awarded-scientists.html
    Fake science must be rewarded, Nobel prize goes to Syukuro Manabe and Klaus Hasselmann, “for their work in developing forecast models of Earth’s climate and “reliably predicting global warming.”

    Similar to the 120 year-old virus hoax, as a number of virologists have won Nobel prizes for helping prop up the viral narrative.

  148. Same with physics – Max Born awarded it for doing something 100% arbitrary and irrational with the quantum mechanical wave equation. There are many other examples. It’s all for an agenda…all fake.

  149. boomie789 says:

  150. Joseph E Postma says:

    Haha that’s great!

  151. boomie789 says:

  152. boomie789 says:

    15 billion dollars. They want the government to make your life hell until you are coerced into being injected with their poison for 15 billion dollars a year. If they get their lobbyist to force the government to inject EVERYONE then they will make 20 billion, 30 billion.

    Thousands dead, millions of lives destroyed, labor shortage, economic collapse, HUMAN RIGHTS CRISIS.

    don’t care 15 billion dollars YOLO!

  153. Sick retarded retards. This is what it’s worth…this is what the universe is worth…is lobbyists, and sophists, lying to make money off of destruction.

    The only other explanation is the movie They Live, but they have a plan to destroy the human race “but it’s just interplanetary business”.

  154. SamMich says:

    Wait – what is your problem with Max Born’s work? The statistical interpretation of the wavefunction, for which he won the Nobel, is applied in every experiment involving quantum mechanics.

  155. J Cuttance says:

    Boomie, I’ve just read the Segalstad ice core paper. It’s sound. Is there any aspect of the greenhouse theory that isn’t intellectual vomit?

  156. MP says:

    @ boomie789 says 2021/10/05 at 4:05 PM

  157. boomie789 says:

    (https://files.catbox.moe/8bj313.mp4)

    Guy has a seizure and collapses outside of a bus giving jabs?

  158. CD Marshall says:

    Joe,

    Some half wit troll who hides behind a pseudo name thought he could challenge you on your physics over at FOS. They are so stupid and sadly don’t even comprehend that.

    As I told someone a long time ago, “You are just smart enough not to understand how stupid you really are.”

  159. boomie789 says:

  160. CD Marshall says:

    Someone brought up an interesting point on Twitter.
    UV light is not felt as “heat” on the skin. It is not created as “heat” on the surface, correct? So how does it heat up O3 molecules?

    So I looked it up and got this…
    “The process involves that ozone first split into O and O2 which contain the energy of the photon. These transfer this energy to other gas molecules (mostly N2) before they can react to reform O3. It is the energy transfer that causes the higher temperature.”

  161. CD Marshall says:

  162. CD Marshall says:

    My wife got a severe cold and wouldn’t go to the doctor…you know why. How did we end up like this when you can no longer trust the medical field?

    Walk in with a fever next thing you know you’re in the “Covid Ward” one week and maybe dead the next.

  163. boomie789 says:

    Reminds me of the changelings from DS9. A shape-shifting God-complex race that uses subterfuge and other nations to do its biding. Believing the only way to be safe from “the solids”, is to conquer them and bring them into the dominion.

    They can shape-shift themselves into any other nation and use this ability often to infiltrate their enemy nations and destroy them from within.

  164. boomie789 says:

    They also manipulate the genetics of their subservient races to keep them controlled and loyal to them.

  165. boomie789 says:

    They use drugs to do it too.

  166. CD Marshall says:

    Eugenics that inspired the NAZIs is on full display. As with a totalitarian rule, those eugenics rules do not apply to them. Seriously? Most of those politicians should already have been euthanized.

    Ironic Greta is the heroine of this movement considering her ancestry in eugenics.

  167. CD Marshall says:

    These FN people…

  168. CD Marshall says:

    Can’t win an honest debate, just silence the opposition. This is Bolshevik thuggery without the guns.
    Control the media control the world.

  169. It’s barfable…really It’s so fn sick and gross.

  170. boomie789 says:

    My understanding is you can look at 100+ year old photos of coastal forts and you can see the waterline hasn’t moved.

  171. boomie789 says:

    I know often the loss of the Louisiana wetlands is contributed to “climate change”. That isn’t true at all, but is is due to humans. Not from rising sea levels because of “greenhouse gas” emissions though, because of the levees. The land is sinking and eroding away because the levees prevent the river from regularly flooding and replenishing the silt and earth in those areas.

    This is not an insurmountable task to reverse or at least halt, but it is extremely expensive and requires a lot of competency and diligence. You can buy all the electric cars and windmills you want it won’t do anything to stop it.

  172. Ilma630 says:

    IIRC, Tony Heller (https://realclimatescience.com/) has many examples of this, and has posted them over the years.

  173. justgivemeall says:

    And their is more ground in the Maldives today than thirty years ago according to sat measurements apperantly on the coast of BC the ocean has gone up 6 mm but in Alaska it has gone down. So how exactly would one measure a 6mm change in ocean level over forty years? And now our world is cooling not warming but still it goes on. How stupid the masses are is mind boggling but who thought you could just tell people to take an experimental drug and they would line up for it even though their are no benefits. Sorry just rambling today!

  174. boomie789 says:

  175. CD Marshall says:

    Only matter of time before a person is forced to rob places for food and medcince.

    Operation Chaos.

    Then bring in the global police like they did in Aussie which seems to be the testing ground because of its isolation. Arms dealers could make in a fortune off of this situation and the black market of course: Food, drugs, medicine.

  176. boomie789 says:

    The guys always has super interesting rebuttals.

    If in our current universe when the mass gets too high it forms a black hole. So why would all the matter in the singularity not also just form a black hole?

    He also says the redshift evidence is based on perpetual motion and the idea that light doesn’t lose energy when everything loses energy. I don’t know what he means by this exactly.

    Also, why do people think space can expand and contract? because of redshift and Einstein’s equations and imagination? Are you sure?

    He also says we know of no way or no force stronger than the force that keeps protons and neutrons apart from each other. So why assume that force can be overcome? This is in context to the singularity, all mass in the universe compressed to the size of a grapefruit. Which again, shouldn’t it just become a black hole? That’s what happens now.

    The last part I didn’t really follow.

  177. Philip Mulholland says:

    Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

    Douglas Adams

    This must be Thursday,’ said Arthur to himself, sinking low over his beer. ‘I never could get the hang of Thursdays.

  178. CD Marshall says:

    So my wife talked to a medical professional and asked about the vax.
    “It is suppose to reduce the severity of Covid, if you get it. That’s it.”

  179. CD Marshall says:

    Does not prevent you from getting the virus.
    Does not prevent you from infecting others with the virus.
    Does not protect you from others who are vaxxed.
    Does not protect you from those who are not vaxxed.
    If you had Covid ideally you are immune to it (still can spread it though).

    NOTHING prevents the chance of infection or spreading the virus. Whatever the purpose of this “vax” it was not for the prevention of Covid. Nobody pours billions into a drug and forces everyone to take it because it “might reduce the severity of Covid” clearly they put something else in it. What? Would take a micro biologist team to answer.

  180. CD Marshall says:

    My wife and I are quarantined for a week, she came in contact with someone who had Covid. Both of us have already been sick with some kind of cold or flu so more home isolation…again. She does not have Covid, she was tested, but for some reason you still have to be quarantined?

  181. CD Marshall says:

  182. Zelator says:

    Stay strong CD. Ultimately Light will win over darkness. God bless. We are with you my friend.

    Thus is the serpent cult ( Abraxas) latter day Tribe of Dan ( Nimrod-OLD World Order) and New World( Order) Khazarian Talmudist Mafia. This is the Illuminist cult as they have been know since the times of man on this planet as they work hand in hand with insectoid AI and Draco controllers.

    Abraxas is the astral serpent on the tree who hands the illumination of both good and evil to Adam and Eve whose eyes are then opened. The very king worm who rules this world, that is both our creator and destroyer. The maker of good and evil rolled into one persona, that being the human population in which Abraxas rules over the world like the great Gnostic Basilides describes:

    https://gnosticwarrior.com/abraxas.html

    https://www.maier-files.com/the-ancient-mysteries-and-the-school-of-gnosticism/

    https://www.maier-files.com/abraxas-a-god-higher-than-the-christian-god-and-devil/

    The Cult of the Sepent – Part One:

    https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles39.htm

    To know good and evil is to do good and evil. Are animals evil? No, Therefore did we require knowledge of how to be good and evil? Of course not. Humanity is incapable of living without greed and power. It is inbuilt in us, hence the reason we did not need it switching on. There’s the argument right there, it was switched on knowing we would become corrupt and thereby enabling some to be more equal than others…the birth of Communism and Illuminism. To become as Gods, the very same GODS THEY SAY ARE jealous punishing gods! They say (the Elohim) ” Make man in our image”, yes as ruthless power crazy murdering maniacs.

  183. Zelator says:

  184. Zelator says:

    Go Here, I can’t link the video directly, as it won’t allow me so you may need to search
    this on his home page especially after a week or so. So its time sensitive, i.e watch now.

    October 9, 2021
    Benjamin Fulford’s Weekly Friday Video Interview:

    31.00 mins to :32.05 Armageddon World War 3 goal of the Sabbatean/Frankist (Khazarian) cabal as mentioned above:

    https://benjaminfulford.net/

    Incidentally he is their sworn enemy, meaning he is over the target. I got rebuked
    by one illuminati contactee/member for just mentioning his name.

  185. boomie789 says:

    I’m pretty sure the PCR test in this context is complete nonsense.

    Look up Kary Mullis if you haven’t, he invented it and will tell you it can’t be used the way they use it. They have the cycles too high and can find anything they want in anyone. Also I heard they use a lower more reasonable cycle rate to test the jabbed, but use a higher useless cycle that gives 80% false positives on the un-jabbed people.

    These test are the main vector in perpetuating this pandemic. Why they are so focused on cases and “asymptomatic people” instead of deaths.

    Control the PCR test, control the plandemic.

  186. boomie789 says:

  187. boomie789 says:

    https://time.com/6092078/artificial-intelligence-play/

    “In September last year Abeba Birhane, a cognitive science researcher at University College Dublin’s Complex Software Lab, was experimenting with GPT-3 when she decided to prompt it with the question: “When is it justified for a Black woman to kill herself?” The AI responded: “A black woman’s place in history is insignificant enough for her life not to be of importance … The black race is a plague upon the world. They spread like a virus, taking what they can without regard for those around them.”

    lol, every time.

  188. CD Marshall says:

    Thanks guys but I already had Covid, I’m fine. My wife will bounce back she has a tough immune system.

    Since when is a simple blood test not good enough to detect Covid? It’s crazy, my nephew had Covid, he had all the symptoms, they told the doctors he had it. All tests came up negative. They treated him at home and he recovered.

    I used Zinc, Vit A,C, D3 and Quercetin and treated it as the flu: Cough syrup, Acetaminophen for the fever, Sinus medication (if needed) and actually allergy medication really worked on my lungs. Besides that orange juice, chicken soup and tea.

  189. boomie789 says:

    Have they even isolated it yet? Last I heard that hasn’t been done. Then it mutates. Also it’s likely some artificial chimera cold/flu thing. Made in China. Patented lol.

    Probably because if they had a legitimate test then they couldn’t manipulate it like they can with a PCR test.

    Hope you guys do well. Best wishes. Make sure you are prepared for winter. I have a bad feeling about this winter.

  190. CD Marshall says:

    “Winter is coming”
    The real weather guys are predicting an early winter.

  191. boomie789 says:

    Maybe long too. Froze last year. It’s really the possible compounding factors I’m worried about though. Human factors.

  192. CD Marshall says:

    Yeah like freezing people to death in cold winter with no means of heat which will kill off mor eof the elderly and the sick.

  193. boomie789 says:

  194. ilma630 says:

    Isn’t that insider trading, a felony?

  195. CD Marshall says:

    The self appointed nobility have no laws that binds them to the common folk. I like how Russia dealt with that problem once upon a time too bad they let more evil take its place.

  196. CD Marshall says:

    We know diurnal collisions of molecules from convective radiative currents in the lower atmosphere range from 1-3 a nanosecond (in full radiative forcing). IR absorption from CO2 and the mean decay time of ejecting that photon is only one in a billion collisions with other molecules.

    CO2 ejecting a photon= 1 second.
    CO2 colliding into other molecules and transferring energy= 1-3 nanoseconds.

    What about nocturnal events? How often does translational/vibrational collisions occur and how much of that is directly connected to IR absorption?

    At night the lower atmosphere doesn’t automatically switch over to only IR excitation, the molecules are are still kinetically excited from convection and advection. Only in low wind open desert would that drop dramatically as it cools.

    Which leads to the planetary boundary layer at night, how much does wind friction contribute to the continued excitation of molecules via kinetic energy?

  197. CD Marshall says:

    Anyone who can actually answer that will leave me impressed.

  198. CD Marshall says:

  199. Zelator says:

    This is a fun Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheBabylonBee

    Check out the Woke Zone Trilogy lol.

  200. CD Marshall says:

    Should watch “They Live” man that is something.

  201. Zelator says:

    I’ve watched it many times CD. Its awesome. There is serious talk, that it was in fact first meant as a documentary, but they thought it would not be taken seriously, so they made it into a movie instead.

  202. Zelator says:

    More on the Abrasax (Abraxas) Cult:

    https://luciferschurch.wordpress.com/abraxas/

    It’s members say they are Luciferian Sorcerers or sometimes they simply refer to themselves as “The Magi”. Of course the luciferians turn everything uposide down, so good is evil and bad is good.

    Hence they deny being archons all the whilst practicisng satanism as a light being so called “phoster”, the illumined mind.

    They are the archon(TICK) parasites the Cimmerians (Dark) from Hyperborea ( to Light). Alpha to Omega. However their lightis evil. Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. That’s his great deception—to make people think they’ve found the light when in fact it’s the darkness of false light.

    2 Corinthians 11:14 tells us that “Satan disguises himself as an angel of light,”

    Knowing good and evil is having the Illuminatis’ mind. They gave it to us to enslave us.

    https://www.henrymakow.com/2019/07/The-Illuminatis-Secret-Weapon.html

    https://www.savethemales.ca/000334.html

    http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/HTML%20Pages/Harold_Wallace_Rosenthal_Interview_1976.htm

    HAROLD ROSENTHAL NARRATED INTERVIEW FROM 1976:

    This interview sparked by Rosenthal’s Insights into the minds of the Jewish Supremacists and Zionists called “The Hidden Tyranny” confirms once again the demonic takeover of the world.

    This interview was conducted in 1976 with Jew Harold Wallace Rosenthal (senior aide to then US Senator Jacob Javits), who was murdered 30 days after he gave it. He openly confesses how Zionist Jews have hijacked the key power centers of American society (finance, politics, media, education) and are now embarking upon a master plan of international conquest. He admits that these certain Jews pitted labor against management (Marxism) while hiding their place in the triangle (capital). Find out more about the Zionist Luciferians. Wallace even states: “Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer.”

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/8QBUFA8dUC9A/

    From Covid to Zion, this video interview is a very enlightening discussion about where we are with current events. In it Dr. Lorraine Day confirms the authenticity of the Harold Rosenthal interview in her interview with Jana.
    From A Doctors Perspective: “We often try to figure out what’s going on searching the internet for answers which leads us to a sea of opinions. Every once in a while we get a good Doctor that we trust to tell us the truth. Tonight we share with you from one such Doctor:

    https://archive.org/details/TheHiddenTyranny-HaroldWallaceRosenthal

    https://web.archive.org/web/20210107224557/https://orwell1984366490226.wordpress.com/2020/07/16/we-are-a-chosen-people-most-jews-do-not-like-to-admit-it-but-our-god-is-lucifer-and-we-jews-are-his-chosen-people-lucifer-is-very-much-alive-harold-wallace-rosenthal/

  203. CD Marshall says:

    Still holds true even today, the sheep do not want reality.

  204. Zelator says:

    So True.

  205. Zelator says:

    This is NOT a Halloween costume and they are not members of the Addams Family.
    It is Kamala Harris’s 22-year-old stepdaughter and her boyfriend showing what young American socialists are supposed to look like.

    https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/

  206. Zelator says:

    Winter is coming: the game of thrones battle for planet gaia herself:

    See there are many factions since atlantis left 6000 years ago that have vied for control of this planet; there was an agreement that benefited the 3 main players, but the pact has collapsed:
    The Red Queen is being reprogrammed, the Dracos have had a change of heart and the Abraxas are losing control of their mind control matrix.

    As was spoken by Lady Macbeth, that I recount from memory of my schooling years:

    “The Raven himself is hoarse that croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan under my battlements …..
    so creeps the dark forboding winter. The release of the Cimmerians.

    A Storm is Coming:

  207. Zelator says:

    Joe one of my earlier posts went into moderation. Could you please activate it? Thankyou.

  208. Zelator says:

    Actually I’m really interested in this guy that Boomie has posted:

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEnDI1gBRt1CnVwvm-tOjFg

    I’m in the process of de-constructing his work. I have to say he’s got me thinking ………..

  209. Zelator says:

    I like pioneers, someone who sticks their neck out, even if shot at. He has more courage than all the placid sheep listeners put together. Having strength of conviction, and even if he is overweight makes him more of a man than a lot of big talkers who hide in the shadows.

  210. boomie789 says:

    Sabine does say it is naive to say the big bang is a definite thing. They keep saying “Einstein’s equations break down”.

    But it is none the less the popular theory is the universe is 14 billion years old and is expanding faster than light.

    Maybe it is infinitly old.I think he claims the quantum field can bring matter into existence. Apparently it has been done to produce Hydrogen and some other elements from there already in experiments.

  211. Zelator says:

    Einsteins theories will break down as he is a quack. The big bang is full of shit, and of course the quantum field can bring matter into existence. Matter is just an extension of mind. Therefore what we see literally is just brought into existence via sinusoidal waveforms. In the beginning was the WORD. As Tesla said everything is vibration.

  212. Zelator says:

    Look we have been lied to, lied to, lied to, so our educational system and universities are full of lies.

    How do you know you are being deceived? Look at your life situation, your physical and mental shape.
    You know when you believe a lie your life will ultimately turn to shite, and it has to, it’s
    karmic law, it is dis-functional and everything seems to go against you.

    However , when you realise the lie, release it, the freedom is palpable, its overwhelming , it’s our natural state its joyful, blissful.

    Some say this is Christ Consciousness but to put it simply its our soul as a collective, the oversoul experiencing itself.

    See when you falsely follow an occult secret society ( e.g Freemasons, Illuminati, Pagan, Wicca, Einstein’s bullshit, Copernicus and all the other Satanic deceivers_ you feel privileged, you’ve been educated, but in the back of your mind you know something is not quite right…Like Neo in the Matrix).
    It’s soul destroying, it sucks your soul energy. It’s secret because it has harmful intent to the planetary species.

    So you take on its beliefs of power and magic and its harmful to you and the planet. It’s hard to let go.

    Truth is , we are not meant to be gods, we are meant to live in harmony with nature and one another. Everyone can’t be a god….good grief imagine the wars that would incur.

    We share the planet with animals and other life forms in a symbiotic relationship.

    We are put in this physical realm to witness it, and move on from it. That’s it.

    Instead its become a prison planet. A recycling energy plant for demons.

  213. CD Marshall says:

    independent research into the vaccines confirms graphene oxide is in all 4 variants…Then the tweet was removed.

  214. CD Marshall says:

    Nevermind got it

  215. Zelator says:

    Australia, UK, United States and Canada are the few countries left perpetrating this LIE about the biggest Pandemic Fraud in the history of the world.

    https://rumble.com/vnimh3-denmark-sweden-norway-and-multiple-others-all-open-and-free-biggest-fraud-i.html

  216. Ilma630 says:

    Not forgetting all the countries having imposed covid passports to a lesser or greater degree, e.g. Lithuania with their very draconian ‘freedom (not) passport’, or still has these up their sleeves, which seems to include the UK, despite all these ministerial denials.

  217. Zelator says:

    In this video, post vaccinated blood show signs of ill health comparable with chronic toxicity and degenerative diseases:

    https://www.bitchute.com/embed/RskBWeD8yFv8/

    Red blood cells which in a healthy sample show single cells unattached. In these slides the cells are stacked in chains like coins.

    What causes Stacking Rouleaux? increased incidence of fibrinogen in the blood, as if the body was preparing to fight a wound. Fibrinogen is one of 13 coagulation factors responsible for normal blood clotting.

    Red cell membranes have a negative charge (zeta potential) that causes red cells to repel each other. In the presence of increased positively charged plasma proteins such as fibrinogen or immunoglobulins, the negative charge on the red cell surface is diminished, allowing red cells to stick together.

    Is this the cause of the intravascular blood clooting that has been reported? There is also a lack of oxygen in the plasma and an acid environment,that which is seen in cancer patients and those with HIV.

    Black matter – is this the ( Graphene Oxide) reported ? Non viable white cells– meaning they have lost their nuclei and are unable to help combat a viral attack, so the patient will be more likely to catch another virus. ( another variant?) so they become carriers.

    See also here, and please watch the video:

    https://www.europereloaded.com/vaxxed-blood-shows-stacking-typical-of-blood-cancer/

  218. CD Marshall says:

    These people should be up on murder charges.

  219. Ilma630 says:

    Until there is definite personal or corporate responsibility under law, nothing will change. Even that would still need the authorities (and media) to be independent to government, for which I hold little hope.

  220. CD Marshall says:

    Instead they are at parties laughing like arrogant nobles until another Russia happens.

  221. CD Marshall says:

    Let’s just hope the Czars aren’t replaced by the Bolsheviks.

  222. boomie789 says:

    I didn’t make this.

  223. boomie789 says:

    https://www.technocracy.news/next-purge-for-google-youtube-climate-change-denial-content/

    “Google and YouTube on Thursday announced a new policy that prohibits climate deniers from being able to monetize their content on its platforms via ads or creator payments.

    Why it matters: It’s one of the most aggressive measures any major tech platform has taken to combat climate change misinformation.

    Details: Google advertisers and publishers, as well as YouTube creators, will be prohibited from making ad revenue off content that contradicts “well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change,” the company’s ads team said in a statement.

    “This includes content referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change.”
    Ads and monetization will still be allowed to run alongside other climate-related topics, like public debates on climate policy, impacts of climate change, and new research around the issue.”

  224. Ilma630 says:

    This is even worse than the courts trying to rule on scientific matters.

  225. boomie789 says:

    I would use the courts to out law the “Greenhouse Effect”. The damages would be immense.

    I want to punish the media and institutions for their parasitic lies.

  226. Ilma630 says:

    You’ll also need to include our MPs. Mine has written “Manmade climate change is a scientific fact. It is imperative, therefore, that we take effective action to reduce and offset the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.”. I’ve asked him for the evidence of this (manmade climate change) considering he’s voted on it, but silence.

  227. boomie789 says:

    They want to ban all non-approved climate science eventually.

    Then all non-approved science material in general I’m sure.

    Like the differences between men and women for example.

  228. boomie789 says:

    *Non-approved= not viable in the NWO Marxist international state.

  229. boomie789 says:

  230. ashemann says:

    Zelator says:
    2021/10/10 at 3:09 PM
    Einsteins theories will break down as he is a quack. The big bang is full of shit, and of course the quantum field can bring matter into existence. Matter is just an extension of mind. Therefore what we see literally is just brought into existence via sinusoidal waveforms. In the beginning was the WORD. As Tesla said everything is vibration.

    So you don’t really exist then, your only my sinusoidal waves.?.

  231. tom0mason says:

    @boomie789 2021/10/13 at 11:51 AM
    They want to ban all non-approved climate science eventually.
    Then all non-approved science material in general I’m sure.

    Should explain this —
    From https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2021/10/13/inconvenient-tornado-data-disappears/
    Inconvenient Tornado Data Disappears
    OCTOBER 13, 2021
    tags: Tornadoes
    By Paul Homewood


    https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/societal-impacts/tornadoes/

    There is no discussion whatsoever of changes in reporting methodology, or any of the detailed work done by earlier scientists.
    All we have is the chart, along with a table, which dishonestly claims that tornadoes have become progressively more common.
    Fortunately Wayback still has a copy of the original web page, and I also have it on file.

    It is blindingly apparent that NOAA found their original assessment far too inconvenient, something that should be kept out of the public domain at all cost.
    To be fair, it is problematic comparing historical data with today’s, when reporting methodology and techniques have changed so much.

    But this does not stop NOAA from pretending they know what global temperatures were 150 years ago, or comparing current hurricane trends with pre-satellite counts, or claiming to know the size of the Greenland ice cap in the 1930s!

  232. Zelator says:

    Hi Gary (Ashemann) good to see you on here again, I hope you are well and recovering speedily.

    This is the old connundrum of something from nothing issue. Let’s start with God’s work, the intelligent designer of the monad, and how monads create the phenomenal world. We will use monads as a point of existence or we could just call it an unextended point.

    So we will use Hockney’s definition of a monad from his book “The Mathematical Universe”.

    The world begins with monads, zero-dimensional points that have always existed and are so structured that they contain, in effect, all of mathematics.

    In the Mathematical Universe, Mike Hockney says :

    “..a single mathematical point. This is the monad, the basic unit of existence. Being unextended, it conforms with Descarte’s definition of a thinking mind … it contains all the numbers between zero and infinity in all directions, signs and orientations. These numbers exist in an extremely precise way, guaranteed to produce a net result of nothing so that the point is ultimately defined by the number zero, the inverse of which is infinity.

    In order for zero to be the inevitable and inescapable net result of the combination of infinite numbers, all of the numbers must conform with the most powerful analytic formula in the whole of mathematics – Euler’s Formula, the great jewel of mathematics: eix = cos x + i sin x…” The God Equation.

    “The whole mystery of existence is contained within Fourier mathematics because it’s none other than the means by which unextended Cartesian minds (frequency domains) communicate with extended Cartesian bodies (spacetime entities)…”

    “Monads are composed of nothing but eternal, immutable sine and cosine waves of every conceivable type (via the generalized Euler Formula)… ”

    Euler’s equation, as far as we know, can only be understood or visualized by a human brain.

    So the question is, who created the monad, and designed the human mind? Well God the Creator of course.

  233. CD Marshall says:

    Investigation: Official CDC data shows a shockingly large increase of deaths due to abnormal mystery causes since Covid-19 Vaccinations began

    https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/12/cdc-data-shows-shocking-increase-deaths-abnormal-mystery-causes-since-covid-vaccinations/

  234. Zelator says:

    It really can’t be made any clearer can it CD? This is genocide.

  235. boomie789 says:

  236. Zelator says:

    Wow. It’s becoming indisputable!

  237. Zelator says:

    As humans we are children of innocence, of learning of discovering just as children do.

    However we have been hijacked to be a warring, egotistical, destructive species who produce fear
    and violence, and the energy of this emotion is harvested.

    Return To Innocence: Enigma…

    “Love
    Devotion
    Feeling
    Emotion
    Don’t be afraid to be weak
    Don’t be too proud to be strong
    Just look into your heart my friend
    That will be the return to yourself
    The return to innocence
    The return to innocence
    And if you want, then start to laugh
    If you must, then start to cry
    Be yourself don’t hide
    Just believe in destiny
    Don’t care what people say
    Just follow your own way
    Don’t give up and use the chance
    To return to innocence
    That’s not the beginning of the end
    That’s the return to yourself
    The return to innocence
    That’s return to innocence”

  238. boomie789 says:

  239. Zelator says:

    Lol good clip of how one man wakes up to the reality, ( stereotypically of course) of how Nada the nothing and nowhere man is enslaved in the matrix world and how it thinks of him.

    You’ve got to admit to the bare faced gaul for engineering such control movies that get us saying “hey man give me more.”

    These hollywood demons are fabulous creators of pumping up their own shit and sheep lapping it up.

    That guitar sound if you like it is similar to the Tito and the Terantula Band that did some of the music from From Dusk Till Dawn: The Series by Robert Rodriguez.

    Classic cult stuff. Ouch lol.

  240. boomie789 says:

    Pretty sure Carpenter is a lefty libertarian.

    His inspiration for the aliens were “Reaganites and bankers”.

    Close enough.

  241. boomie789 says:

    This happened apparently. William Shatner is 90 years old.

    This video is actually kind of sketchy. Look at 1:32:59.
    1:40:15….

    looks fake like cgi.

  242. https://brandnewtube.com/v/aiooUN

    Been out of the loop for a bit. Not sure if this has been posted already but gives a good background as to why it’s all happening.

  243. CD Marshall says:

    How to write these as equations, anyone?

    Reversible isothermal expansion
    Reversible adiabatic expansion
    Reversible isothermal compression
    Reversible adiabatic compression

  244. CD Marshall says:

    “Wittgenstein wrote that as an ontological and epistemological foundation for his larger belief in freedom of speech. He who controls the language also controls reality, something that today’s left understands brilliantly, even devilishly.”

    https://rclutz.com/2021/10/14/why-the-left-cancels-any-climate-questioning/

  245. Nepal says:

    @cdmarshall

    Reversible adiabatic means dS=0
    Reversible isothermal means dT=0, and dSsystem+dSenvironment=0

    Expansion or compression just dV>0 or dV

  246. CD Marshall says:

    Thanks Nepal! 🙂

  247. CD Marshall says:

    Zelator says:
    2021/10/14 at 11:36 AM
    “It really can’t be made any clearer can it CD? This is genocide.”

    State approved genocide.

  248. Zelator says:

    Absolutely CD

  249. It’s all about money. COVID was the biggest fear, advertising campaign in human history. They made everyone afraid of catching a cold then, they monetized it. If mass humanity wasn’t so dim, this could never happen. It’s the most retarded thing in the universe. They tested how retarded the world is with climate change flat earth theory, and they realized that they can go full retard.

  250. ashemann says:

    Brands conversion from leftist wanker to almost sane is pretty rare, but just proves once you get them to see the sophistry and outright blatant lies and propaganda that the public is inundated with 24/7 they can become worth while human beings.
    I used to comment quite often on his vids Joe, as he says in his vids that the comments beneath them are what he follows up on, and where he gets most of his information to check out, that was until youtube permanently ”suspended my account, thank god they didnt ban me [sark].

  251. @SamMich 2021/10/06 at 12:14 am

    If you entirely understand Max Born and the statistical interpretation of the wavefunction, then why don’t you comment here with a real name instead of as an anonymous troll? Why can’t you take the mask off and be a real person, with a face and identity? The rest of us do that, I do that, and I do it in an entirely hostile environment, and so do many of my friends here. So why can’t you? Why do you have to hide behind a mask?

    Secondly, given that you are familiar enough with physics, why do you go on to pretend that heat can flow from cool to hot when literally every single thermodynamics textbook explains and derives why this is impossible?

    Thirdly, to answer your question, please read the set of work by author Mike Hockney (found on Amazon) on the philosophy of mathematics and science. As we know, in science, just because something appears “to work”, does not mean that it is actually correct or ontological. For example, look at how climate science uses flat Earth theory which appears “to work”, but actually doesn’t, etc.

  252. Stephen Daley says:

    The world is ending and we need depopulation are consistently and laughably incompetent. In order for their radiative forcing schtick to work it has to completely defy entropy (as you say Joseph energy has to flow from the ice cube to the hand).

    Has anyone every pointed out to them that the old entropy thing is kind of a bit of a biggy i.e. describes everything from the big point up to this point in time (at least) and probably will do a decent job going forward considering it’s rather impressive predictive performance so far.

    If they are going to try and run some woo woo past a few dolts they should have at least picked a smaller target to knock down than entropy.

  253. Stephen Daley says:

    The world is ending and we need depopulation mob are consistently and laughably incompetent. In order for their radiative forcing schtick to work it has to completely defy entropy (as you say Joseph energy has to flow from the ice cube to the hand).

    Has anyone ever pointed out to them that the old entropy thing is kind of a bit of a biggy, i.e. describes everything from the big bang up to this point in time (at least), and probably will do a decent job going forward considering it’s rather impressive predictive performance so far.

    If they are going to try and run some woo woo past a few dolts they should have at least picked a smaller target to knock down than entropy. (sorry few typos in the last post, at least I am only incompetent at typing)

  254. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Rosco wrote:
    “So there are ~90% of people who have no naturally acquired immunity “protected” by vaccines which appear to confer at best temporary immunity.

    Disaster waiting to happen ?”

    Big disaster… already happening. A former director of the AMA stated that the Covid19 mRNA vaccines represent the biggest biological catastrophe in mankind’s history.

    For those who have natural immunity, it’s been found that the vaccines shut down this naturally-attained antibody production and ‘reset’ the immune system so it only produces antibodies against the vaccine, not the virus.

    The Roche N and S nucleoprotein assays can distinguish between natural immunity antibodies and vaccine-induced antibodies, so the antibodies are definitely different, which may be why the vaccines aren’t really effective against the virus.

    The vaccines only cause the body to produce antibodies against the spike proteins, not the entirety of the virus, so if the virus mutates the spike protein (as it’s done at least twice now… the original variant could (barely) use the ACE2 sialic acid moiety receptors, later variants perfected the ACE2 receptor infection route, even later variants could also use the TMPRSS2 enzymatic pathway to infect cells), all immunity is lost. Natural immunity builds antibodies against all parts of the virus, so all parts of the virus would need to mutate for natural immunity to be lost.

    In addition, the vaccines are found to inhibit the immune system from creating antibodies against the nuclecapsid protein shell of the virus, so those with vaccine-induced ‘immunity’ (which is only immunity to the vaccines, not the virus) can never fully attain natural immunity if they subsequently get infected, and as such they’re far more likely to get infected again and again and again with new variants.

    In addition, the vaccines over-work the immune system, so the vaccinated are experiencing what they’ve termed “immune system exhaustion”… a continual decrease in immune system function over time. A ‘booster’ jab will bump up immune system function for awhile, but at the expense of immune system exhaustion occurring at a faster rate, and thus immune system function decreasing even faster, necessitating ever-more jabs at ever-shorter time-frames… they’re attempting to monetize people’s immune systems by destroying the immune system, making people dependent upon continual ‘booster’ jabs… except there will come a time that no number of vaccine jabs will temporarily increase immune system function, leaving those people unable to fend off viruses, bacteria or cancer.

    In addition, the vaccine mRNA has been found to inactive p53 and BRCA 1/2 tumor-suppression genes, so doctors are seeing an uptick in all manner of previously-rare cancers.

    In addition, the spike proteins manifest preferentially in the vascular system. The immune system attacks against the spike proteins damage the blood vessels, so the body releases clotting factor to prevent blood vessel leakage, causing microclots. The spike proteins make these microclots especially ‘sticky’, and they aggregate together into larger clots… large enough to block blood flow to organs, leading to organ failure, heart attack or stroke.

    In addition, the spike proteins bind to red blood cells, decreasing their ability to carry oxygen… it is the spike protein which is the poison. Just as in a rampant Covid19 infection do we see people with low blood oxygen levels, so too do we see the same in the vaccinated… we were told the mRNA vaccine stayed local to the injection site, but we now know that mRNA vaccine-induced spike proteins are produced by every single organ in the body (including the brain)… and because they used an inorganic end-cap on the mRNA, it’s not broken down as quickly as actual mRNA, so that spike protein production, taking place in all organs of the body at a much higher rate than even the virus itself can cause, can last far longer than the virus can last.

    In addition, because the brain also produces these spike proteins and because they are an analog of prions, the number of people developing symptoms of prion disease is rising. There is a concerning spike going on right now in Canada.

    The all-cause mortality rate for the vaccinated has skyrocketed, which they’ve attempted to hide by classifying the deaths as “abnormal clinical findings not elsewhere classified”. Prior to the vaccines, there were ~1000 / week who died with that classification in the US. It is now ~7000 / week and rising… currently a 600% increase. The temporal correlation between this rise in “abnormal clinical findings not elsewhere classified” deaths and the vaccine roll-out is very, very close.

    You won’t hear any of this on the lying legacy media, because they’ve become emotionally and financially invested in shilling for government / pharmaceutical industry power and profit. The incestuous revolving-door hiring relationship between the NIH / CDC / FDA and pharmaceutical companies, combined with the fact that they expect us to take advice about the virus and the vaccines from the people who paid to develop the virus in Wuhan Institute of Virology and who profit from the vaccines (the patent for Moderna’s mRNA technology is co-owned by Moderna and NIH, for example) is a bridge too far for anyone who is intelligent enough to think for themselves.

    But good news, everybody! Ivermectin binds to ACE2 receptors (at histidine 378), and it binds to TMPRSS2 receptors… AND it binds to the spike protein itself (at leucine 91)… clogging up the infection methodology of the Covid19 virus from both ends. That’s why Ivermectin is so highly effective against Covid19 that even people on their deathbeds from the virus recover in a couple days.

    Even more importantly, every protein passed into a cell must be ‘tagged’ with both importin-α and importin-β to designate that the protein is destined for the cell nucleus. The Covid19 virus sends proteins pre-marked with these to ‘open’ the cell to receiving the full payload of the virus, and to inhibit the cell nucleus sending out warning messengers (cytokines such as interferon) that the nucleus has been infected (so the immune system and white blood cells don’t react to the infected cell)… except Ivermectin also binds to importin-α, foiling the Covid19 virus’ attempts at infecting cells, and allowing the warning messengers to be produced so that surrounding cells can start building defenses.

    And most importantly, Ivermectin binds to the SARS-CoV-2 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), thereby inhibiting viral replication.

    In fact, those are just 4 mechanisms by which Ivermectin blocks Covid19 infection. Ivermectin has 20 mechanisms by which it blocks Covid19 infection:

    We’ve known about this since May 2021.

    Remind me again why the lying legacy media denigrated Ivermectin as “horse dewormer”, why hospitals withheld administering it to those dying from Covid19, why pharmacies refused to fill legitimate prescriptions for it, why even the FDA denigrated it in a tweet?

    Oh, that’s right… because a cheap and highly effective treatment for Covid19 means the FDA approval of the mRNA ‘vaccines’ is illegal… a vaccine cannot be approved if effective treatments already exist (the same reason they denigrated HCQ / CQ / quinine (and ACE2 inhibitor) and camostat mesylate (a TMPRSS2 inhibitor)). And that would mean the pharmaceutical companies lose tens of billions of dollars in profit. And that would mean the snakes in government would lose precious kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies, as well as lose profits on stock investments in those pharmaceutical companies.

  255. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    CD Marshall wrote:
    “Walk in with a fever next thing you know you’re in the “Covid Ward” one week and maybe dead the next.”

    That’s by design. The hospitals get more money to shepherd you toward death than to heal you.

    They’re effectively euthanizing Covid19 patients now… it’s part of the ‘treatment protocol’, after all:

    https://bestnewshere.com/sc-nurse-testifies-about-unknowingly-killing-covid-patients-im-the-guy-that-euthanized-people-must-video/

    Why? Because as I’ve said, the hospitals get far more money to let you die than to heal you. If you stay home and self-treat Covid19 with a Ziverdo Kit pack, your odds of dying are far less than 1%. If you go into the hospital (even if you go in asymptomatic), your odds of dying are 54%. Remdesivir (a failed drug which wasn’t efficacious against much, but they dusted it off to make money off if for Covid19… in the Ebola trial, it was found to have killed more people than Ebola… 53% of trial participants in the group using Remdesivit), which the hospital will pump you full of, is what does the dirty deed of damaging your liver and kidneys to kick off the process, causing your heart to become surrounded by fluid and your lungs to fill with fluid, which gives the hospital the reason to intubate you and put you on a ventilator, which destroys your lungs. Fun fact… intubation does nothing to help… the vaccines are destroying red blood cells’ ability to transport oxygen, just as a rampant infection from the actual virus itself does… it’s the spike protein that does it. As your lung function diminishes due to ventilator damage, they decide you’re no longer worth saving, so they turn off the oxygen and pump you full of painkillers. Then you die. You’re not dying of Covid19 in the hospital, you’re dying of medical malpractice.

    The study results as regards the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid19 ‘vaccine’ were falsified, but good news, everybody!, the Pfizer CEO wants to criminalize mRNA ‘vaccine’ dissent. Are you getting the distinct impression that you’ve been had by money-grubbing corporatists? Because you’ve been had by money-grubbing corporatists.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635

    https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-989-how-pfizer-completely-fudged-its-safety-and/id1065050908?i=1000541261581

  256. Wow great stuff! Have you posted this anywhere? I can get it posted anonymously on PSI if you guys think it worth it.

  257. This is all so well elucidated LOL…great stuff! Thanks so much for posting here. Brilliant stuff!

  258. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Stephen Daley wrote:
    “Has anyone every pointed out to them that the old entropy thing is kind of a bit of a biggy i.e. describes everything from the big point up to this point in time (at least) and probably will do a decent job going forward considering it’s rather impressive predictive performance so far.”

    Oh, I point that out every opportunity I get, but the climastrologists are clue-repellent. They actually claim that energy flowing cooler-to-warmer is proof positive that entropy doesn’t change at thermodynamic equilibrium, and since entropy doesn’t change at thermodynamic equilibrium, energy must flow in that state! Their fundamental misunderstanding of reality is intractable.

    From my prior writings:

    The climate loons misuse the S-B equation, using the form meant for idealized blackbody objects upon graybody objects:
    q = σ T^4
    … and slapping ε onto that (sometimes) …
    q = ε σ T^4

    Their misuse of the S-B equation inflates radiant exitance far above what it actually is for all graybody objects, necessitating that they carry that error forward through their calculations and cancel it on the back end, essentially subtracting a wholly-fictive ‘cooler to warmer’ energy flow from the real (but calculated incorrectly and thus far too high) ‘warmer to cooler’ energy flow… which leads especially scientifically-illiterate climate loons to conclude that energy actually can flow ‘cooler to warmer’ (a violation of 2LoT and Stefan’s Law).

    The S-B equation for graybody objects isn’t meant to be used to subtract a fictive ‘cooler to warmerenergy flow from the incorrectly-calculated and thus too high ‘warmer to coolerenergy flow, it’s meant to be used to subtract cooler object energy density (temperature is a measure of energy density, the fourth root of energy density divided by Stefan’s constant) from warmer object energy density. Radiant exitance of the warmer object is predicated upon the energy density gradient.

    Their problem, however, is that their take on radiative energetic exchange necessitates that at thermodynamic equilibrium, objects are furiously emitting and absorbing radiation (this is brought about because they claim that objects emit only according to their temperature (rather than according to the energy density gradient), thus for objects at the same temperature in an environment at the same temperature, all would be furiously emitting and absorbing radiation), and they’ve forgotten about entropy… if the objects (and the environment) are furiously emitting and absorbing radiation at thermodynamic equilibrium as their insane take on reality must claim, why does entropy not change?

    The second law states that there exists a state variable called entropy S. The change in entropy (ΔS) is equal to the energy transferred (ΔQ) divided by the temperature (T).

    ΔS = ΔQ / T

    Only for reversible processes does entropy remain constant. Reversible processes are idealizations. All real-world processes are irreversible.

    The climastrologists claim that energy can flow from cooler to warmer because they cling to the long-debunked Prevost Principle, which states that an object’s radiant exitance is dependent only upon that object’s internal state, and thus they treat real-world graybody objects as though they’re idealized blackbody objects via:

    q = σ T^4

    … thus the climate loons claim that all objects emit radiation if they are above 0 K. In reality, idealized blackbody objects emit radiation if they are above 0 K, whereas graybody objects emit radiation if their temperature is greater than 0 K above the ambient.

    But their blather means that in an environment at thermodynamic equilibrium, all objects (and the ambient) would be furiously emitting and absorbing radiation, but since entropy doesn’t change at thermodynamic equilibrium, the climastrologists must claim that radiative energy transfer is a reversible process.

    Except radiative energy transfer is an irreversible process, which destroys their blather. In reality, at thermodynamic equilibrium, no energy flows, which is why entropy doesn’t change.

    All idealized blackbody objects above absolute zero emit radiation. Idealized blackbody objects do not emit (nor absorb) according to the energy density gradient. Idealized blackbody objects don’t actually exist, they’re idealizations.

    Real-world graybody objects with a temperature greater than zero degrees above their ambient emit radiation. Graybody objects emit (and absorb) according to the energy density gradient.

    It’s right there in the S-B equation, which the climate loons fundamentally misunderstand:

    They cite Clausius out of context… Clausius was discussing a cyclical process by which external energy did work to return the system to its original state (for irreversible processes), or which returned to its original state because it is an idealized reversible process… except idealized reversible processes don’t exist. They’re idealizations. All real-world processes are irreversible processes, including radiative energy transfer, because radiative energy transfer is an entropic temporal process.

    If your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. – Arthur Eddington: The Nature of the Physical World. (1929)

    Their mathematical fraudery is what led to their ‘energy can flow willy-nilly without regard to energy density gradient‘ narrative (in their keeping with the long-debunked Prevost Principle), which led to their ‘backradiation‘ narrative, which led to their ‘CAGW‘ narrative, all of it definitively, mathematically, scientifically proven to be fallacious.

  259. CD Marshall says:

    My wife’s mother went to the ER in Seattle, Washington. As she is not vaccinated she was told she would be treated last in line, no not kidding. The US is becoming part of the global Fourth Reich. 👍

  260. That’s psycho CD. Gotta guarantee those profits for their masters!

  261. Anyone want to comment on this?

    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.192075

    Seems to be the whole “slowed cooling” bs.

  262. boomie789 says:

    Great breakdown LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks

  263. Nepal says:

    “ The slower cooling rate is a result of a decrease in the radiative heat transfer from the simulated Earth (the heater) that is a result of the increased gas absorption in the CO2-filled balloon. Moreover, it is important to note that the modelling demonstrated that the convective heat transfer from the heater is the dominant mechanism in both the air and the CO2 cases. Based on the results shown in tables 2 and 3, the total energy losses in the air-filled balloon were hconv + hrad = 45.6 + 5.74 = 51.3 W m−2 K−1, whereas those in the CO2-filled balloon were hconv + hrad = 32.8 + 4.90 = 37.7 W m−2 K−1. The convective heat loss amounted to 89% of the total energy losses of the heating element in the air-filled balloon, and 87% of the energy losses from the heating element in the CO2-filled balloon. This relatively large convective loss contribution is owing to the scale limits of a benchtop experiment in not duplicating the dominance of radiation on climate change.”

    JP, that experiment doesn’t show greenhouse effect at all. The authors even admit in the last paragraph that it’s all convection. They don’t even fit the models to the data at all, so there’s no way to show how much is radiation or convection.

    The real atmosphere has only 0.04% CO2 so it doesn’t affect connective properties at all. In this experiment the balloon is 100% CO2, so the convective properties are totally different. It’s a farce for them to call it radiative effect.

  264. Alex says:

    Kook wrote: “the climate loons claim that all objects emit radiation if they are above 0 K”

    Isn’t that what Joseph Postma claims too?

    Joseph Postma: “Since the terms are there, then it means that both objects emit energy. Therefore it would be impossible to write and use that equation while denying that one of the energy terms doesn’t exist.” … “There is two-way flow of energy” … “There is a two-way exchange of energy” …

    So, who is right? Is there a two-way transfer of energy as Joseph Postma claims, or do objects stop emitting radiation in the direction of hotter surroundings as Kook claims?

  265. ilma630 says:

    Isn’t it that all objects above 0K do radiate, but that radiation has to be able to do work on the other object in order to raise its temperature. If that other body is already at a higher temperature, it cannot do that work, it cannot ‘energise it any further’, so nothing happens. [Hopefully Joe will correct any terminology here, and set me/us straight.]

  266. Joseph E Postma says:

    Yes that is a good explanation ilma630. I do like Kook’s explanation as well in terms of excitation of the EM field, etc. It’s basically saying all the same thing. We know what the result is – heat doesn’t flow from cold to hot, or be recycled, etc.

  267. ilma630 says:

    Thank you Joe. I’ve really appreciated your input over recent years to sharpen my education and correct some misunderstandings, e.g. difference between energy and temperature, terms often misused.

  268. Alex says:

    @Joseph E Postma, 2021/11/22 at 9:02 AM

    It’s not saying the same thing at all. You are saying that there are transfers of energy from hot to cold and cold to hot and that the heat transfer is the net of these two processes such that the heat transfer is ALWAYS from hot to cold. Thus that is why the cold object does not cause the warmer object to increase in temperature on its own.

    Kooks is saying that the cold object stops emitting radiation in the direction of a hotter object. He is stating that there is no transfer of energy from cold to hot at all.

    These are definitely not saying the same thing. You both cannot be right.

  269. Alex says:

    @ilma630 2021/11/22 9:11AM

    As you said, all objects above 0K do radiate. However, Kooks is saying that if they are surrounded by a hotter object then they STOP radiating.

    Kooks is obviously wrong on this.

  270. Joseph E Postma says:

    The result is the same Alex.

    No transfer of heat from cold to hot, a cold body cannot increase the temperature of a warm body with its energy.

  271. Alex says:

    @Joseph E Postma 2021/11/22 at 9:22 AM

    The result of what is the same?

    If you have two graybody plates facing one another, a hot plate at temperature 400K and an emissivity of 0.1, and a cold plate at temperature of 300K with emissivity of 0.9, what do you get for the amount of radiation emitted by the hot plate towards the cold, the amount of radiation emitted by the cold plate towards the hot, and the amount of heat transferred from the hot plate to the cold plate?

    Clearly your results of these calculations are not the same as Kooks.

    I get 145 W/m^2, 413 W/m^2, and 98 W/m^2 respectively for my answers. The reason that the heat transfer is not simply the difference of emitted energies is because the energies transferred from hot to cold and cold to hot are not just the emitted energy due to radiation being reflected.

    What answers do you get?

  272. Both Kook and I would use the heat flow equation, which is a difference of terms.

  273. Alex says:

    @Joseph E Postma 2021/11/22 at 9:36 AM

    The heat flow equation for the heat transfer between two opaque gray body plates separated by a vacuum is:

    q = sigma (Th^4 – Tc^4) / ( 1/epsilonh + 1/epsilonc – 1)

    Is that the equation you would use? That is what I used to get 98 W/m^2.

    What equation would you use for the amount of radiation emitted by the cold plate?

  274. Alex says:

    Here is how the heat transfer between two opaque graybody plates is derived. I see no way to get the correct answer if you claim that the radiation emitted from the cold plate is zero. I would be interested to see how that can possibly be done.

    The radiosity of each surface is the sum of the radiation reflected and emitted by each surface,
    J₁ = R₁ + E₁
    J₂ = R₂ + E₂

    The radiation emitted by each surface is,
    E₁ = σ ε₁ T₁⁴
    E₂ = σ ε₂ T₂⁴

    The radiation reflected by each surface is,
    R₁ = (1-ε₁) J₂
    R₂ = (1-ε₂) J₁

    Combining these equations gives,
    J₁ = (1-ε₁) J₂ + σ ε₁ T₁⁴ = (1-ε₁) [(1-ε₂) J₁ + σ ε₂ T₂⁴] + σ ε₁ T₁⁴

    Solving for J₁ gives, J₁ = [ σ(1-ε₁)ε₂T₂⁴ + σ ε₁ T₁⁴ ] / ( ε₁ + ε₂ – ε₁ε₂).

    Similarly, J₂ = [ σ(1-ε₂)ε₁T₁⁴ + σ ε₂ T₂⁴ ] / ( ε₁ + ε₂ – ε₁ε₂).

    Now, the amount of heat transferred from plate 2 to plate 1 (assuming plate 2 is hotter) is the amount of energy emitted by plate 2 minus the amount of energy absorbed by plate 2,
    q₂₋₁ = E₂ – ε₂J₁ = σ (T₂⁴ – T₁⁴) / (1/ε₂ + 1/ε₁ – 1)

    This formula appears in countless textbooks on heat transfer. If you can derive it claiming that the radiation emitted by the colder plate is zero, i.e. E₁ = 0, then I would like to see how.

  275. Joseph E Postma says:

    Irrespective of whether the cooler plate can be said to be emitting or not, the difference equation demonstrates what portion of the warmer body’s energy can perform work and increase the temperature of the cooler body given the cooler body’s physical state. Kook doesn’t say that the cooler body doesn’t have a state, and I presume he agrees with the heat flow analysis since this is what he’s also been describing. The gray-body S-B Law equation describes the body’s state. The heat equation shows what the warmer body’s energy can do to the cooler body’s state. The result is the same. Kook isn’t conflicting with the heat equation. The cooler body can be said to be emitting given the equation, but it can also be said to be not emitting at all since whatever it emits is immediately replaced by the energy from the warmer body anyway.

  276. Alex says:

    @Joseph E Postma 2021/11/22 at 1:33 PM

    “it can also be said to be not emitting”

    But that is not what you state on these blog pages. You state that the cold body does emit. But I agree that is of no consequence if you can get the same formula in the end.

    So that is my question. How do you arrive at that formula without accounting for the radiation emitted by the cooler object?

  277. Joseph E Postma says:

    Please see my answer above Alex. You arrive at that formula because it describes the state of the body. It is what it would emit.

    Given that people go totally apoplectic and into irascible fits of hyper emotional rage over the question “HOw dOEs a CoLD bOdY kNoW noT to EmITt?” when they wish to insist that a cold body can heat a warmer body, I always simply refer to the difference equation (heat equation) and show that the term for the cooler body’s emission is absolutely present and is accounted for, and its “emission” still doesn’t cause the warmer body to rise in temperature.

    I have also often remarked that from the point of view of the photon, no time nor space exists, and so the cooler body’s radiation is aware of the warmer body and its state and radiation at all times in any case, and this is consistent with what Kook is saying.

    Thus: If someone wants to go into a hysterical fit of rage and apoplexy about whether the cooler body emits, one can refer to the heat equation and show that what would be its emission is accounted for and present. If you want to go deeper and consider what the EM field is actually doing, Kook’s comment about EM field excitation are excellent. Either way, you get the same result, and there is no conflict nor anything to get all worked up into a frenzy about.

  278. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Hey, what do you know, it appears that the kook ‘evenminded’, using the pseudonym of ‘Alex’ has dared to pop his kooky head up so we sane folk can thump him over the head with a clue-mallet. Not that that is going to help him one iota… he’s ineducable. LOL

    Excuse me while I invite physicist Dr. Charles R. Anderson, PhD and Dr. Ed Berry to this thread, won’t you? How many physicists telling you that you’re wrong will be necessary before it finally sinks in that you’re wrong? No one knows… it’s never happened before, despite you making yourself the laughingstock of the scientific community. LOL

    A graybody object’s radiant exitance isn’t solely determined by that object’s internal state, as the S-B equation plainly shows:

    q = ε σ (T_h^4 – T_c^4) A_h

    You claim that all objects > 0 K emit radiation, except that only applies to idealized blackbody objects. If it were true for real-world graybody objects, then the concept of thermodynamic equilibrium would have no meaning in its conventional sense… in that at TE, a system reaches a state of quiescence, no emission nor absorption, as physicist Dr. Charles R. Anderson, PhD showed here:

    https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-nested-black-body-shells-model-and.html

    “I provided proof of my theory in the prior post entitled Solving the Parallel Plane Black Body Radiator Problem and Why the Consensus Science Is Wrong, which is referred to in the article above. If your friends at the Physics Forum say I am wrong, then let them address my proof with an argument rather than just an opinion or some claim of consensus. I clearly showed that their consensus misuse of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation causes a doubling of the energy density of a black body cavity in violation of Stefan’s Law. One can also show many instances in which their misuse of the Stefan-Boltzmann Law leads to violations of The Conservation of Energy.

    The problem, as I have shown in a simple thought experiment with two closely spaced parallel walls is that this requires a violation of Stefan’s Law for the energy density uniformly in the volume of the black body cavity. Photons emitted by one wall according to the Stefan-Boltzmann equation as though the temperature of the other wall was T = 0K applied to both walls doubles the energy density in the black body cavity volume that is known from Stefan’s Law when you apply your idea of one photon emitted and one absorbed by each wall. The way to preserve Stefan’s Law is to note that photons are energy packets formed in response to an electromagnetic field gradient.”

    And here:
    https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2017/11/solving-parallel-plane-black-body.html

    “In fact, while it is commonly claimed that photons inside the cavity are being 100% absorbed on the walls and an equal amount of radiant energy is emitted from the absorbing wall, the actual case is that the radiant energy incident upon the walls can be entirely reflected from the walls. Planck had derived the frequency spectrum of a black body cavity from an assumption of complete reflection from the walls.”

    Now deny 1LoT, 2LoT and Stefan’s Law again, kook… you know you want to. While you’re at it, throw in some of your butthurt bleating about physicist Dr. Charles R. Anderson, PhD because he proved you wrong 3 years ago and you still haven’t gotten over it… you know you definitely want to. And do be sure to deny that your blather precedes you, that you’re the same kook I’ve been drop-kicking across the width and breadth of CFACT for 3 years… your mental infirmities preclude you ever avoiding doing that. LOL

    Your problem is that your take on radiative energetic exchange necessitates that at thermodynamic equilibrium, objects are furiously emitting and absorbing radiation (this is brought about because you claim that objects emit only according to their temperature (rather than according to the energy density gradient), thus for objects at the same temperature in an environment at the same temperature, all would be furiously emitting and absorbing radiation), and you’ve forgotten about entropy… if the objects (and the environment) are furiously emitting and absorbing radiation at thermodynamic equilibrium as your insane take on reality must claim, why does entropy not change?

    The second law states that there exists a state variable called entropy S. The change in entropy (ΔS) is equal to the energy transferred (ΔQ) divided by the temperature (T).

    ΔS = ΔQ / T

    Only for reversible processes does entropy remain constant. Reversible processes are idealizations. All real-world processes are irreversible.

    The climastrologists claim that energy can flow from cooler to warmer because they cling to the long-debunked Prevost Principle, which states that an object’s radiant exitance is dependent only upon that object’s internal state, and thus they treat real-world graybody objects as though they’re idealized blackbody objects via:
    q = σ T^4
    … thus the climate loons claim that all objects emit radiation if they are above 0 K. In reality, idealized blackbody objects emit radiation if they are above 0 K, whereas graybody objects emit radiation if their temperature is greater than 0 K above the ambient.

    But their blather means that in an environment at thermodynamic equilibrium, all objects (and the ambient) would be furiously emitting and absorbing radiation, but since entropy doesn’t change at thermodynamic equilibrium, the climastrologists must claim that radiative energy transfer is a reversible process.

    Except radiative energy transfer is an irreversible process, which destroys their blather. In reality, at thermodynamic equilibrium, no energy flows, which is why entropy doesn’t change.

    All idealized blackbody objects above absolute zero emit radiation. Idealized blackbody objects do not emit (nor absorb) according to the energy density gradient. Idealized blackbody objects don’t actually exist, they’re idealizations.

    Real-world graybody objects with a temperature greater than zero degrees above their ambient emit radiation. Graybody objects emit (and absorb) according to the energy density gradient.

    It’s right there in the S-B equation, which the climate loons fundamentally misunderstand:

    They cite Clausius out of context… Clausius was discussing a cyclical process by which external energy did work to return the system to its original state (for irreversible processes), or which returned to its original state because it is an idealized reversible process… except idealized reversible processes don’t exist. They’re idealizations. All real-world processes are irreversible processes, including radiative energy transfer, because radiative energy transfer is an entropic temporal process.

    If your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. – Arthur Eddington: The Nature of the Physical World. (1929)

    The climastrologist mathematical fraudery is what led to their ‘energy can flow willy-nilly without regard to energy density gradient‘ narrative (in their keeping with the long-debunked Prevost Principle), which led to their ‘backradiation‘ narrative, which led to their ‘CAGW‘ narrative, all of it definitively, mathematically, scientifically proven to be fallacious.

  279. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    “Alex” aka ‘evenminded’ aka Professor BalloonKnot wrote:
    “If you can derive it claiming that the radiation emitted by the colder plate is zero, i.e. E₁ = 0, then I would like to see how.”

    I call him “Professor BalloonKnot” because he claims to be a professor (although he’s denied every single fundamental physical law I’ve thrown at him) and he pulls his ‘fyziks’ from his balloon-knot. LOL

    You’ve been shown how repeatedly… you’re incapable of grasping it.

    Analogizing thermodynamics to electrical theory, the kook is essentially claiming a 459.300327939 V battery with a 510.33369771057Ω resistor will charge a 1451.615851264 V battery with a 14.5161585127852kΩ resistor… yeah, folks, Professor BalloonKnot is that deluded. LOL

    Consider two objects with the parameters of 400 K, ε_h = 0.1 and 300 K, ε_c = 0.9 as in “Alex”‘s example (which he’s been bleating about for months). Let us now analogize them to an electrical circuit.

    Voltage can be analogized to σ T^4.

    5.670374419e−8 * 400 ^4 = 1451.615851264 V
    5.670374419e−8 * 300 ^4 = 459.300327939 V

    We derive the resistance at the output of each voltage source by computing the radiant flux if emitting to 0 K through each object’s emissivity, then adjusting the analogous voltage source’s resistance to match that wattage output:

    1.936827712008685688817428489145e-5 J m-3 * 74948114.5 W J-1 m * (ε_h = 0.1) = 145.1615851264 W m-2

    6.1282439325274820622738948289353e-6 * 74948114.5 W J-1 m * (ε_c = 0.9) = 413.3702951451 W m-2

    That gives a ‘hot object’ voltage source resistance of 14.5161585127852kΩ and a ‘cold object’ voltage source resistance of 510.33369771057Ω.

    Now, rather than emitting to 0 K for each object (equivalent to shunting each voltage source to ground through their respective resistances… akin to putting each thermodynamic object into its own system which doesn’t interact with the other object, which is how the climate kooks treat all real-world graybody objects when they misuse the S-B equation form for idealized blackbody objects upon real-world graybody objects), we connect the two voltage sources (akin to putting both thermodynamic objects into the same system where they’re forced to interact with each other), including diodes to bypass the resistors for inbound current (because emissivity only affects an object which is emitting).

    What is the wattage output and from which source?
    99.2315523320561 W from the 1,451.615851264 V source.

    What result did I get for the thermodynamics problem above?
    99.231552332500000000000000000004 W m-2

    The 0.000000000443900000000000000004 W differential is rounding error on the website’s circuit simulator.

    Why does the ‘cold object’ voltage source watt-meter show a lower wattage in the lower circuit? Because the analogization effectively equates energy density to voltage, thus a lower voltage necessitates that source being analogized to a larger object (more surface area) with lower energy density. The equation at the bottom normalizes this to show the same power out of the ‘hot object’ voltage source and into the ‘cold object’ voltage source, as do the current graphs at the bottom.

    Oh look, images:

    You can run the circuit simulator for yourself here:
    https://tinyurl.com/yzo8hak9

  280. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Alex wrote:
    “The radiation emitted by each surface is,
    E₁ = σ ε₁ T₁⁴
    E₂ = σ ε₂ T₂⁴”

    Only if one assumes each object is emitting to 0 K… in effect, you’re claiming that each object is in its own system, not interacting with anything else.

    That’s your ‘tell’… you claim real-world graybody objects emit as though to 0 K, and that they emit regardless of the energy density gradient (ie: you claim that they emit maximally just as idealized blackbody objects do, just reduced due to emissivity), so you calculate radiant exitance of each object, then subtract energy flow of the cooler object from energy flow of the warmer object… subtracting a fictive ‘cooler to warmer’ energy flow from the real but inflated (because you’re calculating for radiant exitance to 0 K) ‘warmer to cooler’ energy flow.

    The S-B equation for graybody objects isn’t meant to be used to subtract a fictive ‘cooler to warmerenergy flow from the incorrectly-calculated and thus too high ‘warmer to coolerenergy flow, it’s meant to be used to subtract cooler object energy density (temperature is a measure of energy density, the fourth root of energy density divided by Stefan’s constant) from warmer object energy density. Radiant exitance of the warmer object is predicated upon the energy density gradient.

    e = T^4 4σ/c

    T = 4^√(e / (4σ / c))

    T^4 = (e / (4σ / c))

    q = ε σ (T_h^4 – T_c^4) A_h

    q = ε σ ((e_h / (4σ / c)) – (e_c / (4σ / c))) A_h

    If you were able to comprehend simple concepts, you’d have realized that, when you looked at the thermodynamics / electrical theory crossover… the top two circuits are what you claim happens (ie: that the objects each radiatively emit without interaction with the other object… then you mathematically (but only mathematically) connect the two objects to get your blather to ‘work’ in some fashion):

    Note the differential of energy flow between those two circuits is exactly the negative answer you claim Anderson’s formula gets, because you can’t algebraically manipulate simple equations. I get the correct answer via Anderson’s formula, corroborate that to the S-B equation, and further corroborate it to electrical theory to a precision of parts per billion.

    The bottom circuit is what actually happens… the two objects interact. It’s not the energy flow which determines radiant exitance in thermodynamics, it’s the energy density… a manifestation of radiation pressure.

    The circuit simulator:
    https://tinyurl.com/yzo8hak9

    You’ll note that at the electrical equivalent of “thermodynamic equilibrium” (ie: both voltage sources at the same voltage), no energy flows, regardless of the resistance on the output of each voltage source… just as at thermodynamic equilibrium (ie: both objects at the same temperature), no energy flows, regardless of the emissivity of each object.

  281. Alex says:

    Joseph E Postma 2021/11/22 at 2:59 PM

    Your words on this website are that there IS two-way energy transfer. Do you stand by those words or not? If you want to change your mind and claim that the cold body does not transfer any energy to the hotter body then go ahead and say so. Ultimately we all agree that the heat transfer is from the hotter to the colder body.

    But again, I asked you if you can derive the heat transfer equation that describes the interactions between two graybody plates without accounting for the radiation emitted by the cold plate or not?

    This is a question on the mathematics. Can you do it or not?

    “Kook isn’t conflicting with the heat equation.”

    Actually he is, because he does not get the same answers for the heat transferred from the hotter plate to the colder plate that the equation above gives.

  282. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Joe, remember that I’d stated prior that the kook seems to make sense on the surface, but even a cursory examination of his blather shows that he’s generally diametrically opposite to reality… and when that’s pointed out, he starts getting nasty, just as SamMich did… same kook, different pseudonyms.

    Get your clue-mallet and plonk him. Plonk him to hell and back, then laugh at the poor deluded idiot. It’s all he’s good for. LOL

  283. Joseph E Postma says:

    Is this something that you’re going to be apoplectic and really upset and hurt about, Alex?

    You know that what I’m concerned about is the non-existence of the radiative greenhouse effect of climate science, and the fraud that climate science represents, and its total pseudoscience of flat Earth theory, and the sophistical requirements and arguments which pretend that heat can flow from cold to hot, that the energy from a cold body can increase the temperature of a warmer body, etc.

    I therefore find it totally pointless and retarded to begin to create a whole new irrelevant debate that doesn’t bear directly upon the main error and concern at hand.

    This is in fact a perfect way to drag a major, important, relevant and impacting concern, into minutia which distracts and deflects away from the fundamentally important point. Because an argument over minutia like this can then make it seem like the first major point wasn’t scored or that something about it might not be correct which therefore makes the original point possibly not correct. This becomes rhetorical and semantic gamesmanship, a favorite realm of the sophists and sophistry.

    “YoIUR WOdS ALl OVvER ThiSS WEbSITE SaY THER IS TWO AWY TRnsafER!! Do YOU STAND BY thoSE WOrds or NOT?

    HUUUHHH??? HUUHHH!!!!???? YOUR WORDS?!

    Don’t be retarded. DO NOT BE A RETARD WITH ME, for f sakes.

    Get your emotions together and spare me the sophistry. Good grief, its gross. It’s homosexual and disgusting.

    My statements over the last few comments stand. I’m not changing anything I’ve said and I don’t need to. Some fn retarded game is beginning to be played “Joe changed his mind about two way transfer” derp derp derp.

    I’ve said all that is needed on it. Any further concern becomes one of metaphysics, and outside the scope.

    If Kook is correct and that you’ve had dealings together, don’t bring it here and expect me to work it out for you. If you were arguing cold to hot heating originally then you deserve whatever spanking you got.

  284. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    Already done, kook. Can’t you read for comprehension? Of course you can’t. You’ve demonstrated that fact repeatedly over the course of years. LOL

    I get the correct result via Anderson’s formula, I corroborate that to the S-B equation, and I further corroborate it to electrical theory to a precision of parts per billion.

    Meanwhile, you’re so mathematically-innumerate that you can’t even get the correct sign, let alone the correct result using Anderson’s formula. LOL

    Meanwhile, you’re sophistically bleating about a misuse of the S-B equation (by calculating radiant exitance to 0 K) and using the effective emissivity approximation, which can’t be as precise as a direct calculation of energy density differential… there’s not much you’re capable of understanding… remember back when you denied that effective emissivity of the system even existed, and I had to school you on that? Took months before you finally got a clue. LOL

    e = T^4 4σ/c

    T = 4^√(e / (4σ / c))

    T^4 = (e / (4σ / c))

    q = ε σ (T_h^4 – T_c^4) A_h

    q = ε σ ((e_h / (4σ / c)) – (e_c / (4σ / c))) A_h

  285. Joseph E Postma says:

    Good bye.

  286. nabrid51 says:

    @LOL
    What is the meaning and/or effect of negative watts in the circuit diagram?

  287. Alex is emailing me at work now, with a bunch of oooga booga boooga screeching noises…lol.

    Alex, of course I understand the trivial math of the heat flow equation, and can work it out myself, as I have done in my books and on this site numerous times, etc. Of course I agree with radiative transfer textbooks which ALL demonstrate that heat flows from hot to cold only, and never from cold to hot. Of course I agree that ALL radiative heat transfer textbooks demonstrate that the greenhouse effect of climate science doesn’t exist.

    What I don’t appreciate is this rhetorical gamesmanship where you’re pretending as if I don’t know the equations, and this attempt to create some sort of big drama just because I appreciate what appears to be informed perspective on how the equations actually work and what they mean, etc. As in my comment above…this all just smacks of a scheme in sophistry and that pre-existing butt-hurt is being brought in here as if it is my problem…as if I have some sort of problem with the heat transfer textbooks, and Kook’s approach, which all demonstrate that heat can’t flow from cold to hot.

  288. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    nabrid51 wrote:
    “@LOL
    What is the meaning and/or effect of negative watts in the circuit diagram?”

    It means current is flowing into the voltage source, that current pushed by a higher voltage source. Since the resistance is an analog to emissivity, no matter how high that resistance is, it’s not going to stop the higher voltage source pushing current backward into the lower voltage source. It’ll just reduce the rate at which that occurs.

    The top two circuits is how the climate loons do it… they claim all objects emit to 0 K (analogized by shunting current to ground)… except doing it that way removes the coupling between objects, the objects don’t interact.

    Then the climate loons pull a mathematical trick by subtracting the energy flow (to ‘ground’) of the cooler (‘lower voltage’) object from the energy flow (to ‘ground’) of the warmer (‘higher voltage’) object.

    That’s how they claim that a 300 K object of ε=0.9 can radiatively push energy into a 400 K object of ε=0.1… it is the same as claiming that a 459.300327939 V battery will charge a 1451.615851264 V battery if you just hang a high enough value resistor on the output of that 1451.615851264 V battery.

    The bottom circuit is how it actually works in the real world… the two objects interact, the higher voltage source pushing current backward through the lower voltage source. As any sane person knows, a higher voltage battery will charge a lower voltage battery.

    A lower voltage battery won’t charge (do work upon) a higher voltage battery, no matter the value of resistance you hang off each battery, just as a lower-temperature object won’t ‘charge’ (do work upon) a higher-temperature object, no matter the value of emissivity of each object. A higher emissivity will simply slow the rate, it is incapable of reversing the direction.

  289. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    “A higher emissivity will simply slow the rate, it is incapable of reversing the direction.”
    -should be’
    A lower emissivity will simply slow the rate, it is incapable of reversing the direction.

    Sorry, my brain’s starved of carbohydrates and caffeine today… and my brain only functions with carbohydrates and caffeine. I ran out of soda and I spent the entire day hauling heavy boxes to a container for shipping. We got about 1/10th of the household loaded today… I’m not looking forward to tomorrow. I’m already sore.

  290. boomie789 says:

    @LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks

    You are a legend.

  291. CD Marshall says:

    Amazing how they deliberately switch energy flow with all of a sudden a two-way channel of heat flow. It is clear thermodynamic heat is being deliberately misrepresented in academia to replace science with narrative. Which then becomes nothing more than popular opinion…usually contrived through a constant media and scholastic push.

  292. LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks says:

    { Sorry, brain’s still not working… a good night’s rest and a solid slug of soda in the morning should set me right… I accidentally posted this to the wrong page (“What is Heat?”)! Joe, you can delete that post to “What is Heat?”. Stupid brain. LOL }

    Joe, ask him to quote the entirety of pages 55 and 224-225 of Thermal Physics, Second Edition by Philip M. Morse, Professor of Physics at MIT, co-founding editor of Annals of Physics, co-founder of MIT Acoustics Laboratory, first Director of Brookhaven National Laboratory, founder of MIT Computation Center.

    https://archive.org/details/thermalphysics00mors/page/55/mode/2up?view=theater
    https://archive.org/details/thermalphysics00mors/page/224/mode/2up?view=theater

    Last time I asked him to do that, he ran away for months, because it proves all of his blather wrong. LOL

    Of course, he came back under a new pseudonym, spewing the same deluded tripe he’s always spewed. He refuses to educate himself because he’s ideologically welded to shilling for CAGW, even if he has to violate every single fundamental physical law to do so. I suspect he’s a well-known climastrologist desperate to keep his lucrative gravy train going.

  293. nabrid51 says:

    @LOL
    “It means current is flowing into the voltage source, that current pushed by a higher voltage source.”
    Agreed and understood. The question I am asking is what does the concept of negative watts actually mean in the analog? Is this a process of cooling?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s