How an Investigation into the Intellectual and Philosophical Fraud of Climate Science and Peer Review Uncovered a Plot to Create a Final Extinction Level Event to End All Life on Earth
Humanity is facing a planetary-level-threat which seeks to end all life on Earth. This threat is vectored through our scientific, political, and media apparatuses, using means of a technological nature far beyond human comprehension. The plot has been found out, but we’re not sure if we will be successful in stopping it. This sounds like science fiction, but it is real, and it is happening.
This book is the culmination of my research into the cause, motives, and end-goal of the fraud of climate science and its global warming climate change pseudoscientific political hysteria. What you will discover will shock you, as it goes far beyond mere “environmentalism”. The answer draws upon all possible knowledge humanity has developed since prehistorical times, and by reading this book you will be exposed to the highest and most carefully refined knowledge humanity has ever developed. No joke. All life on planet Earth is under attack and there is a plot to end it all. The stakes are as high as they are possible to be, and it requires our highest knowledge to face it.
You may get the book in Kindle, paperback or hardcover. Please have a look at it, and please recommend it to friends and acquaintances, and everyone else who needs to know this information.
This is not a joke…this isn’t embellishment to sell a book. I know it sounds incredible, but take a look around. You either see the problem, or you don’t. If you do, then this book explains why the problem exists in the first place, and also suggests some things which we can do to help correct it and stop it.
Climate of Sophistry 
Ordering it now.
Good stuff Ken, thanks! I was going to email you…good to know you jumped at it 🙂
Got it on kindle. Shorter than I thought it would be. Which is good imo.
Not too long, but high density 😂
Courage my friend.
Letter to Justin Trudeau Margaret Anna Alice Feb 7 2022
Wait a minute. Are you saying that people who are promoting a climate change conspiracy believe the flat earth theory ?
Pingback: On the Strange Ideas that can be proven and disproven : any philosophers in the house? – Unexpected Objects
Flat earth theory is the basis of climate science, yes. And they tell you that it is. It’s (climate science) flat earth theory worked out into its own math and science, which they peer review with each other.
Pingback: The Astrophysicist in Question: – Unexpected Objects
Hm. Ok. I don’t know anything about astrophysics. But a freind if Mine monitors sun spots effect on the global power grid. 🤷🏽♂️
That’s cool. If you’re a philosopher, you will really enjoy the book…lots of crucial philosophical topics discussed in it.
I’ll think about it.
Hey Joe, got the kindle version.
It will give me something to read while I’m in the detention camp!
Awesome Rick! hah hopefully you stay out!
Hey you guys here’s my brother Bart Postma, interviewed inside the RV in Ottawa…he’s there helping out the truckers!
I put that one in my book at the last minute, boomie!
Is there an error on page 56 of the kindle version? The figure on that page didn’t render.
This is what I see.
Oh darn. I saw that on review and it didn’t like the .tiff format, so I changed it to jpg, and then it viewed fine for me on review. I will go back in and check. It’s just that Kiehl and Trenberth diagram.
OK just checked on the publisher previewer…renders OK there. I will try emailing them.
On my Galaxy S10 android OS if that helps.
Bought it on Amazon, Kindle version.
I deleted and re-downloaded it and it’s still the same.
SpaceX just lost 40 satellites sounds like they need to hire a competent astrophysicist.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/solar-storm-knocks-40-spacex-satellites-out-of-the-sky-after-the-company-ignored-scientists-warnings/ar-AATHH75?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531
I just had some idiot claim the horse latitudes only cover 33% of the planet, these are the “global warming experts” I’m guessing he doesn’t know what 30 degrees latitude means?
:
“The Earth is a globe with 90 degrees center to top.
30 degrees = 33%.
That’s all you have eh?
The wrong simple mathematics and the wrong degrees latitude for the planet?
Thanks for another non-answer laugh, little clown.”
I had completely forgotten about the 1999 influenza a H1N1 virus.
The Ontario Provincial Police are allegedly monitoring social media groups for the Freedom Convoy and visiting people’s homes who have commented on Facebook groups regarding the convoy.
https://twitter.com/TomlinsonCJ/status/1492141288703074305?s=20&t=xDLXLZDJlctBT7XBii2MXA
That Entity CG the robotic one, sounds like the Zeta.
“C.G.: “Beep boop beep bop boop…oh yah, we’re robots baby, that’s what we are! LOL!”
Here is a recording of tonal sequencing of a Zeta for comparison:
[audio src="http://www.treurniet.ca/zetacom/audio/zetas_speaking_close.mp3" /]
[audio src="http://www.treurniet.ca/zetacom/audio/close1filt8k.mp3" /]
Fascinating read. Have tons of questions lol.
p.s I have the same issue with page 56 as Boomie. I think Amazon can send an auto-update to fix this quite easily.
The Zetas ( greys, there are many different strains of this species, bred for different castes).
They are pathological liers by nature. Masters of subterfuge. Lack empathy.
After the crash and capture of some of their species at Roswell, they were referred to
as EBENS ( EBE1, EBE2 etc) Extraterrestrial Biological Entity.
But to be more specific they were Zetas. The same ones depicted in Close Encounters. ( The Greys)
A famous one was Jrod. See http://www.patriciacori.com for more info.
J-Rod, who was one of two surviving Greys captured when their craft crashed in Kingman,
Arizona, in the early fifties. The photo above is said to be one of the rare images of
the being to be leaked out of Area 51.
Dan Burisch claims to have been one of the scientists that interacted with J-Rod, and that J-Rod
is actually a visitor from the future. In his version, several Grey species would be descendants from mankind and they would now be visiting us from the future to correct some mistakes that ultimately will have a negative impact on the possibility of the future grey humans to survive.
They are a particularly nasty parasitical race that collects and trades loosh. ( Abrasax).
Does anyone speak German?
I need something double checked if you do.
Sorry CD. My ancestors are German ( grandparents) , but I personally don’t have a great grasp of the German language other than high school level. Have you tried Google Translate?
Here is some more info on the negative alien reptile/insectoid collective.
The Zeta Drakonians ( Illuminati/Black Sun) are the ones I refer to as “Abrasax” or the Humans of the future as they like to be called. Others refer to them as Blond Nordics or Tall Whites
https://ascensionglossary.com/index.php/Zeta
Click to access SBAWW_24_0279-0284.pdf
Anyone can explain what the records are for on pages 281-282
I thought they were from Beck’s work, but I might be wrong.
I’ve never come across the “Forum” Soul collective before, but can see its modus operandi.
Like going back to primordial times before the bi-cameral mind. The subconscious
God voice in the head of pre-historic man.
The “forum soul” sounds like a group soul of animals? The hive mind. The insect mind. Ants. The robotic automaton programmed instincts and characteristics of the form of animals as species for example like spider monkeys use of a prehensile tail. Its also the 100th monkey effect of tipping point of learning via a input threshold that tips the species to copy its brothers.
You can see the external control benefits from that.
As you say Consciousness is less than 3000 years old. We are still learning from
our user manual how to use the conscious mind gatekeeper to use/access fully the most powwerful aspect of mind, that is the subconscious mind of God. Our spark of God. The subconscious is the fifth element, the primordiaal soup of the quantum field.
The law of attraction, the laws of cause and effect etc are all universal laws that allow us, as soul creators to produce effects on the 3d material plane.
What if entities who are unable to create themselves hijack our god like abilities to create but
not for ourselves but for another species entirely?
CD, this is what I translate the table to be about:
“The calculation was made from the existing barometer and thermometer readings assumed the mean. In the following I give a number of determinations as I have carried them out according to the procedure described.”
Sorry not been of much help there. All I know its something to do with C02 from atmospheric air.
Thanks’ Z do they look like they are from his garden for that’s what was claimed? Looks like the header is the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (atmosphurischen luft)?
A troll said it was taken in his garden. He might be right I don’t know.
Just bought the Kindle edition. Will be reading this afternoon and weekend. Thanks Joe!
CD the experiment most certainly was conducted outside, and he did mention his garden.
“The question I kept asking myself at the beginning of my experiments, whether
during the prevailing southerly wind (sirocco) the carbonic acid content of the
air is very changed can now already be answered.
The fluctuations are extremely insignificant and in any case too small to
to be able to explain the strange effects on the organism that
set during the reign of the same. Hlasiwetz.
The amount of air examined averaged 60
Liter, “she” was taken from the upcoming garden. To
Discharge of 30 liters each, which required three hours,
barometer temperature and manometer reading were noted, the aspirator
refilled. After the experiments had been completed, it was time to wash out
of the precipitation received.”
Thanks Z so is it not worth anything? I’m guessing it’s not really.
I owe you one.
No worries my friend. If I can help you guys out I will. You do a great job for our side CD.
I think R/LackmustestTester is German?
https://www.reddit.com/r/RealClimateSkeptics/
Can find him on my tiny subreddit.
https://www.reddit.com/user/LackmustestTester/
I think I remember him telling me he is German anyway. Sorry if he’s not lol. Pretty helpful dude.
I’m something like 1/4 German as far as I know. Then 1/4 Anglo(Norman) and half French. Pretty good mix, the big 3 pretty much.
Yeah thanks Boomie, Zelator did enough to get the point of the works. Pretty much he measured the CO2 levels in the air over his garden. Which still means he measured outside air at Innsbruck. Now I know.
CD FYI the CO2 meter at work read 386ppm last time I read it, in the southern hemisphere winter. I’m exposed to the roaring 40s right by the ocean’s big CO2 sink.
Ok What the fuck are these things? Are they NOT Human??
Grey State: Alien World Order:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6APyjBL6TuR7/
There is information in this video. It goes on a bit but you have to
see it to gain valuable insight.
It is a spiritual battle, that is why ultimately I believe they are demons
more than aliens, but that is just word play. Djinns, Demons, ET’s they
are not from this realm.
I believe everyone has felt their presence in their life. Some attract them
with their vibration, their soul type, others are weak and are attacked by them and can
become possesed, others channel them, others use them ( see Magicians).
They have been called various names like Archons, Djinn, Aliens, Ghosts, Demons,
Paranormal anomalies.
They are real. They exist whether you believe in them or not. However any unseen enemy once
the light is shone on them becomes vulnerable to defeat, and that is our purpose here.
There is such a thing as Finger Magic, Word Magic, Psycho Pictography etc. Many ways to control. The human body is a magicians kit. If you have the faith of a mustard seed you can move mountains. We are that powerful. Don your armour of God.
This above is not meant to alarm you but to help you see.
You look around your neighbourhood, town or city or village, you see decay, delapidation,
broken infrastructure; down to uneven pavements, potholes in roads, urban no go areas of
delapidation and despair. Areas that can be green and healthy, buildings to house everyone.
Unemployment, lack of motivation to work for minimum wage. We see it.
What if we gave you money to complete these projects to improve your neighbourhood.
That you were the director of your own individual projects and all your employees were those who
saw your vision and would be paid accordingly rewarding for their skills.
Would we not see a univesal programme of progress of willing labour forces working
for their own good in their own areas and not for a universal parasitical elite?
The money is there. Trust me. There is a way. Soon. We can defeat these demons. We have friends in very powerful places. But we need to know our enemy. It starts here.
Some people remind me of these zombie drones.
Folie a Deux
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0751127/
J Cuttance
I’ve always been suspicious of the CO2 claimed numbers. Never any fluctuation which is not how CO2 works.
Even Judith Curry attacked Dr. Ed Berry’s assessment of real CO2 circulation. Really not a surprise.
https://edberry.com/blog/climate/climate-co2-temp/skrable-chabot-and-french-limit-human-co2-effect-to-48-ppm-in-2020/
CD you have a very cinematographic imagination. Do you watch a lot of films or are you a film director or author? Your samples are incredible. Great insight.
Whatever the reason more people are acting like drones, it’s just creepy. A sane person can see something is making normal regular people act insane. What normal human being chooses to commit genocide?
A normal person finds a way to make things better through advancement in technology and medicine. An insane person wipes everything out and justifies the action.
In science a normal person knows our Earth “lifeline” is limited and only as a space faring species does the human race have a chance to survive.
Someone sent in a thing that showed over a dozen top HIV researchers died all over the world. Now that’s weird.
Looks like the deaths started in 2017 and continued on to present a total of 15 top HIV researchers either retired or currently working in the field.
Even weirder, a new HIV “prevention” drug is now out?
CD, I don’t see where Judith Curry attacks Dr. Berry’s work. Can you supply another link because it wasn’t on the one you supplied.
LOL, nothing is coming through.
immortal600
I asked her. We’ll see if she replies.
I was so tired at the time I was doing one thing and thinking another. Trolls claim she did.
The post:
Even Nic Lewis and Judith Curry say Ed Berry is wrong.
Ed Berry – LOL
Just wondering, where did the extra 100ppm of natural CO2, acc to Ed, come from in the past century and a half?
Did it magically occur out of the blue or does Ed post a specific source?
immortal600
The link was a paper supporting his work. Two totally unrelated things I somehow fused into the same post.
CD, gotcha. That clears it up, thanks!
“Despite mainstream culture and in particular mainstream philosophical materialistic science,
all of these unique mental phenomena are well-founded in Jungian psychology and the concepts
of the personal, collective and universal subconsciousnesses, in the bicameral psychology of
Julian Jaynes, and Rupert Sheldrake’s psychological theory of morphic resonance lends some understanding, and there are many other references, but in particular, for me as a scientist, it is ontological mathematics and the monadology of Gottfried Leibniz which justifies a basis for the authenticity of all of these such phenomena”.
Joe how do you link otological mathematics to the above phenomena? Could you therefore explain what you mean by ontological mathemetics? How you see it.
How does understanding Ontological mathematics help us as humans?
Could you give us some real life examples where it will change our quality of life?
I have always wondered what Hockney and his crew mean by Ontological Mathematics.
Do you have a laymans explanation, and how does this help us defeat the enemy at the gates
that we face not only in Climate terms but in terms of existence itself?
I ask the question, as I understand the concept of Jung’s collective consciousness, the akashic record of morphic resonance, Ilya Prigogine’s non-equilibrium thermodynamics, but have no examples of were ontological mathematics fits in the above mental phenonmena.
“Joe how do you link ontological mathematics to the above phenomena?”
Because ontological mathematics explains them and justifies them logically…how they can exist factually in the first place. The normal scientific thing is to dismiss all these phenomena as aberrations, but ontological mathematics demonstrates that they are real, part of fundamental reality, and in fact even more real that material existence.
“How does understanding Ontological mathematics help us as humans?”
How does understanding thermodynamics help us? Of course, normal science helps us with technology and thus physical life. Ontological mathematics will do that too, and will give us a Star Wars/Trek future, when and if developed…it will give a fundamental control over reality, make the wavefunction deterministic, etc.
It also helps spiritually because it proves the existence of the soul, life after death, explains the purpose of existence, which is to grow in experience and knowledge, to make yourself the best version of yourself which you can be – like the movie Groundhog Day! (just re-watched that for Groundhog day…lol).
“Could you give us some real life examples where it will change our quality of life?”
Technologically, no, not yet. But like I always say, IF we survive, and get to the point where we can develop it, it will give us Star Wars/Trek tech.
A lot of people also want the emotional aspect of proof of the existence of the soul. This can improve quality of life. It can also direct a person to engage in optimizing their life and fulfilling it, knowing that if they don’t do it now, they will just need to come back and try again.
“I have always wondered what Hockney and his crew mean by Ontological Mathematics.”
They mean the mechanics, the science, the mathematics, the philosophy, the nature, of base fundamental existence, why existence exits at all, how it exists, what existence’s purpose is, how it is engineered, structured, our relation to it, etc.
“Do you have a laymans explanation, and how does this help us defeat the enemy at the gates
that we face not only in Climate terms but in terms of existence itself?”
Existence cannot end. But humanity could. Hockney may have provided us the knowledge to recognize the enemy. Without Hockney, I wouldn’t have written my books or made the insights that I did, etc. I wouldn’t have went this far exposing the climate fraud and its apparent end-goal.
“but have no examples of were ontological mathematics fits in the above mental phenonmena”
It just explains that they’re quite real, important, and are in fact the way that base reality works. Base reality is non-local, whereas science has us all thinking only in local terms and hence dismisses psychology and such phenomena. Ontological Mathematics proves that these phenomena are real, substantial, and in fact accord with the base nature of existence as a fully-connected non-local singularity.
Other people can accept these things for other reasons. For me, I required them to be logically proven, based on math and logic. Hence why I say that Ontological Mathematics is what most provides a foundation, for me, of understanding the reality of these phenomena and that they can’t be merely dismissed. The philosophy of ontological mathematics proves that the mind is not in the body, for example, hence making astral travel not merely a hallucination, but a real factual possibility.
Thanks for the detailed answer. I have something to learn here. Thankyou for the explanation and taking the time.
Marc Morano is going to post a link to the book on climatedepot!! NICE!
Cheers Z
I invited that Tom guy and his Crawley buddy over here to share his brilliant physics with you. As usual I doubt he’ll show. He prefers to take jabs at you from the shadows, I guess.
He’s attacking Fisher over on Twitter right now with Brandon and Creepy Crawley.
CD Marshall told me to come over here and explain physics to you. Are you ready to be schooled?
[JP: It depends. Are you a clone-node of the other ranting personas coming here? Can you present an argument without having to yell, insult, ridicule, and diarrhea all over the place?
Please tell us why you think that flat Earth theory with cold sunshine is real. Please tell us why you think that the empirical evidence of every single greenhouse in the world refuting backradiation heating are invalid.]
Joe would you equate ontological maths with vibration ( resonance). ie to frequency and
wavelength? Numerology is known by Pythagoras that numbers have energy. ” Everything is numbers” Alphabet is numerical. Depending on the cypher.
Incidentally to a phenomenom called rapport in humans ( George De la Warr) – yes that feeling! Did you know that we all have a signature ( aura ) that is unique to us. Dis-ease is a breakdown of the natural rhythm. Rife technologies ( Frequencies) can kill/cure all dis-ease!
sorry that was jumbled. from my phone. I cant type with small keypad lol
Z: Yes, we all have a number (frequency) which define us. ONE can tell you the number…lol.
Something must be equivalent to nothing, since nothing is the most logical state. Nothing requires nothing to exist, hence nothing can prevent nothing from existing. Nothing is the base state.
However, nothing can exist in two forms: absolute, or structured. Absolute nothing is simply a static nothing, with no internal manifestation. It produces nothing. So you don’t need to worry about it…it’s literally nothing.
However, another type of nothing is structured nothing with internal parts which net to nothing. This is also a type of nothing which requires nothing to exist, hence is self-existent. Except in this case it has manifestation…internal phenomena.
Net nothing has internal parts which “balance” to nothing. The internal parts have to be the simplest possible thing since it would violates Occam’s Razor and the Principle of Sufficient Reason that they should be anything more arbitrarily complex than the simplest possible thing.
The simplest possible thing is the point, moving around a circle. This nets to nothing. Hence it requires nothing to exist, nothing outside of itself to exist, and hence is self-existent and eternal.
This explains the existence of existence.
But if one circle can exist without requiring anything to make it exist, then an infinite number of them can, and also, over all possible circle sizes and hence frequencies.
Every instance of a set of circles over all possible frequencies is the immortal, indestructible, self-existent, soul. Leibniz called them “monads”, but the other name is “soul”.
The point moving about the circle is indeed the energy wave, the vibration, the frequency, etc.
However, from the simplest possible ingredient, one can build the most complex structure. In fact, only the simplest ingredient could create the most complex structure. The ingredients to reality are the base sinusoids in the frequency domain, which through the Fourier Transform can create the most complex structures in the spacetime domain.
Ontological Mathematics is ALL ABOUT energy waves, which are created by the point moving around the circle, creating frequencies of energy.
“Ontological Mathematics is ALL ABOUT energy waves, which are created by the point moving around the circle, creating frequencies of energy.”
This exists in the singularity…they all exist in the singularity. Which is mental. This is the frequency domain…what is called the frequency domain in Fourier Transform mathematics.
They create the spacetime domain through the Fourier Transform, where the information in the frequency singularity is “portaled” (in a sense) to create extension and time.
Other frequencies create matter, and this is what the fundamental particles are, and is why they have a wave-like and also point-like nature: the “point” part is the front of the wave. De Broglie actually had this figured out, but the community went with Copenhagen probabalism instead. But de Broglie had developed “pilot wave” theory, which is the correct mathematics, which has the particle as the wave-front, which thus explains the so-called wave-particle duality.
Tom,
So far, I’m not impressed.
Yes I can present arguments without insults. Can you?
Here is a picture that explains where the “mysterious” factor of 4 comes from. Do you see the shadow on the plane behind the sphere? It’s the area of that shadow that shows the maximum amount of radiation that the hemisphere can absorb. Take that area, multiply by the radiation flux, and that is the amount of energy incident on the hemisphere in each second. It’s really very simple.
“Here is a picture that explains where the “mysterious” factor of 4 comes from.”
The factor of 4 is not mysterious. It is the ratio of the area of a sphere to that of a disk with the same radius.
“It’s the area of that shadow that shows the maximum amount of radiation that the hemisphere can absorb.”
This would be the cross-section of the sphere, which is a disk, with area pi*r^2.
“Take that area, multiply by the radiation flux, and that is the amount of energy incident on the hemisphere in each second. It’s really very simple.”
So your simply doing OID here?
Here, this might help you more:
You’re not contributing very much here, Tom.
Well, I don’t understand how you can be so confused by something so simple. Let’s see if we can find agreement. How much energy do you think the Earth absorbs from the sun in one second assuming that 30% of the radiation is reflected? Please provide the equations you are using to arrive at your answer.
Guys…do you see how strange this is? Do you see, guys…do you not see here the empirical demonstration of what I’ve written about in my book!!!???
Z, do you not see what is happening here? Boomie? CD? It’s the forum, guys!
Tom: “Well, I don’t understand how you can be so confused by something so simple.”
I didn’t display confusion. I explained agreement in what the ratio of area is between a sphere and disk, and the equations for them.
I also attached the diagram. Here, I’ll do it again:
“Let’s see if we can find agreement.”
We did have agreement. It’s pretending otherwise, for OID! lol! I mean guys…you see the demonstration of my book here!!??
“How much energy do you think the Earth absorbs from the sun in one second assuming that 30% of the radiation is reflected? Please provide the equations you are using to arrive at your answer.”
I already did. See above, in the diagram.
Guys…this computer program is glitching out!
So if we agree on the amount of radiation absorbed from the sun per second then what is your problem? The Earth receives solar radiation on one hemisphere and emits from around the entire sphere. This is not news to climate science.
“So if we agree on the amount of radiation absorbed from the sun per second then what is your problem? The Earth receives solar radiation on one hemisphere and emits from around the entire sphere. This is not news to climate science.”
haha. OID.
At this point it is clear that “Tom” is “Alex” and is likely this computer program NPC or forum. BLOCKED. lol
Guys, you just got to witness empirical evidence for the phenomenon discussed here many times and explained in my book.
CD invited a rando from the internet who CD thought was a unique novel person who would have something relevant to say. Instead, we just saw a complete repetition of what has already been gone over, examples of OID, etc.
Unless this is CD himself doing this, to create appearance, than what we have witnessed is the Forum in action.
Interesting. You are losing the argument and so you bow out. Typical.
[JP: Notice how this entity will not address flat Earth averaging, and cold sunshine, but has went straight to the parallel plates BS.
If the parallel plates worked as they desire, then greenhouses would demonstrate the backradiation greenhouse effect. They do not. QED
CD this better not be you fucking with me…lol]
I have addressed the average solar radiation. I don’t understand what your problem with it is. You seem to agree that the amount of radiation that the Earth receives per second is ~240 W/m^2 times the full surface area of the Earth, or if you like ~480 W/m^2 times the surface area of the hemisphere, or 960 W/m^2 times the area of a great circle. We agree on all of those numbers. So what is your point?
[JP: This is the point, as has already been presented several times now:
By Tom/Alex…time for auto-trash again.
]
Postma is presenting an energy budget for Earth’s climate that is actually applicable to reality. We completely understand the neat geometry tricks and averages, that doesn’t mean those are actually applicable to a real time model.
The alarmist model uses those low averaged solar inputs like 240W/m^2(-18C) in order to invent the “Greenhouse effect” to regulate “Greenhouse gasses”. The alarmist model does not have the sun generating the climate.
Postma simply uses a real time model with sunlight as it actually falls on the earth, showing that there is no “Greenhouse effect” needed. In Postma’s energy budget, all the energy needed for the climate comes from the sun.
Sent this out today to a whack of work-related acquaintances:
Dear Colleague,
Please pick up and read my new book!
Planet Wars
‘How an Investigation into the Intellectual and Philosophical Fraud of Climate Science and Peer Review Uncovered a Plot to Create a Final Extinction Level Event to End All Life on Earth’
Most of you I know from astronomy, and peer-review in STEM isn’t really an issue at all. But you must agree that if peer-review has downstream political and financial consequences, and also benefits, then conflict of interest most certainly will creep in.
The book details the most sophisticated concepts in mathematics, philosophy, science, and spiritualism which you will ever find combined into a single work of non-fiction. The book details precisely how modern science has found itself in such an illogical state as to declare the molecule which creates all life a “pollutant”. We’ve been being set up for this result for over a century, and possibly much longer. The human mind is young, frail, and easy to manipulate, and I demonstrate how this manipulation has been accomplished with regards to climate science.
“Humanity is facing a planetary-level-threat which seeks to end all life on Earth. This threat is vectored through our scientific, political, and media apparatuses, using means of a technological nature far beyond human comprehension. The plot has been found out, but we’re not sure if we will be successful in stopping it. This sounds like science fiction, but it is real, and it is happening.”
There are alternative sciences which “monied interests” have no interest in seeing the light of day, and yes, this certainly can effect the sciences. Another example is pharmaceutical corporations guaranteeing themselves billions in profits by buying off government positions, when alternative science and treatments and methods of health are readily available but suffer from lack of profitability, and also lack of awareness among the general public. The history of “health care” is itself a fascinating area of study, and what we have now is not the only system that works, or which can be, just like how climate science is conducted.
Enjoy! Hope you like the book! I guarantee you will find it a fascinating read. Within the book are the answers to Max Tegmark and his “mathematical universe” hypothesis, the question of “why there is something rather than nothing”, how ultimate knowledge of existence is to be attained, and how and why human reason can err and how this can be engineered and manipulated.
You may read the book as fiction if you like and enjoy it in this way, but everything in the book is quite factually my findings and my experience, and I fully believe in the reality of what is presented, because of the empirical and theoretical evidence for it.
I do get “excited” a few times in the book, and so please excuse the passion displayed, and appreciate it in the context of the storyline. You all know me as quite mild-mannered in “persona” life, and so writing becomes an outlet for the “shadow” of frustration.
Best regards!
Joe
Joe,
Will there be an Audible version of the book?
TS
Joe,
Not me. Been dealing with a flooded basement at 1AM,
Tom,
It is well known the divide by 4 was meant for the exhaust and used exclusively for that purpose until someone got cute with manipulating climate science.
I don’t think it’s Tom I think Alex saw I invited Tom and used it to sneak in here again. BUT Tom speaks German and Alex is not native American speaking.
This is Tom
https://www.tomplesier.com/
Thanks for the detailed answers Joe. I have created a document as an addendum to your book. I will create a pdf from it as a hard record of your answers as extra input. I will keep it with the book.
Kleck talks about the self existent Jehovah. That would make sense from the structured nothing concept that you discuss.
Alpha and Omega as Christ calls himself. All and nothing. Beginning and end. The internal phenomenon would be the Christ Consciousness- netting to nothing.
The point moving about the circle is the sine wave, the sinusoid.
Question: As the sine wave is 2d, would the sine wave actually be a spiral in 3d and upward dimensions? i.e in the spacetime domain?
Like In Lol KKK diagrams?
I like the De Broglie idea of the dot leading the wave it makes sense logically to me.
Joe do you still have access to this “One”? you said “One can tell you your numerical frequency” , would that be a input to a possible soul camera application (Like Kirlian photography) to determine the age or experience of the soul, its qualities ( i.e light or dark) etc.
Hockney never did get around to producing a book about the soul camera did he?
I am currently studying and experimenting with subtle energy fields, scalar energy,
zero point energy, the quantum field, spooky at distance effect, radionics, supersensonics, both on a scientific and spiritual level and all this overlaps, so thanks for the input.
Cheers Z
“Will there be an Audible version of the book?”
I haven’t looked into this. I don’t know how it is created…do I narrate it myself?? That would be fun! I’ll see if Amazon KDP has any info, etc.
@Z – yes a spiral I think, and the diagrams you posted are how the sinusoid is created. Motion about a circle creates a wave.
No, no soul camera book.
re audiobooks. I got an email yesterday from an ebook provider I subscribe to. It gave me this link
to listen to your ebooks in audio
http://www.hyperionics.com/
I did a quick test with some pdf ebooks and it works ok. Its not perfect, and if there are any anomalies in the writing it will sound weird. It can also be used on a computer if you download an android converter like Bluestacks.
But yes Joe for a professional version you or someone would have to use your voice I think.
Sorry I think the link I provided is the wrong one. You need to add @Voice Aloud Reader from here to your browser either google or fire fox:
http://www.hyperionics.com/atVoice/index.asp
One of the problems I have with Amazon Kindle ebooks is the DRM (Digital rights management)
which prohibits you from converting it to other formats like pdf etc.
I use Calibre Ebook manager to convert ebook formats:
https://calibre-ebook.com/
It is also a reader of all different formats. However Kindle mobi files are locked (DRM), which pisses me off as I have purchased the book, and should be able to view it in any format I desire.
CD that picture of “Tom” from his website is very very very familiar. I can’t quite put my finger on where i have seen it before. It’s not “him” that I recognise as such, as I have never heard of him and don’t follow any other discussions other than here on Joe’s site, but it’s the photo, and I have definitely seen it before….definitely. His demeanor stuck out. Something about it. He could be a stooge. A bot? As for Alex. Hey man don’t fucking judge me. I trust Joe. Don’t come here attacking those of us who are learning and discussing things your small mind will NEVER EVER comprehend. Or maybe you don’t have a mind. LOLOL
Soldier Of Fortune
Snowy White
NOTE: Snowy was my first pet Mouse. His spirit, the animal spirit has become
my friend Jonathan the Seagull… the animal totums are everywhere. My friends Stanley
the CATS they ARE with me forever. Stan I miss you! Thankyou animal soul. Respect. Love.
Soldier of fortune, standing on the hillside
His horse was resting by the willow tree
But the forces of evil were gathering in the mountains
While the village bathed in the midday sun
The old men bent their backs to their labour
The young maidens’ laughter trickled down from the hills
Then he rode on his horse
Past the fields of destruction
He could hear the music from the land of the free
And he tried not to look at the towers on the hillside
Standing dark against the sunrise
He finally came to the gates of a castle
Where the bells started ringing and the peacocks displayed
Ladies-in-waiting wiped the dust from his body
That night he dreamed of a girl who was waiting
Alone in the darkness for her soldier of fortune
While he was sleeping his sword was blessed by a wandering angel
She kissed him so sweetly he thought he was dreaming
But his mind was clear and his soul was free
And the flags waved bravely as they marched into battle
When he reached the sea a ship was waiting
The clouds were low and the guards were sleeping
On the further shore his girl was waving
And his hounds came running to guide him home
Soldier of fortune, standing on the hillside
Joe Postma wrote:
“I don’t know how it is created…do I narrate it myself??”
Text-to-speech software, programmable so you can edit the bits where you have printed equations to give better audible explanations of the equations.
Some years ago a friend of mine was studying Philosophy and Psychology at University.
Part of her core reading list was a book by the author Robert H Thouless and called
“Straight and Crooked Thinking”.
It was originally published in 1930 and has had several re-publishings. I think
it is out of copyright as it available free online, with slight modifications.
I read the 1974 version.
It is still relevant today, and may be useful to all you guys debating away against twisted
and sophistical language.
Here is a link to the book online:
https://www.lutheranlibrary.org/pdf/000-thouless-straight-and-crooked-thinking.(pdf)
Please remove brackets to access document.
Cheers Z
Zelator
His Twitter account has an older version of him on his profile.
If the 99% Twitter bot hypothesis is correct…
Twitter has 330 million “active” users a month, then only 3,300,000 are human.
Rumor has it Musk donated to the Convoy under a dummy organization.
Joe,
I’m debating the “real” Tom on Twitter, you should visit if you got time.
At the moment I can’t.
So in Alex’s algebra, how under the laws of thermodynamics, is he getting 185 Kelvin with 2 plates? He can’t it’s impossible.
He claims it’s in steady state but not in TE.
Oh are you doing the TTS right now? My bad.
You know I found a chart from 2003 where NASA had the solar constant at almost 1370 I haven’t looked into it in detail, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the reduction in the solar constant matched the “alleged” greenhouse effect “flux increase” they took out of the Sun’s flux over the years.
https://science.nasa.gov/files/science-pink/s3fs-public/styles/large/public/mnt/medialibrary/2003/01/15/17jan_solcon_resources/lede2_med.jpg?itok=uaFhD6BK
“The intensity of the Sun varies along with the 11-year sunspot cycle. When sunspots are numerous the solar constant is high (about 1367 W/m2); when sunspots are scarce the value is low (about 1365 W/m2). Eleven years isn’t the only “beat,” however. The solar constant can fluctuate by ~0.1% over days and weeks as sunspots grow and dissipate. The solar constant also drifts by 0.2% to 0.6% over many centuries, according to scientists who study tree rings.”
NASA;
2003 the solar constant was 1367.5
2020 version of 2003 is under 1361.
I’m going to bed but…
Tom/Alex/Alex/Tom claimed the equation is based on enthalpy:
Try Enthalpy.
It’s an open system steady state.
dQ + dW = H_outdn_out – H_indn_in
So I said,
You still can’t provide the justification for the work.
H=U+PV
Q=DU+PDV
If Q=DH
What state variable changed to justify the increase in Q to plate 1 that is based on W from plate 2 keeping in mind that W must be based on the Q provided by a state variable change to provide the W.
The constantly changing equation.
Good one CD. It’s just making stuff up.Theres heat from one object upon, and there’s emission. No work of course! That’s the only way to solve this with the actual First Law.
A 92 bar atmosphere is like living approximately 3,077.97 feet under the ocean.
=938.16 meters
=1025.99 yards
=0.9 km
=0.58 miles
Tom/Alex is really butt hurt over you guess you mussed up his AI? 😂 He said something about you being “skipped over” for a PhD. Like he even knows anything about you.
https://notrickszone.com/2022/02/20/marshall-islands-growing-not-shrinking-world-banks-embarrassing-error-in-alarmist-2021-report/
“Last October, just before Glasgow Climate Conference, the World Bank issued a report with a dire warning for the Marshall Islands. It claimed: “Rising sea levels in the atoll nation of Marshall Islands are projected to endanger 40 percent of existing buildings in the capital, Majuro, with 96 percent of the city at risk of frequent flooding induced by climate change.”
The startling claims were based on “new visual models” and that the rising sea levels were due to co2-induced warming.
But now we learn that the model inputs were garbage, and so the model outputs were garbage as well. Nothing of the sort is going to happen to the Marshall Islands anytime soon.
Analysis shows 4% growth from 1945 to 2010!”
Interesting find Boomie,
How did you come across it.
Reddit. R/climateskeptics. I’m banned but still subscribed.
Reason I made R/RealClimateSkeptics
Heat is a form of work
Heat does work on less heated objects
Cant do heat work on hotter objects, just like you can’t push a very heavy object to get friction without enough strength
Now Eli Rabbet is commenting to me over on Twitter. Guess I woke all the bots up.
Imagine a large steel shipping container and 1 person trying to push it.
The person does work but the shipping container won’t move
Same with cold backradiation, there is cold back radiation but it doesn’t work.effectively to raise temperature
Good one MP, all that energy / futile force has to go somewhere, obviously it transfers to the ground where the resistance is.
Where the friction is, sit the container on 100s of steel balls and one man could move it i reckon.
This boy above is a 2nd generation post normal physics kid, remember the first generation Joe was about the same time i started talking with you, about 15 years ago so the 1st generation were schooled 20 years ago.
i only noticed you thru the forum wars back then, then it was the tree house kids from unskeptical science going around causing mayhem every where, they were mainly teenagers early 20’s and that.
@ ashemann
What you claim with your climate science is that the weak counter forces act as strong as an actual force that is greater
You claim a 1 on 1 counter acting relation, in your climate science math
While a storm can blow down a tree, but a million people breathing hard against a tree can’t. And a million people breathing hard can’t create a storm
You have lost me MP, i have no idea what you are talking about in those first 2 sentences, but if you have mistaken me for a back heating flat earth believer you couldn’t be more wrong.
My personal belief is that the aussie guy folly has the only equations that matter.
Pressure and the ideal gas law is all that is needed to calculated the global surface temperatures.
By the boy above i was referring to the latest troll, TOM..
Have a nice day son.
This Frolly.
So for two days straight…
Trolls:
“All universities agree man is the cause for global warming.”
Me:
“So prove the science.”
Them:
“All institutions agree man is the cause for global warming.”
Me:
“Fine. Prove the science.”
Them:
“Show one university that disagrees that man is the cause for global warming.”
Me:
“Don’t hide behind opinions, SHOW THE SCIENCE.”
Them:
“All universities agree man is the cause for global warming.”
😂😒😜😁😃🤣😆😂
I like this guy, Dr Pat (Paleoclimatologist)
“Let’s see your empirical evidence, which is the scientific standard, directly linking CO2 to global climate change. If there’s so much of it you can show me tons. Hint: Empirical is directly measured, repeatable, verifiable evidence. Consensus and polling of scientists are not.”
Anyone else know of this?
https://truthsocial.com/
@CD Marshal
Their TOS just goes to a 404 lol
Yeah, I heard (?) that it keeps crashing because so many are going on it. Now that might be true or a stunt to “get” more people to go on it. It is used I do know that much, but always wary of these things until I get confirmation.
If it keeps crashing though kind of kills the usefulness of it.
So this link here from @Alan is interesting.
“As an illustration of the huge impact of the oceans, we should consider that Earth’s oceans contain more thermal energy than exists on the surface and in the atmosphere of Venus, where the temperature is 464°C or 867°F. In fact, Earth’s oceans contain four times more thermal energy than the atmosphere of Venus, yet the oceans have an average temperature of less than 5°C.”
The last one has been disproved so much they came up with another one,
https://phys.org/news/2021-03-humans-earth-energy.html#:~:text=Now%2C%20a%20NASA%20study%20has%20confirmed%20these%20predictions,25%2C%202021%2C%20in%20the%20journal%20Geophysical%20Research%20Letters.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2020GL091585
March 25th 2021
In case you missed this about AMS your favorite org
Joe,
So Tom Plesier still refuses to debate you on Zoom but claims he’s had 7 years of thermodynamics education and he is still claiming you are not a scientist. What a weird dude.
These people are all extremely fake. The fakeness arises out of a need to defend their cognitive dissonance, which of course defines them. They must maintain their cognitive dissonance at all times. This is why you cannot simply present to them a flat Earth vs. a round Earth and ask them to choose – they simply CANNOT do it…they really cannot. It is astounding to witness. They will change the subject and never admit that flat Earth theory can only create pseudoscience.
As they fight a rearguard action for their faith, some will wonder at their own inability to reconcile the facts with it. They will sit back and come to the realisation that they can’t. Others are too ideologically blinkered to change their minds.
The Peer Review plea
Tom Plesier
@TomPlesier
27m
He has never authored or co authored anything on planetary atmospheres, let alone our atmosphere…
Defense mechanism. I’m published
in astrophysics oh but that’s not good enough lol….peer review and specialization is just a defense mechanism.
They have a perfect set up. Anything that does get through the gatekeepers and published is immediately discredited. No open debates. No opposition allowed in climate conferences. No funding if you don’t follow the rules.
But the science is settled.
Yes exactly that.
CD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-normal_science
This is why micky mann proudly announced climastrology as a stand alone post normal science
back in 96 or 98 i can’t remember now exactly, when it broke away from meteorology.
Up until then climatologist’s were the equivalent of Al bundy in the shoe department of science.
The link above explains all what you are seeing now with peer review etc..
Delete my first post will you Joe please.
CD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-normal_science
This is why micky mann proudly announced climastrology as a stand alone post normal science
back in 96 or 98 i can’t remember now exactly, when it broke away from meteorology.
Up until then climatologist’s were the equivalent of Al bundy in the shoe department of science.
The link above explains all what you are seeing now with peer review etc..
And ps i’m on another 7 day holiday with twitter, apparantly telling Gerald Kutney that i hoped he was 14th up on the scaffolds for his contribution to all the 1000s of death from fuel poverty was bullying poor Gerald who was bragging about being the 14th most influential climate change propagandist on twitter,
LOL Tom just said you don’t understand thermodynamics what a putz lol
TOM:
No, what Postma want to do is know the “state” of the atmosphere at a given point in time. And then use that to let ppl believe global warming is driven by the sun. No. Climate models want the state of the atmosphere in X amount of time. Big difference.
ME:
No dumbass Postma is showing how climate is created in real time by the Sun. Cluless.
TOM
No he is not. He thinks he does, but then there is that fundamental thermodynamic problem he stumbles upon.
ME
Which he clearly understand better than you which is why you are avoiding debating him
TOM
Shows flat earth E budget and claims you violate Kirchoff’s law. Which they love using that as the holy grail.
They have no clue. And that’s their defensive position.
If I’m remembering this correctly, if you apply KIrchhoffs law to the entire planet it works out perfectly. However, they are applying it in some convoluted form to justify the GHGE.
Yes…they do it as simply as equating output to input as if they occur over equal surface area.
This is Postma’s model. The absorbtivity does not equal emmisivity. Violation of Kirckoff’s Law.
Postma also claims the planet does not radiate just up and down. But in 3D, thus the GHE is wrong because of this mathematical error.
The greenhouse theory states isotropic radiation. Thus in all directions. Thus not wrong, not just up and down.
Not sur ehow to post this?
Well best I could do.
Cheers
What a FN asinine statement. That’s not my model…that’s the standard GHE model. Talk about misrepresentation!
This is Postma’s model.
Indeed
He’s seen your model, the dude lies.
Swear it’s computer programs inside people. His stupid comment about the missing ‘f’ is IDENTICAL to how SKS attempted to attack me… Big fn deal…I didn’t put an ‘f’ in that diagram when I copied it from Harvard University. So then they focus on that and go on about emissivity, when that’s not the fn point at all. Retards. I didn’t create a new flat Earth model identical to Harvard University but now I leave out an ‘f’ emissivity factor as if that is what I’m talking about…but they focus on that and then entirely ignore the model I actually produced in comparison to the standard “Harvard Model”. Anyway they’re so obviously in their scheme to maintain the lie.
I have no idea where he would have gotten it…perhaps from SKS. I could ask them to update it, but I don’t care.
What I actually like is that it shows how fn retarded they are. They pretend that my “new model” is the exact same thing as the Harvard Model, but I leave out an ‘f’. Fuck them and their retardation.
Improving your model is part of the process, even small tweaks.
You’re not following. it’s NOT my model they’re referencing…it is a copy of the Harvard flat Earth model which I had put into some paper once, in which there is an ‘f’ missing. So no big deal.
Boomie posted my model…spherical.
I get you.
He keeps wanting me to do these stupid equations.
Pʳᵃᵈ = Aʳᵃᵈ εσT⁴
So I said why bother Dr. Holmes already showed the right equation to calculate the Earth’s T?
Te=T4 0.523 x Tv
They really seem like chatterbots programmed to permute through scientific lingo while never saying a thing and making a relevant point.
It is weird “Alex” wanted me to do equations too.
So I asked Professor Merrifield what he thought of the Green Plate equation.
“Looks like a fairly standard radiation transfer calculation. Not sure what they mean by “green plates” though — they seem to be black bodies.”
That’s it said nothing else.
I am confident he never read your book. I’m guessing he got that from Skeptical Science.
Tom Plesier
@TomPlesier
Replying to
@MarshallCd
@Alex98465713
and 5 others
I know. That’s what the equations are for… It’s really hard to explain those equations on twitter. I believe Postma has them in his book (he should actually). His book is something you can use for educational purposes tho, yet there are some errors that compromises the outcome.
The Earth is not in a steady state is it? The entire system is not receiving a balance of energy. Thus can you really apply Kirchhoff’s law to the system? Or is it just applicable for air parcels and atmospheric blobs in relative LTE?
The first and second laws are suppose to be the control for the other laws when used.
1st Law of Thermodynamics
The First Law of Thermodynamics simply states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed (conservation of energy). Thus power generation processes and energy sources actually involve conversion of energy from one form to another, rather than creation of energy from nothing. The change in eternal energy of a system is equal to the heat added to the system minus the work done by the system.
The first law seems pretty simple and forward. The second is a little more complex.
2nd Law of Thermodynamics: Entropy and Disorder
<100% energy cannot be transformed to work
<Entropy can be produced but never destroyed
Kelvin & Planck
“No (heat) engine whose working fluid undergoes a cycle can absorb heat from a single reservoir, deliver an equivalent amount of work, and deliver no other effect”
Kelvin Postulate
“It is impossible to construct an engine which transforms heat into work without surrendering some heat to a source at a lower temperature.” -…Atmospheric Thermodynamics, A. Tsonis
Clausius
“No machine whose working fluid undergoes a cycle can absorb heat from one system, reject heat to another system and produce no other effect”
Both statements of the Second Law constrain the First Law of Thermodynamics by identifying that energy goes downhill.
The Second Law is concerned with Entropy (S) which is produced by all processes and associated with the loss of ability to do work. The Second Law states that the entropy of the universe increases. For energy to be available there must be a region with high energy level and a region with low energy level. Useful work must be derived from the energy that flows from the high level to the low level.
So Tom won’t debate you openly I think because he is depending on his troll pals to jump in, I doubt he is capable of an honest discussion. I think Nepal could openly debate him and win at this point. That’s a complement Nepal, not an insult if you really are 16.
If the chapter on peer review in my new book doesn’t prove coordinated pseudoscience defense, then nothing does. But it does.
Coordinated idiocy anyway.
Tom’s 100% narrative charged web site:
Welcome!
In a digital world communication is of importance. Often scientific topics are hard to comprehend due to terminology. My goal is to spread science in an easy understanding way for everyone. In this way, we can as a community tackle #fakenews and teach the wide public. STEM education is of utmost importance in a rapid changing technological world. Our generation is obligated with the task to tackle issues like climate change.
On my website, I’ll provide blogs about scientific topic’s and write about my experiences with pseudo-science spreaders on social media.
All content is reviewed within my inner circle of contacts with experience in the field, however there are no spelling and language checks, I apologize for this inconvenience.
I hope that you enjoy my writings and learn from them!
Retarded
Gates just said another Virus is coming. HIV? He is mocking these idiots.
https://www.ibtimes.com/bill-gates-covids-threat-may-have-passed-another-pandemic-imminent-3406385
“Water vapor is a condensing gas. You can’t increase atmospheric water vapor content without warming the atmosphere beforehand. That’s why its greenhouse effect is strictly a feedback mechanism.”
WT???🤷♂️🤦♂️
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/climatesciencenarratives/its-water-vapor-not-the-co2.html
Hockey Stick to the Head
Professor Richard Muller was on the council that reviewed Mann’s MWP and basically Mann lied through is teeth about his work being validated. They did not validate his version of the MWP. Complete lie.
So-called greenhouse gases have always been known as either condensing gases or optically active gases.
Greenhouse effect and greenhouse gas are political misnomers.
Yes but I believe they are claiming that ncghgs are responsible for wv getting in the atmosphere. It is absolutely ridiculous claiming the atmosphere cannot warm up without ghgs and this is not the first time I’ve heard of this. They have claimed because of the ignorantly proclaimed -18C solar insolation, that ghgs warm up the atmosphere and the surface to allow the latent heat of evaporation process to proceed. Thus they claim that ghgs are the only means of reversing the “snowball Earth”.
Tom Plesier wrote:
“This is Postma’s model. The absorptivity does not equal emmisivity. Violation of Kirchoff’s Law.”
Notwithstanding the spelling errors denoting that Mr. Plesier isn’t even familiar enough with the topic to spell ’emissivity’ or ‘Kirchhoff’ correctly, he’s wrong in that it’s not “emissivity must always equal absorptivity” and he’s wrong in that emissive power doesn’t always have to equal absorptivity.
As Kirchhoff originally wrote:
“The ratio between the emissive power and the absorptive power is the same for all bodies at the same temperature.”
Where Kirchhoff refers to “absorptive power”, he means absorptivity. He correctly refers to “emissive power”, though.
Click to access 1502.0007v2.pdf
“Though Kirchhoff speaks of absorptive power, A, he was actually referring to the unitless absorptivity, αν. Conversely, when referring to emissive power, E, he was, in fact, referring to this quantity, even in modern terms. That is, Kirchhoff’s “E” has the same units as his “e” and neither is equal to 1.”
Kirchhoff’s law is a ratio, not an equivalency.
E/A = e. Not E=A.
In modern parlance:
Eν/αν= f(T, ν)
In other words, the ratio between emissive power and absorptivity is equal to specific intensity.
At equilibrium, the emissive power is always equal to absorptivity, which is why the object doesn’t change temperature. It’s reached equilibrium with its ambient. At equilibrium with the ambient they are equal because both absorption and emission are zero.
In fact, it’s a law… Stewart’s Law of Equivalence. Kirchhoff didn’t originate it, and in fact formulated Kirchhoff’s Law without giving Balfour Stewart credit for the Law of Equivalence, which Stewart had conceived of a full two years before Kirchhoff. Kirchhoff didn’t do any empirical experimentation to derive Kirchhoff’s Law, it was gedanken all the way. In fact, Kirchhoff’s Law has largely been invalidated, and only Stewart’s Law is correct. There is no proper mathematical proof of Kirchhoff’s Law to date. In fact, Planck’s equation (derived from Kirchhoff’s Law) is the only fundamental equation in physics today which has yet to be linked to physical reality… and given that Kirchhoff’s Law has largely been invalidated, it will remain so.
If emissive power always equaled absorptivity, an object could never change temperature. Think about it.
Carnot erred in assuming that heat is never consumed as work; Clausius in his first memoir erred in attributing ‘heat’ to the energy density of an object (‘heat’ is definitionally an energy flux, ‘temperature’ is a measure of energy density); Kirchhoff in formulating his original version of Kirchhoff’s Law used the term ’absorptive power’ when he actually meant ’absorptivity’; and Planck erred in not validating Kirchhoff’s Law (from which he derived his equation) and clinging to a long-debunked radiative model (Prevost Theory of Exchanges and Prevost’s Principle), and his follow-on assumptions stemming from that led to his treating real-world (graybody) objects as though they radiatively emit willy-nilly without regard to the energy density gradient.
It is these errors that the climate loons cling to in order to shill for their incorrect take on reality in furtherance of the CAGW scam.
But “the science is settled”, right? LOL
I understand your reluctance to be on Twitter, but wow you could really hammer these morons. I’d assume they would block you {eventually}.
I’ve been trying to figure out KIrcchoff’s Law for 2 years, under the “current law” or however it is properly phrased it seems that was KL original intention which works with or against Ohm’s Law?
Used in climate science it seems to make no logical sense. KL would (it seems) only apply to a steady state in TE. Where is that on planet Earth in atmospheric dynamics? Then again “climate experts” keep saying heat is blocked from leaving the planet.
Feel free to use anything I write however you like. That goes for everyone. I’m not looking for recognition, I’m looking to slide a shiv into the heart of CAGW before it destroys our way of life… which is what it’s designed to do.
Yes, Kirchhoff’s Law only applies at thermodynamic equilibrium, and only because at that state at which the object has attained equilibrium with its ambient, the object neither absorbs nor emits photons. This is the quiescent state, the steady state, the equilibrium state, whatever you want to call it. The object cannot absorb nor emit, there is no energy gradient to act as the impetus for generation of photons in the case of emission, and there are no lower energy states available for absorption to occur. As stated above, Kirchhoff’s Law is a ratio, at thermodynamic equilibrium it is the crossing (at the zero point) of emission and absorption.
If you doubt that CAGW is designed to destroy our way of life…
The birth of the modern organized religion of CAGW:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” – “The First Global Revolution” (1991, p. 104) published by the “Club of Rome”, originally the Morgenthau Group, a Malthusian group dedicated to creating a Marxist “New World Order” government and drastically cutting world population. In 2000, they released “Global 2000: Blueprint for Genocide”, their blueprint for committing genocide on 2 billion people. And that was just the start of their agenda. They would have to commit genocide on an additional 5.3 billion to meet their goals. These are the people you’re siding with, snowflakes. You think you’re going to be one of the few who are spared? You’re what’s known in socialist parlance as “useful idiots”. Should they gain power, they’ll get rid of you first… they always do… they don’t want people who riot at the drop of a hat, they don’t want political activists, they want sheeple who quietly do what they’re told. They’re using you to gain power, and once they gain power, you’re no longer useful to them, you’re a threat to their dominance.
“The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all. Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.” – Saikat Chakrabarti, 10 July 2019; Chakrabarti is Socialist Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) Chief of Staff
“For present-day Earth, the only important continuum is the water vapor continuum in the window around 1000 cm-1. Carbon dioxide continua are unimportant for conditions which have prevailed on Earth during the past several billion years, but they are important for plugging the gaps in the line spectra for the dense CO2 atmospheres of Venus and early Mars. Diatomic homoatomic molecules like N2, which are transparent to IR in Earthlike conditions, have collisional continua that become important in cold, dense atmospheres. For example, the continuum makes N2 one of the most important greenhouse gases on Saturn’s largest moon, Titan.” – Infrared Radiation And Planetary Temperature, Raymond T. Pierrehumbert (Louis Block Professor in Geophysical Sciences at University of Chicago), Physics Today, January 2011, p. 35 (https://web.archive.org/web/20190613031107/http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/PhysTodayRT2011.pdf)
“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society. This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking Agenda 21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” – J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN, founder of the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP)
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN, founder of the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP)
“…one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.” – Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC official, 2010
“Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” – From the 1976 UN Habitat I Conference report
“So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.” – Stephen Schneider, lead author of IPCC reports, in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989
“None of the models used by the IPCC are initialized to the observed state and none of the climate states in the models correspond even remotely to the current observed state.” – Kevin Trenberth, via email (ClimateGate), lead author of IPCC reports
“CA are lookign [SIC] for someone to say more extreme events likely in future due to global warming at lanuch [SIC] of new campaign. I’ve said I won’t do it but did say I’d ask around. Frankly, I’d advise against as the impression I have is that this really does amount to ‘rent a quote’. I’m not into peddling doom and gloom anyway. Oh, date is May 15th. Let me know asap if you are interested as they are getting desparate. Mick” – Mick Kelly, University of East Anglia, May 2000, stating that California climate alarmist politicians are “getting desperate” to find someone, anyone who can ‘rent a quote’-provide a trumped-up claim that extreme climactic events are becoming more likely.
“…dear TC colleagues looks like BP have their cheque books out! How can TC benefit from this largesse?” – Simon Shackley (Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research) to Mike Hulme, via email (ClimateGate), money grubbing climate alarmists discuss how to capitalize upon BP’s largesse.
“Tim, Chris, I hope you’re not right about the lack of warming lasting till about 2020.” – Phil Jones, via email (ClimateGate), 2009
If warming really threatens to destroy human civilization, why was Jones hoping for warming?
If the world was still warming in 2009, why did Jones refer to “lack of warming lasting until 2020”?
That’s because ‘warming’ only exists in the computer climate models, and in the climate data manipulated to show a warming trend rather than a cooling trend.
“I would just suggest, as a backup to your prediction, that you also do some checking on the sulfate issue, just so you might have a quantified explanation in case the prediction is wrong. Otherwise, the Skeptics will be all over us – the world is really cooling, the models are no good, etc. And all this just as the US is about ready to get serious on the issue.” – Mike MacCracken, via email (ClimateGate), in response to Phil Jones above, CC’d to John Holdren (Obama’s chief science advisor), advising Jones to have a backup explanation (however false it may be) for why the planet is cooling rather than warming… so they knew the planet wasn’t warming, and intended to implement the climate change agenda anyway… that’s not scientific, that’s political. It was a scam from the get-go. A scam designed to subjugate you, to impoverish you, while the elitists lived luxurious lives. That’s what socialism does.
That Rob Honeyutt you are currently dealing with is one of the original skeptical science pipe pipers CD, iv’e been around the houses a few time with that wanker in the past i can tell you.
Honeycutt pied pipers, my keyboard is getting fecked.
@ashemann
Are you on Twitter? I need to know my allies. Few I have over there, @UV Meter knows some stuff, (obviously he made UV Meters and has a PhD).
@DawnTJ90 is an absolute powerhouse, they expose the hypocrisy of all these people, and they have tried to have her removed from Twitter. Hayhoe almost succeeded. Evidently quoting Hayhoe’s own words is enough to get you a suspension on Twitter. I’ve dealt with Honeycut before. Tom P. arrogant and knows enough to spin very believable deceptions. Another Tom on there is a physicist and an AGW patsy. They are all AGW patsies and most of them are making money off of it, if not all.
Strange Tom is willing to spin on Twitter but refuses to debate Joe live.
Yeah but i got a week on the naughty step for a reply i made to gerald someone who was bragging that he is the 14th most influential cc advocate on twitter, i said i hope he is the 14th up on to the gallows when it omes time to pay for all th 1000s of deaths from fuel poverty he has been a part of.
apparently i was bullying poor gerald in twitters eyes.
We follow each other on there, i’m gary ashe.
Gary ash… makes perfedt sense now.
Ah yes Gerald Kutney he’s a hypocrite, Dawn has been bashing him for a long time. He’s been fined for polluting the Ottawa River. All of these blokes are scam artists.
Anytime you need a hand hit me up, half my notifications never show up.
ACRIM shows TSI at 1367+ not the 1360.7 NASA is claiming.
This is clearly an opinion piece being passed around as science. I mean read this.
“0.53 ± 0.11 W/m2” just noise.
Observational Evidence of Increasing Global Radiative Forcing
Ryan J. Kramer, Haozhe He, Brian J. Soden, Lazaros Oreopoulos, Gunnar Myhre, Piers M. Forster, Christopher J. Smith
First published: 25 March 2021
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091585
Citations: 9
Read the full text
PDFPDF
Tools
Share
Abstract
Changes in atmospheric composition, such as increasing greenhouse gases, cause an initial radiative imbalance to the climate system, quantified as the instantaneous radiative forcing. This fundamental metric has not been directly observed globally and previous estimates have come from models. In part, this is because current space-based instruments cannot distinguish the instantaneous radiative forcing from the climate’s radiative response. We apply radiative kernels to satellite observations to disentangle these components and find all-sky instantaneous radiative forcing has increased 0.53 ± 0.11 W/m2 from 2003 to 2018, accounting for positive trends in the total planetary radiative imbalance. This increase has been due to a combination of rising concentrations of well-mixed greenhouse gases and recent reductions in aerosol emissions. These results highlight distinct fingerprints of anthropogenic activity in Earth’s changing energy budget, which we find observations can detect within 4 years.
Great video!
That’s the documentary they labelled a mockumentary, and forced the producers to say it was a mockumentary, it wasn’t they were quite serious.
I posted this on Twitter, a few older chaps on there that should relate. Excellent find.
I watched it when it was broadcast on channel 4 when 4 was edgy and new, not the woke morasse of relativism it is now
I wish the truth had taken this trash out in the beginning around 1988 when it was being pushed hard.
SIMPLE PROCESSES OF A REAL GREENHOUSE:
*Solar energy is absorbed in the greenhouse.
*The internal air of the greenhouse is warmed by the surface by way of conduction.
*That warmed air rises by way of convection but is stopped by the glass ceiling in completing its convective process that would have cooled off the greenhouse.
*That temperature at the top of the greenhouse cannot exceed either the external temperature or the internal temperature.
Which the internal temperature, in daylight, theoretically cannot exceed the solar energy available in that time and region.
The top of the greenhouse temperature can and does exceed the external temperature CD other wise it couldn’t cool.
“either” the external temperature or the internal temperature.
…Meaning can’t get hotter than. theoretically a GH can reach the temps equal to the incidence of radiation from the Sun in that area. Reason why GH in Antartica wouldn’t help much w/o assistance.
https://thesaker.is/address-by-the-president-of-the-russian-federation-february-24-2022/
Read this.
It’s time for us to also reject the globohomotrans empire completely. As Putin said, it’s contradictory to human nature…like I relate in my book.
Wuwt’s latest piece…”From a knowledge of the intensity of solar radiation received by the earth and the infra-red radiation emissions as a result of the earth’s temperature, it is widely accepted that the average earth temperature would be a chilly -18°C.”
Since when did ‘…it is widely accepted…’ constitute proof?
It IS -18C. These people have no fn clue what they’re doing.
Or they do which is even more disturbing. I’d prefer ignorance over malignant intelligence.
Earth’s entire surface emittance average is 240w/m^2, which can get a perfect blackbody up to -18C.
If you take just the sunlit hemisphere it’s 30C(480w/m^2). So the dark side must be less than 240w/m^2 average.
Then there is the actual measured average surface temperature and that is about 15C. For the whole surface, I think.
JP Yes you’re referring to the temperature half way up the atmosphere. My problem with that is the concept doesn’t seem to apply to Venus, even though its temperature at 1 bar is exactly what it should be compared to Earth’s at sea level and given its closer orbit to the sun (rendering its CO2, being 2000x Earth’s concentration, to be decidedly unwarming)
No that is all consistent. And it’s the radiative temperature measured from outside which is the effective temperature, -18C etc.
JP Mind you I’m probably missing something…
Nepal
“If emission and absorption did start to decrease to zero, the approach to equilibrium would slow down. This has never been observed.”
A temperature difference of 100C heats faster than a 10C difference…I’m pretty sure I observed this with my coffee this morning.
Ok where is Venus’s effective temperature measured from?
From space jc
I see…not some altitude somewhere clearly.
I agree all objects absorb and emit E but Kirchoff’s law is suspect when dealing with terrestrial bodies with an atmosphere.
“Used in climate science it seems to make no logical sense. KL would (it seems) only apply to a steady state in TE. Where is that on planet Earth in atmospheric dynamics?”
Tom/Alex even said a ss does not mean TE I believe that’s how he phrased it or doesn’t always mean TE. Anyway, they use KL to claim the RGHGE is valid for the surface.
Using KL for the effective blackbody temperature seems more reasonable(?). Then they are once again confusing the COE for heat when dealing with the surface and it is not in TE or a steady state.
So why is the BB temperature of the Moon higher than the Earth?
Maybe you should start a Twitch Astrophysics corner?
Lower albedo
Boomie could be your moderator.
Ah…yes.
Bond Albedo .11
Diurnal temperature range (equator): 95 K to 390 K
~ -290 F to +240 F
Celsius: -178.15 to 116.85
Wow a nomination. Why not you? You’ve been here even longer lol.
Tech stuff isn’t my jam. Well not that tech stuff anyway.
Putin — Mankind has become manipulated to become ‘unconscious’ through the use of programming by the news and media.
https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/news/putin-95-world-terrorist-attacks-are-made-cia?page=21
Wow that’s exactly one of the premises in my book.
Who would think the “Great Red Bear” would end up having more common sense than those who once promoted freedom above all.
The media deception coming out of this war is on a level that’s never been done.
Then again Putin would know brainwashing when he sees it. The Media 100% controls the narrative of this war. This guy is great…
Joe or “another person” 😂 Erik David was talking smack again so I asked him if he wanted to continue our conversation. 🤦♂️
Erik Davis
14 hours ago
@CD Marshall You mean when I took on both you and another person and I showed neither of you have even the most basic of basic understandings of the topic (even showing where your side was using patently false data/graphs, straw men versions of everything I said, and appeals to false authority)? I mean, if you really want me to show people your ignorance yet again we can, but my replies may be slower given I have far better things to do than try to teach a, frankly, highly scientifically illiterate person on the internet. If you truly want to, and to help refresh me: What were your credentials/education, and do you still hold that GHGs don’t cause an increase in average atmospheric temperature, something that flies in the face of experimental and documented evidence?
CD Marshall
46 minutes ago
@Erik Davis I see you stroke your own ego every night maybe get a girlfriend/boyfriend?
But if you seriously want to talk the science you are welcome to do so…Provided you can.
Now since I posted that here let’s see if Alex tries to infiltrate the conversation.
The endless posturing. It’s all so tiresome.
Endless, endless posturing.
Always posturing, never substantial content.
I couldn’t be plainer in my reply to this guy on Twitter.
ME:
Slowing E loss would have an effect on a closed system, a system in steady state or a system in thermodynamic equilibrium. It however has no effect to increase T on the Earth’s surface. Nowhere does this state slowed cooling=higher radioactive temperature.
P=e sigma A (t^4-T^c)
IT:
The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere give a lower effective emissivity that requires an increase of TP to about 288 K to maintain energy balance. For ΔF > 0, a positive radiative forcing, the incoming energy is higher than the outgoing. See:
https://www.pnas.org/content/111/46/16297
ME:
No, it actually doesn’t. They are measuring fluxes and claim that means something that it simply doesn’t. What forcing? The flux would have to be greater than the original ambient temperature which is 288 kelvin not 255.
Again, the troposphere/surface is not in
*radiative T lol not radioactive my eyes are getting worse
Elon Musk says Starlink is active in Ukraine amid internet disruptions
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/elon-musk-says-starlink-is-active-in-ukraine-amid-internet-disruptions
I think Putin’s intent is to annex Ukraine back into his new vision of the (new) Soviet Union with the least amount of animosity as possible to the Ukraine people. Which doesn’t make sense at all but what does in 2022?
So even now we live in a world of superstition.
From a commentor on YT…
” I remember back in the late sixties any extreme weather events happening were attributed to the activity of NASA’s launches into the atmosphere.”
So I was right the first time KIrchhoff’s Law is meant for thermal equilibrium, thus it can only be loosely applied to LTE. I wish I hadn’t of lost all my files on my PC put my physics back a year and a half. Trying to play catch up now and some of these guys slipped some physics lies on me.
Gustav Robert Kirchhoff (1824–1887) stated in 1860 that “at thermal equilibrium, the power radiated by an object must be equal to the power absorbed.” This leads to the observation that if an object absorbs 100 percent of the radiation incident upon it, it must reradiate 100 percent. As already stated, this is the definition of a blackbody radiator.
Most radiation sources are not blackbodies. Some of the energy incident upon them may be reflected or transmitted. The ratio of the radiant emittance W’ of such a source and the radiant emittance W of a blackbody at the same temperature is called the emissivity ε of the source:
With this relation, different types of radiation sources can be classified as indicated in the figure below, where the curve for the blackbody with ε = 1 is Plank’s curve. The curve for a graybody is proportional to Planck’s curve for all wavelengths. The spectral radiant emittance for a selective radiator varies not only with temperature but also with wavelength.
Someone want to explain this in plain English.
https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73
Nepal wrote:
“LolKooks, you once again misunderstanding the concept of equilibrium”
Your take on reality demonstrably violates Stefan’s Law, specifically the energy density in a cavity space at thermodynamic equilibrium is doubled under your hypothesis from what we calculate with Stefan’s Law.
“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.”
You’ll get right on detailing exactly how energy can flow against an energy density gradient for your claimed energy flow from cooler to warmer in order to make your bidirectional gross energy flow hypothesis work. Do remember that a warmer object will have higher energy density at all wavelengths than a cooler object.
α = absorbed / incident
ρ = reflected / incident
τ = transmitted / incident
α + ρ + τ = incident = 1
For opaque surfaces τ = 0 ∴ α + ρ = incident = 1
Now your task is to differentiate between reflected and emitted photons… while keeping in mind that if an object cannot absorb a photon and cannot transit a photon, it must reflect that photon.
I feel as though I’m arguing with someone who claims that water can flow uphill, and it’s the “net water flow” that determines downhill flow rate. LOL
I feel as though I’m arguing with someone who claims that electrons flow both ways for a system of two batteries, one 12 V, one 1.5 V, connected ‘+’ to ‘+’ and ‘-‘ to ‘-‘, and it’s the “net electron flow” that determines current from 12V to 1.5 V battery. LOL
Your disconnect from reality has analogies which are directly applicable, you see.
The top is how you’re doing it, you split the two objects off into separate systems so they cannot interact and you assume emission to 0 K (akin to shunting to ground), then through hand-wavium, you claim the two objects magically interact and it’s the “net” of this interaction which is the energy flow (ie: heat).
The bottom is the proper way to do it, the two objects are in the same system, they interact.
You’ll note the analogy of electrical theory to thermodynamics which I created has a precision of 3.8 parts per 100 trillion. You can go into ‘Options > Other Options’ and increase the decimal digits to prove this for yourself. I could improve the precision further, but really, what would be the point? It’s well known that electrical theory and thermodynamics are analogous.
Your mis-use of the S-B equation inflates radiant exitance far above what it actually is for all graybody objects, necessitating that you carry that error forward through your 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).
Nepal wrote:
“If emission and absorption did start to decrease to zero, the approach to equilibrium would slow down. This has never been observed.”
It’s right there in the S-B equation, FFS. Of course the approach to equilibrium slows down. Stop pulling “facts” from your coal-chute and acknowledge reality.
Nepal wrote:
“heat flow (a net quantity) goes to zero at equilibrium, but all objects still emit and absorb energy.”
The S-B equation says you’re sorely misinformed… or you can’t do simple math. You misunderstand what ‘heat’ is. It is not a “net quantity”, it is any energy flow (and energy doesn’t flow up an energy gradient unless external energy does work to push it up that gradient… 2LoT in a nutshell, which you also misunderstand). Stop pulling “facts” from your down-under and redefining definitions to fit your incorrect take on reality.
Better images:
You can run the circuit simulator for yourself here:
https://tinyurl.com/yzo8hak9
Interesting fact in the news:
Ukraine supplies 90% of U.S. semiconductor-grade neon.
Energy does move freely both ways through a system.
Heat does not, as is so often stated, heat is simply the “net energy gain” I believe is the appropriate term.
However, when dealing with photons you still have the interference factor. Phonons can merge to change energy values, not sure photons can.
I’m pretty sure Joe is not a fan of Robitaille. I agree modern physics needs challenged, but not to insert your claims “as true” which got us our modern-day version of climate science, but to test and proves things like science did in forming the foundation for thermodynamics.
Nepal wrote:
“No, this is not the case. When the enclosure contains the correct black body photon number distribution as given by Planck’s energy density, every piece of the walls emit exactly as much radiation as it absorbs.”
What is the specific mechanism for production of photons in your alternate universe? Because in the real world, it’s due to an electromagnetic field gradient.
One doesn’t have that at thermodynamic equilibrium.
Now you’ll be forced to either recant your incorrect take on reality, or to pull more “facts” from your sun-don’t-shine by claiming that an EM field gradient exists at thermodynamic equilibrium, and therefore photon production can take place.
We await with bated breath which you’ll choose. LOL
Nepal wrote:
“You need to understand the difference between heat and energy”
You need to understand that ‘heat’ is nothing more than energy in transit. It is not a ‘net flow’, it is any energy flow.
The new paradigm CD is ontological mathematics.
I’m positive this world isn’t a dream, it is most certainly a nightmare.
Joe I’d love it if you could get on Joe Rogan.
Yah sure!
Lers Email them for a show suggestion.
Nepal wrote:
“The emission of photons is not, and has never been, impeded by the presence or lack of an energy density gradient”
Bwahahaa! Then what exactly in your kooky universe is the impetus for photon generation? Do they just pop into existence for no reason?
This gets back to the question of what a photon is… which you obviously don’t have a firm grasp of.
As to your sophistry in attempting to claim that I’ve claimed that “Carnot, Clausius, and Kirchhoff were all wrong” (your words), I’ve correctly stated, backed up with actual historical proof, that Carnot, Clausius and Kirchhoff made mistakes, being human. One can look these mistakes up for themselves and determine that what I state is correct.
The Scientific Method necessitated that they correct those mistakes. The climate loons desperately use those mistakes, long since corrected, to continue to shill for CAGW. For instance, Planck using a radiative model predicated upon the long-debunked Prevost Principle in order to claim that only the internal state of an object determined that object’s radiant exitance… we know that’s not the case and that knowledge is mathematically reflected in the S-B equation:
Hence by clinging to Planck’s mistake, the climate loons claim that energy can flow willy-nilly without regard to the energy density gradient (remember that temperature is a measure of energy density), which is why they claim that a cooler atmosphere can warm an already-warmer surface… which is exactly the same sort of tripe you’re pushing.
As I said, I highly doubt you’re a 16 year old… you’re most likely ‘evenminded’ continuing your sophistic attempt at twisting science to fit your skewed take on reality in order to continue to shill for CAGW.
I removed that J C because Nepal doesn’t deserve that. I would have said the other guy is, if anyone…lol.
I would say the one thing that Geraint Hughes needs to do is hook up an IR camera to his experiments to show the E moving around w/o a T change. That would debunk all of the IR camera trick experiments.
Nepal wrote:
“If there are other photons of the right frequencies at the location of the emitter, they will stimulate it to emit even more.”
No, they’ll introduce anisotropy which can bump the quantum state energy over the threshold necessary to emit.
You seem to be hung up on stimulated emission… likely because you don’t understand that it’s all stimulated emission… as I’ve stated prior, it is the anisotropy which is required to produce emission. What we call ‘stimulated emission’ is us introducing the anisotropic perturbation which produces emission by bumping the energy state just enough that the energy differential between two states is wide enough that emission can occur, and what we call ‘spontaneous emission’ is the anisotropy of the background EM field doing the same (with the limitation that the bound electron cannot fall below the ambient energy level (unless induced to do so as in, for instance, a Casimir cavity… and even then not, we’re merely creating an artificially lower ambient energy density within the Casimir cavity… but it is below the ambient energy density which is outside the Casimir cavity).
https://casper.astro.berkeley.edu/astrobaki/index.php/Einstein_Coefficients
“What about spontaneous decay to a lower energy state? In quantum electrodynamics, there’s no such thing as a nonzero electric field – even if you’re not shining a light, the “ground state” still has a nonzero field. And it’s this field that acts as the perturbation. So, “spontaneous” decay is really not spontaneous – it’s just stimulated decay by a different electric field!”
But then, you’ve denied that the quantum vacuum EM field is anisotropic… in direct contradiction to reality. In fact, as we reduce the size of the volume looked at, the macroscopic ‘smearing out’ of quantum changes of states is reduced, and it becomes much more binary… either there is a photon (ie: an EM field) in the volume, or there is not. That’s anisotropic, right? LOL
Nepal wrote:
“My evidence is the equations written down by Einstein to describe emission. They have no dependence on energy density gradient.”
Pulling more “facts” from your fudge-factory, Nepal? LOL
In fact, Einstein’s equations (as regards the photoelectric effect) are inherently dependent upon energy density and thus energy density gradient. How else do you explain that below a certain threshold of photon energy (which depends upon the metal used), the photoelectric effect has no… erm… effect? That takes care of absorption.
As to emission, Einstein’s equations to describe emission most certainly do depend upon energy density gradient. They make certain assumptions about ambient energy density.
For instance, for emission, you’ll note that the emitted photon is exactly equal to the energy differential between the two bound electron states (ΔE = hv), and ambient is lower energy than or equal energy to the lower state of the bound electron:
But you’ll note this never happens:
… because the lower state of the bound electron is lower than ambient. The bound electron cannot fall to this state. Ambient energy prevents it. That’s the assumption in Einstein’s equations, that ambient energy is such that the bound electron can fall to a lower state.
As I’ve elucidated elsewhere, that’s also the reason why invariant-mass matter is meta-stable, why the ground-state bound electron doesn’t just ‘spiral in’ to the oppositely-charged nucleal proton(s) by emitting photons… the ground state energy density of the quantum vacuum prevents the bound electron from attaining a state in which the integer number of de Broglie waves in its orbital is so low that electron capture can occur. Under your take on reality, there’s nothing stopping the bound electron from continuing to emit photons below the ground state, successively decrementing the number of de Broglie waves in its orbital until electron capture decay (and hence transmutation) occurs. Why is invariant-mass matter meta-stable in your alternate universe? LOL
Photons are the force-carrying gauge boson of the electromagnetic interaction, produced as a result of a gradient in electromagnetic field energy density. Your claiming that photons can be produced with no energy density gradient violates conservation of energy and is tantamount to claiming that energy can flow willy-nilly without regard to energy density gradient… and that’s what the climate loons claim. No matter how you try to hide your true face, you cannot escape the fact that you’re attempting to argue for the exact thing which keeps CAGW on life-support despite it being proven to be fallacious and unscientific.
The energy density of an electric field is: U_E = 1/2 ε E^2
The energy density of a magnetic field is: U_B = 1/2 1/µ B^2
In empty space, ε = 8.854e-12 C^2 Nm-2
For a photon, given that a photon is comprised of the electric and magnetic fields oscillating in quadrature about a common axis (a circle geometrically transformed into a spiral by the photon’s movement through space-time): U = U_E + U_B = ε E^2
Now, E = hv on a per-photon basis.
Thus the number of photons per unit volume must be proportional to E^2, and the proportionality constant must depend on the frequency.
U = N hv = ε E^2
N (photons m-3) = ε E^2 / hv
You’ll note that we’ve been discussing in terms of energy per unit volume… energy density.
Energy density has the same units as pressure (force per unit area… remember that photons are the force-carrying gauge bosons of the EM interaction). Photons carry momentum, and exert pressure. Radiation pressure. It is that radiation pressure which regulates photon absorption and emission.
Now embarrass yourself by quoting the website above out-of-context in support of your insane take on reality (while conveniently side-stepping the fact that stimulated emission requires anisotropic perturbation, which you’ve denied), to wit:
“Wow! These equations are full of interesting physics. They tell us that if a particle starts off in a higher energy state, and then we shine light on it then, because the light is just an oscillating electric (and magnetic) field, the resulting perturbation to the Hamiltonian can induce the particle to fall down to the lower energy state. This is exactly the phenomenon of stimulated emission. Note also that shining light on the particle can also cause it to jump up an energy state – and the probabilities of going from the lower to the upper state and from the upper to the lower state are the same!”
… without also mentioning:
“Let’s now consider only perturbations oscillating at near the transition frequency – i.e., {w_0 ~ w}.”
I think both of you need to look at Joe’s videos again for reference. Do either of you disagree with his videos?
Did you miss it, or are you disingenuously attempting to squirm your way out of a losing argument by continually playing dumb to the point that everyone gives up on you?
Any change in energy density means an energy density gradient. Any flow of energy (‘heat’) implies an energy density gradient. This is simple thermodynamics… you can’t possibly be getting this stuff wrong unintentionally.
ΔE = hv <— that’s the energy of a photon as a direct consequence of a change in energy density.
Nepal wrote:
“Now photon emission requires radiation pressure? Okay, show me the equation that relates emission to radiation pressure.”
You can’t look this stuff up yourself, Nepal? Or are you merely making demands and playing dumb until I give up in disgust? Because I never do that. If you’re arguing just to argue, I’ll crush you, then come back to crush you a few more times just for S&Gs. LOL
This isn’t my first rodeo… I’ve already got all this written out.
Radiation energy density is proportional to T^4 and is derived via the thermodynamic relation between radiation pressure p and internal energy density u, using the electromagnetic stress–energy tensor: p = u/3, it represents the EM field contribution to the stress–energy tensor, describes the flow of energy in spacetime, and is a representation of the law of conservation of energy.
At thermodynamic equilibrium, the Helmholtz Free Energy is zero:
F = U – TS
Where:
F = Helmholtz Free Energy
U = internal energy
T = absolute temperature
S = final entropy
TS = energy the object can receive from the environment
If U > TS, F > 0… energy must flow from object to environment.
If U = TS, F = 0… no energy can flow to or from the object.
If U < TS, F < 0… energy must flow from environment to object.
If U = TS, p_photon = u/3 = p_object, energy cannot flow because no work can be done. Photon chemical potential is zero.
Let’s look at the Stefan-Boltzmann equation:
q = ε σ (T_h^4 – T_c^4) A_h
q = ε σ ((∂U/∂S)_h^4 – (∂U/∂S)_c^4) A_h
q = ((U * c/4εσ)_h – (U * c/4εσ)_c) A_h
That seems to be a straightforward connection between the energy density of the emitting particle and the energy density of the surrounding ambient, wouldn’t you say? Now again, how is energy going to flow from lower to higher energy density without external energy doing work upon the system?
P/A = ε σ T^4 = c/4 * Energy density
Energy density = 4/c σ T^4
At 303.15 K, energy density is 0.6384870391162539e-5 J/m^3.
At 287.64 K, energy density is 0.51751020211456733e-5 J/m^3.
It requires ”’energy”’ (an energy gradient) to perform ”’work”’, to provide the impetus for any action… in the case above, it would require external energy performing work upon the system to force energy to flow against an energy gradient of 0.12097683700168657e-5 J/m^3.
2LoT (in the Clausius Statement sense… “No process is possible whose sole result is the transfer of heat from a cooler to a hotter body”) states that energy cannot flow from a lower to a higher-energy region without external work being done upon the system… not via conduction, not via radiative means, not macroscopically, not at the quantum scale[1], not ever. Do keep in mind the definition of heat: “an energy flux”. Thus: “”’No process is possible whose sole result is an energy flux from a cooler to a hotter body”'” without external energy doing work upon the system.
[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/112/11/3275
Learn to read for comprehension, Nepal. LOL
Learn to look up definitions (such as Helmholtz Free Energy and photon chemical potential, perhaps) for yourself, Nepal. LOL
At thermodynamic equilibrium, the Helmholtz Free Energy is zero:
F = U – TS
Where:
F = Helmholtz Free Energy
U = internal energy
T = absolute temperature
S = final entropy
TS = energy the object can receive from the environment
If U > TS, F > 0… energy must flow from object to environment.
If U = TS, F = 0… no energy can flow to or from the object.
If U < TS, F < 0… energy must flow from environment to object.
If U = TS, p_photon = u/3 = p_object, energy cannot flow because no work can be done. Photon chemical potential is zero.
Are you confused as to what a gradient is? It’s merely a differential in the energy density.
‘evenminded’ had the same mental block about gradients. I schooled that idiot for months on the topic and he was still unable to fully grasp it. LOL
I do not “constantly interchange energy and heat”, I have repeatedly stated that ‘heat’ is nothing more than an energy flux. Your inability to grasp fundamental realities is your own problem.
I most certainly do not “interchange energy and temperature”, I specifically state that temperature is a measure of energy density, and provide the equations to prove what I state:
To wit:
“Temperature is equal to the fourth root of energy density divided by Stefan’s Constant (ie: the radiation constant).
e = T^4 a
a = 4σ/c
e = T^4 4σ/c
T = 4^√e/(4σ/c)
T^4 = e/(4σ/c)
Since we’re using the Kelvin temperature scale, which has its base at 0 K, we can calculate temperature (and thus energy density) as above. Energy density at 0 K is zero, thus temperature at zero energy density is, of course, 0 K.
q = ε σ (T^4_h – T^4_c)
∴ q = ε σ ((e_h / (4σ / c)) – (e_c / (4σ / c))) A_h
Canceling units, we get J sec-1 m-2, which is W m-2 (1 J sec-1 = 1 W).
W m-2 = W m-2 K-4 * (Δ(J m-3 / (W m-2 K-4 / m sec-1)))
∴ q = (ε c (e_h – e_c)) / 4
Canceling units, we get J sec-1 m-2, which is W m-2 (1 J sec-1 = 1 W).
W m-2 = (m sec-1 (ΔJ m-3)) / 4”
Words have meanings… meanings you appear to be utterly incapable of grasping. LOL
OK guys.
From what I can tell, the results are the same: heat from hot to cold. The argument seems to be more about the internal mechanics, which yes is important since it is (real) science, but, it’s not worth arguing endlessly about. I think at this point it’s not worth arguing anymore. So here’s the thing:
1) Always keep in mind that energy is not heat. I go into more detail on this in the new book. Heat is an action, a verb, and it is identical to work, but it is work performed at the microscopic/atomic/molecular scale, whereas work is macroscopic/bulk. Energy is a noun. And temperature is an adjective, i.e. a descriptor of a noun, describing the noun’s quality…i.e., describing the quality of the energy. Heat is a verb which modifies the quality (temperature) of the noun (energy).
So when we have the heat equation:
Qh_c = sigma (Th^4 – Tc^4)
this describes how much work can be performed, and who performs it upon who. A verb is an action performed by one object upon another; running, walking, singing, breathing, etc., can all be characterized in this way.
It is common to speak of “heat flow” and “heat transfer”, and it is also common to simply write Q with no subscripts…this is the colloquial nature of the discussion, but eventually it leads to a cognitive fog and we get lost talking about things which no longer have their absolute proper meaning.
That is: heat does not “flow”, and heat does not “transfer”; heat would have to be a noun, an object, in order to do those things. So you see how our language is already screwing things up for us.
Heat is work. Heats ACTS; it performs. And it performs or acts from one object upon another, hence why we should write Qh_c, etc.
1) Photons. The question always comes around to, in Qh_c = sigma (Th^4 – Tc^4), what are all the photons doing?
Well, the heat equation tells us what happens, what work gets performed, when there is a difference in the quality of the energy. It doesn’t tell us anything about what ALL the photons are doing. It does say, though, that the excess photons of the hotter object will perform work (heat) upon the cooler object. What about the rest of the photons? They do nothing, no work, of course, and so if they do nothing, then “nothing” for a photon is reflecting, or resonating. I think you can just leave it at that.
Joe that’s actually worth a post.
So interesting theory from Connolly & Connolly that the Chapman mechanism isn’t the only means of O3 formation that O3 could form directly from the photolysis of oxygen multimers above the tropopause.
“(O2)3 + uv light → 2O3”
So did Eunice Foote do anything special besides discover that ghgs absorb and re-radiate energy. Why is everyone getting on the Foote fetish with AGW?
Because they can pretend to be smart and “scientific” with “peer review references” while lying and saying nothing at all relevant.
You doing okay Joe? Living in Canda right now must be a nightmare. At least in the US the nightmare changes from state to state.
Things are as well as they can be. Thanks.
Joseph E Postma wrote:
“Things are as well as they can be. Thanks.”
If you need to escape the Trudeaulitarian regime in Canada, you’ve got friends who’ll put you up in the US, Joe. Just let us know. We’ll smuggle you across the border dressed as a little old lady, hide you under the floorboards and behind false walls, shuttle you surreptitiously from safe house to safe house in dead of night. LOL
Of course, you’ll have to have plastic surgery to hide your “Canadianness”. LOL
Joseph E Postma wrote:
“What about the rest of the photons? They do nothing, no work, of course, and so if they do nothing, then “nothing” for a photon is reflecting”
α = absorbed / incident
ρ = reflected / incident
τ = transited / incident
α + ρ + τ = incident = 1
For opaque surfaces τ = 0 ∴ α + ρ = incident = 1
That’s what I’ve been stating all along… a photon is either absorbed, transited (I don’t like the term ‘transmitted’… it implies the object is doing something with or to the photon… in reality, that photon passes the object by with no interaction (for 100% transparency), or with only some measure of phase shift in the bound electron and the transited photon but no energy transferred (for a gas)) or reflected. Since an opaque object cannot transit a photon, and since an opaque object with higher energy density than the photon cannot absorb the photon, it must be reflected to satisfy conservation of energy.
Now take what you’ve stated and apply it to a cavity at thermodynamic equilibrium… the walls reflect all photons, no new photons are produced, a standing wave is set up in the cavity space with equal energy density as the walls, and the nodes of the standing wave are at the cavity walls. Should one wall change temperature, the standing wave becomes a traveling wave with the group velocity proportional to the energy density (remember that temperature is a measure of energy density, equal to the fourth root of energy density divided by the radiation constant) differential.
T = 4^√e/(4σ/c)
T = 4^√(e/a)
e = T^4 4σ/c
e = T^4 a
σ = 5.670374419e−8 W m−2 K−4
a = 7.5657e-16 J m-3 K-4 = 4σ/c = 7.5657332500339284719430800357226e-16 J m-3 K-4
σ / a = 74948114.5 W J-1 m
σ / a * Δe = W m-2
Where some get confused is in measuring the flux of the warmer object… they take all photons to be emitted, but forget that one cannot discern between emitted and reflected photons.
Nepal wrote:
“That’s exactly what you do. Let me remind you from just minutes ago, when you intentionally misquoted the second law to fit your argument (sophistry). You said
“ 2LoT… states that ENERGY cannot flow from a lower to a higher-ENERGY region without external work being done upon the system””
You cannot say “heat flows”, ENERGY FLOWS. ‘Heat’ is an ENERGY FLOW. Saying “a heat flow” is like saying “an energy flow flow”.
To wit:
2LoT (in the Clausius Statement sense)… “No process is possible whose sole result is the transfer of heat from a cooler to a hotter body”) states that energy cannot flow from a lower to a higher-energy (implying a higher energy density, since a higher energy region will naturally have higher energy density) region without external work being done upon the system… not via conduction, not via radiative means, not macroscopically, not at the quantum scale[1], not ever. Do keep in mind the definition of heat: “an energy flux”. Thus: ’No process is possible whose sole result is an energy flux from a cooler to a hotter body” without external energy doing work upon the system.
[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/112/11/3275
Clausius had an excuse… he was working with new knowledge. You have no such excuse. Stop your pedantry and admit your mistakes..
Off topic…
if the planet could not emit energy to space through ghgs would the total potential energy of the atmosphere start decreasing?
I think it’d warm via conduction by contacting the surface (just as it does now), it would convect (just as it does now), but once aloft, it could no longer radiatively emit and thus could not cool.
Thus the upper atmosphere would warm, and the lapse rate would necessitate that the surface warm as well.
I wrote something about that… hold on a sec, let me find it…
2) CO2 isn’t a ‘global warming’ gas… it acts as a net atmospheric radiative coolant at all altitudes except a negligible warming at the tropopause.
That’s from an atmospheric research scientist at NASA JPL.
That’s adapted from the Clough and Iacono study, Journal Of Geophysical Research, Vol. 100, No. D8, Pages 16,519-16,535, August 20, 1995.
Note that the Clough & Iacono study is for the atmospheric radiative cooling effect, so positive numbers at right are cooling, negative numbers are warming.
Gee… adding more of the predominant upper-atmospheric radiative coolant causes more emitters per unit volume, which causes more emission per unit volume, which causes more emission to space, which causes a larger loss of energy from the system known as ‘Earth’, which causes cooling… who knew? LOL
It is the monoatomics and homonuclear diatomics which are the actual ‘greenhouse’ gases… remember that an actual greenhouse works by hindering convection.
Monoatomics (Ar) have no vibrational mode quantum states, and thus cannot emit (nor absorb) IR. Homonuclear diatomics (O2, N2) have no net magnetic dipole and thus cannot emit (nor absorb) IR unless that net-zero magnetic dipole is perturbed via collision.
In an atmosphere consisting of solely monoatomics and diatomics, the atoms / molecules could pick up energy via conduction by contacting the surface, just as the polyatomics do; they could convect just as the polyatomics do… but once in the upper atmosphere, they could not as effectively radiatively emit that energy, the upper atmosphere would warm, lending less buoyancy to convecting air, thus hindering convection… and that’s how an actual greenhouse works, by hindering convection.
The environmental lapse rate would necessitate that the surface also warms, given that the lapse rate is ‘anchored’ at TOA (that altitude at which the atmosphere effectively becomes transparent to any given wavelength of radiation).
The surface would also have to warm because that ~76.2% of energy…
… which is currently removed from the surface via convection and evaporation would have to be removed nearly solely via radiation (there would be some collisional perturbation of N2 and O2, and thus some emission in the atmosphere)…. and a higher radiant exitance implies a higher surface temperature.
The chance of any N2 or O2 molecule colliding with water vapor is ~3% on average in the troposphere, and for CO2 it’s only ~0.0415%. Logic dictates that as atmospheric concentration of CO2 increases, the likelihood of N2 or O2 colliding with it also increases, and thus increases the chance that N2 or O2 can transfer its translational and / or vibrational mode energy to the vibrational mode energy of CO2, which can then shed that energy to space via radiative emission. (And yes, t-v and v-v collisional processes do occur from N2 to CO2… if you doubt me, I can post the maths and studies which prove it.)
Thus, common sense dictates that the thermal energy of the ~95.94 – 99.74% (depending upon humidity) of the atmosphere which cannot effectively radiatively emit (N2, O2, Ar) must be transferred to the so-called ‘greenhouse gases’ (CO2 being a lesser contributor below the tropopause and the largest contributor above the tropopause, water vapor being the main contributor below the tropopause) which can radiatively emit and thus shed that energy to space.
So can anyone explain how increasing the concentration of the major radiative coolant gases (H2O, CO2) in the atmosphere (and thus increasing the likelihood that Ar, N2 and O2 will transfer their energy to those radiative coolant gases and then out to space via radiative emission) will result in more ‘heat trapping’, causing global warming? I thought not.
LOL, I agree with your comments and am amazed that Nepal just wants to argue! He doesn’t seem to grasp your points and even a layman can see that you are logical in what you state. No sense in arguing with someone that obtuse (yes, it reminds me of the clown ‘evenminded’)
BTW, I never received any more messages from you and I periodically check. I am disappointed. Oh well.
Hi Joe, now that some time has passed since you published your new book, and therefore
enough time for those early purchasers to have read it, do you have any comments you
would like to add as an addendum in any way, due to any feedback that you may have had and would like to have included in the book?
I am talking more about the esoteric side of things ( we discuss the scientific exoteric side adequately on here Climateofsophistry, but obviously any insights on that will also we welcome.
I am also aware that many people on here have little or no interest in this side of things, but that which I think is also an important part of not only your book narrative but as a premise as to where we are in this strange world we currently live in.
For example do you have any “resources” for extra information as references to some of the subject matter discussed in the book, like “One” ” Source” the clairaudient channeler etc so that we may do some more research for ourselves and discuss it further, on C of S if you would like or allow?
Also any more information on “Zeta”. I have some ideas relating to our Earth’s electromagnetic
field strength , pole shifts and how magnetism is able to affect forna over a long period of
time to produce giantism and possibly dwarfism. How a possible future human species may look etc.
Cheers Z
Immortal600:
Yeah, the remailer network has been on a downhill slope for years now, ever since Usenet started being used less in favor of website comments sections. This fractionation of the internet, the splintering of what used to be one place everyone could go to discuss topics, to a million and one website comments sections, often each with their own log-in and often no ability to aggregate the comments into one application, has its benefits and downsides, I guess. Disqus is missing out on a huge opportunity to become the new Usenet by not offering an aggregating app or program for all of the comments sections using Disqus.
I used to run a remailer… been years since I’ve done so. It’s a lot of work for those who want to censor… almost no work at all for those who keep the communications encrypted throughout and thus cannot censor. It seems most of the remailers set up since I got out of it are run by those who wish to censor. Sad. That ultimately splinters the remailer network even more as people stop using the remailers which censor, and that leaves the non-censoring remailers with fewer upstream and downstream hops to use for anonymization.
What we really need is a mesh network internet… your data gets hopped around and exits someone else’s connection at a random hop count (much like Tor, which I also used to run an exit node for)… fully encrypted, that’d make it nearly impossible for any but state-level actors (who can do packet-timing and traffic-timing attacks on the whole internet) to determine who’s doing and saying what. Splitting the packets across several hop routes (a mesh-of-mesh network internet) would make their tracking practically impossible. Random bursts of packets sent out at random times (a time-delayed mesh-of-mesh network internet), held for a random time at each hop before being released, would make their tracking impossible, but it’d increase latency, so we’d need some way of designating which packets take a direct route to the destination (for gaming, for example) and which take the time-delayed route.
That’s what we are really going to need as our governments go more totalitarian. It’s only a matter of time before our government (US government, specifically) uses even pseudonymized communications against us. They are evil, bent on attaining and retaining totalitarian power and will stop at nothing to do so.
But, we won’t get that sort of internet. What we’ll get is a bloody war against the totalitarians. While they’ll stop at nothing to attain and retain totalitarian power, we’ll stop at nothing to retain our freedoms… and it only takes a bit of lead to ensure that happens. Once they’ve attained power, they must constantly work to retain it. Once we’ve attained freedom, the totalitarians are dead. It’s easy to see who’ll win.
As to Nepal, I still suspect it’s ‘evenminded’ in a newly-washed sockpuppet, but forced to tone down his blather and play the part of a climate skeptic (while attempting to delicately twist scientific fact to fit his warmist alarmist beliefs) for fear of being found out and banned from his one millionth website. When perturbed, his tactics are identical to ‘evenminded’, as are most of his arguments, to include his dislike of physicist Dr. Charles R. Anderson, PhD. If you’ll remember, ‘evenminded’ hates Anderson because Anderson proved ‘evenminded”s blather violates Stefan’s Law… that was more than 3 years ago and ‘evenminded’ is still so butthurt about it that he obsesses over Anderson. So much so that he’s stalked Anderson, doxed him, attempted to do economic damage to his materials analysis laboratory, slandered him, etc. None of it worked, of course, because ‘evenminded’ is a lackwit idiot and a kook. LOL
Rumors are going around that the Ukraine Army are killing civilians and bombing their own to blame it on Russia. This was from a reporter in Ukraine that is Ukranian.
Again, the media controls 100% the narrative of this war. Nobody knows what is actually going on.
I saw a video where Ukranian tanks were plowing over civilian cars that had [allegedly] people in them. Maybe Ukraine isn’t that innocent either (the gov not the people). This war makes no sense.
One on side you know Putin wants the USSR restored and all nations/satellites annexed back in the fold, but why choose to attack Ukraine now?
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2018JE005579
Examination of the Long-Term Subsurface Warming Observed at the Apollo 15 and 17 Sites Utilizing the Newly Restored Heat Flow Experiment Data From 1975 to 1977
The Russian Military is shrinking every generation so the longer Putin waits the harder it will be?
Nepal no country is safe anymore from the global takeover.
Ukraine is “NWO” run aka Illuminati/Rothschilds. Satanists. The Rothschild banking servers are located in Ukraine.
Here is an article about zelinsky:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2022/03/no_author/ukrainian-president-zelenskyy-is-tied-to-klaus-schwab-justin-trudeau-and-other-global-elites/
Actually Nepal, you will shortly see China “INVADE” Taiwan, or so the MSM narritive will go. Japan will form a friendly alliance with this new Power, and South and North Korea will unify peacefully. Kim is already dead and the country is run by his sister.
Is all this connected to the Russian “INVASION” of Ukraine? Yes it is. There is a mass attack on the KM by the Black Sun Alliance.
They like to call themselves the White Hats, just they have a different agenda, i.e rather than KILL 90% OF THE POPULATION by pandemics etc INSTEAD they USE WEATHER WARS INSTEAD TO REDUCE POPULATION see anthropgenic global warming, which is now being superceded by the Great Reset.
Putin is an Avatar. ( Black Sun) He is not the original version.
Russia despise the Khazarian mafia KM- ( Illuminati/Rothschilds) and have historical reasons to to do so:
Here is a passage from Benjamin Fulfords latest Newsletter regarding the Russians and the KM:
https://benjaminfulford.net/2022/02/28/humanity-is-being-liberated-as-white-hat-alliance-goes-on-the-offensive/
“We will not go back thousands of years to learn the origin of the satan worshiping Khazarian mafia.
Instead, we’ll begin with a brief look at how the KM conquered Europe and embarked on a centuries-long quest to return to their ancient homeland of Khazaria.
A good summary of their activities can be found here:
https://jamesfetzer.org/2021/10/preston-james-and-mike-harris-hidden-history-of-the-incredibly-evil-khazarian-mafia/
To quote and paraphrase a few key passages, Khazaria was a kingdom in central Asia that practiced the Babylonian black arts.
They were known in surrounding lands as thieves, murderers, and muggers, and for impersonating the travelers they murdered…
Around AD 1,200, the Russians led a group of nations surrounding Khazaria and invaded to stop the Khazars’ crimes against their people, which included kidnapping their young children and infants for their blood sacrifice ceremonies to Baal. [Satan].
The KM elite fled to Europe, where slowly, over a period of centuries, they infiltrated the ruling classes and eventually seized power. Their greatest victory came in 1913 when the KM took over the Federal Reserve Board in an illegal action on Christmas Day.
By seizing control of the people’s money in the United States of America, John Rockefeller I and his KM colleagues were able to finance the communist revolution of Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky in Russia.
As soon as the KM overthrew the Christian government of Russia, they began their revenge for the destruction of Khazaria. In all, they killed up to 80 million Russians over the course of the 20th century.
They also began their project to restore Khazaria by starving out millions of ethnic Russians living within the old borders of Khazaria.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
This is why Putin said: Modern Ukraine was created entirely by Russia, or rather Bolshevik, communist Russia.
https://tass.com/politics/1407587
Recently:
The Russians’ patience finally ran out as the KM attempted to take over the nation of Kazakhstan to further their project of restoring Khazaria”.
#~#~####~~~~#####~~~~####~~~~####~~~~####~~~~#######~~~~~~~~#################~~~~~~~~~########~~~~#####~~~~~####~~~~####~~~#######~###~#~##
Now, you will probably also see India and Pakistan saber rattle and more trouble from Israel in the Middle East.
Turkey may also make a move in Syria . This is all pre-planned.
The US capital will be moved from Washington to Idaho the White House will be demolished.
It was moving to Texas but now its destined for Idaho.
Thr Queen will be declared dead and will bring the end of the Monarchy as it exists now. There will also be no new Pope after this last one.
Canada will become part of the USA. The European Union will dissolve. Baltic states will become part of Russia. The World map will be redrawn.
Trudea is under house arrest. Biden will be removed. This is the One World Order. Note the subtle difference.
AGW is the means for UN to take global control or the EU or whatever they will be called in the future (a common market) and they never wanted the US to be part of that. The pawns are being knocked down and the key players are positioning for control.
At this point, whoever wins, we the people lose.
If you try this tell me if you see anything.
“Put these coordinates into a Google Earth search and you can see it.
(Or Google maps with the satellite layer turned on)
42°53’07″N 106°17’43″W”
Use Goggle Earth it works and shows a massive graveyard for wind turbines.
Casper, Wyoming.
Right next to this Soda Lake.
Nepal wrote:
“@LolKooks, again, I not argue this point further with you as per Joe’s request. Show some respect, do not take the opportunity to keep hurling insults my way.”
I didn’t insult you, Nepal, I insulted ‘evenminded’. Are you trying to tell us something? LOL
I was offline today, got a new fan for my ‘puter, took it apart, cleaned it up, put the new fan in. It’s magnetically levitated so it spins really easily. It doesn’t push quite as much air as the old fan, because I’d modified the old fan to tighten up the clearance between fanwheel and fan housing on the underside of the fan (where it pulls air in), and put ‘spoilers’ on the downstream side of the blades… they extend the fan blades a bit, tighten the gap between fanwheel and fan housing on the top side of the fan (where it exhausts air), and due to the dual-angle serrated edge, cut down on the fan’s noise. Unfortunately, after 4 years of hard running, the bearings started to go. This one I took apart and treated the axial bearings (the thrust bearing is maglev) with WS2, so it should last longer. With the new fan, my CPU gets about 4F warmer than with the old fan, for the same room temperature and 100% load.
At idle, the fan doesn’t even run… I’ve enabled CPU Throttle States, and when idle, it drops all the way down to 484 MHz and the CPU voltage drops to the minimum. I could go lower speed (I’ve had it below 200 MHz at idle), but my power supply isn’t stable enough to keep the CPU stable at that low a load. It tends to randomly lock up.
Medical experts, is this real? If so, copy it before it is removed.
Click to access 5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
Yes CD this is genuine it is the document submitted by Pfizer-BioNTech as part of its Biological License Application (BLA) to the U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA).
i.e results from clinical trials.
Pfizer didnt want this out as it knew about the VAED “vaccine associated enhanced disease” and that it had to be reported on VAERS “Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System” but went ahead anyway.
Pfizer admits: Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease is a a very real theoretical risk for its Covid-19 vaccine.
Table 5, found on page 11 of the document shows an ‘Important Potential Risk’, and that risk is listed as ‘Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED), including Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Respiratory Disease (VAERD)’.
…things like pneumonia! I had friends die of pneumonia after having the vaccine and THEN contracting Covid!
See this from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine-associated_enhanced_respiratory_disease
VAERD, refers to an adverse event where an exacerbated course of respiratory disease occurs with HIGHER INCIDENCE in the VACCINATED population in comparison with the control group ( i.e the non vaccinated).
It goes on to say:
“An expected rate of VAED is difficult to establish so a meaningful observed / expected analysis cannot be conducted at this point based on available data. The feasibility of conducting such an analysis will be re-evaluated on an ongoing basis as data on the virus grows and the vaccine safety data continues to accrue’.
In other words its experimental, and will collate results as they go.
Should never have been licensed! Too risky. Its an experiment on humans.
They were granted emergency use by Governments knowing the risks.
See here for greater insight:
https://www.news.alayham.com/content/pfizer-admits-confidential-documents-its-covid-19-vaccine-may-cause-vaccine-associated
Thanks Z you are the man.
Lol. Cheers CD.
You will need to slow down, pause and read a lot of this video as it is full of FACTS.
What is happening is Ukraine is demonic, Fascist Neo Nazi mercenary torturers trained by
our western governments. UK admits it trained thousands of “soldiers” !!!
This is NOT the German people of the Germanic Tribe that went mindlessly to war to protect their Fatherland just like its not the Ukrainian Slavic peaceful peoples. No!
This is the evil face of what is controlling the world. Private facist armies, paid to destroy and revel in blood and pain and anguish. It is food to them. This is the Khazarians. Sick twisted ideology. You will see the names of their factions in this video.
The Rothschilds/Rockefeller funded mercenary organisations. Remember their names.
No country wants war. Populations don’t want war but mercenary factions installed by governments
with agendas want wars:
1) for power and money
2) because they are evil sick minded, with twisted religious ideologies ( Satanism)
I’m surprised this is still on Youtube. Maybe because it glorifies the destruction by their paymasters?
If you only watch from 15:11 mins onwards you will realise the monsters we are dealing with.
Watch, learn and “KNOW” what we are dealing with. The TRUTH will set us FREE.
Zelator, I’m fine with videos on the Azov nazis – Prince’s financing of them is news to me – plans of the filthily rich and what-have-you, but mixing them up with aliens gets into the realms of what I know to be impossible is not what I want to find myself watching.
J Cuttance: with all respect, please only take what is useful for you and discard all the rest.
UK Gov. published data confirming the Fully Vaccinated are now up to 3.2x more likely to die of Covid-19 than the Unvaccinated:
https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/03/04/russia-distracts-uk-gov-reveal-vaccinated-more-likely-to-die-covid/
Romania’s largest soccer club bans vaccinated players because they keep dropping dead:
https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-03-04-romanian-soccer-club-bans-vaccinated-players-dead.html
This follows on from the recent death of 52 year old cricket star Shane Warn dying of a suspected heart attack, and comes amid a flow of healthy high profile sports stars having major heart problems and collapsing.
All vaccinated. Coincidence?
As ever use your discernment, take what resonates with you and leave the rest.
Cheers Z
What is possible and what isn’t possible is based on evidence. Our understanding of evidence is based strongly on what we believe is possible. This is the paradox between reality and what we perceive as reality.
I know I don’t have all the answers, that is the reality I know I live in. We haven’t explored 100% of the planet we live on even now after millions of years. Yet somehow humans have convinced themselves they know the universe. We have no evidence other galaxies exist outside our current time (or not for that matter). We have no evidence time is a constant in the universe.
We have no evidence aliens exist (as a whole human species) or that they do not exist.
We are positive our governments lie to us so why wouldn’t they keep knowledge they actual know from the people? Knowledge is power and our leaders want all of that power for themselves.
Sometimes personal reality is all you can hope to achieve, not convincing others your “reality” is true.
What I know is reality:
Our Sun will expand and destroy this Earth.
Why isn’t more science and technology being used to propagate the future of the human race and not on petty greed and selfish idealized crusades?
Good question.
I like that CD. Well said
Something like this CD?
I heard those papers they wanted to seal for 75 years revealed they knew from the beginning 3% of people who took the jab were going to die. I think that’s just the ones who die relatively suddenly after being jabbed.
Wow. Imagine if they produced a miracle drug your child would be a genius but a 3% chance it could kill them how many would take it?
OK this is for discernment, people with an open mind and who don’t mind taking the time to investigate and look at different viewpoints. Sometimes we need to plow through the chaff to get to the wheat. Or as Jesus says remove the tares. I cannot apologise for your time. We all get a set amount, use it as you will. As always I respect the opinions of others. I have no gripes with anyone.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tmG0o4R4ypmD/
Peace Z.
The only problem with a signal from Andromeda (unless they have technology far out of scope from ours) is the time it would take to reach Earth, 2,537,497 light-years to be exact.
Astronomy/Astrophysics is not one of my hats. That’s why I come on here to listen to all you guys, and pick your brains lol. I hope I give something back.
You do Zelator, you do. Andromeda might not exist anymore for all we know. This speed of light restrictions really opens a lot of unanswered questions. That’s why we need physicists to answer those questions.
I haven’t introduced myself. I’m Z. I’m from Arcturus. Lol.
Great website. Great people. Peace. Z
Thanks CD. That means alot. I think I got off on the wrong foot initially and people thought I was an enemy. Thankfully, thanks to the likes of yourself and Boomie and Joe who initially thought I was an enemy realise I mean no harm. But I am here to learn. Thankyou so much and
Cheers Z
Ah but there was no boy either.
all is forgiven Zed, I apologise in advance for my regular and varied sins
J you’re great too bud, don’t sweat the small stuff. What we go through is nothing compared to the shite Joe has to trudge through on a daily basis. Afte a decade most people would have said “F” it and moved to the Caymen islands by now.
You guys want to leave a comment? Very interested to see what this guy thinks if one of us can engage him.
Sounds like his mind is made up on everything. I doubt he’s the “engaging” type. Maybe I’m wrong?
Wouldn’t be the first time. Aside from that, you can’t comment on his video, at least I couldn’t.
Never mind I can now. That was weird.
Yea I left one and a link. Nothing yet.
Hey J Cuttance; no worries my friend. All the best. Z
https://www.universetoday.com/154833/coronal-loops-might-not-be-loops-at-all/amp/
You spend your entire career just to state loops might not actually be loops?
Physics question.
“Thermal radiation is energy transfer by the emission of electromagnetic waves which carry energy away from the emitting object. For ordinary temperatures (less than red hot”), the radiation is in the infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum. The relationship governing the net radiation from hot objects is called the Stefan-Boltzmann law. While the typical situation envisioned here is the radiation from a hot object to its cooler surroundings, the Stefan-Boltzmann law is not limited to that case. If the surroundings are at a higher temperature (TC > T) then you will obtain a negative answer, implying net radiative transfer to the object.”
So the question asked was:
“Why does first box say “less than red hot” in regards to IR? A quartz rod in an electric home heating unit glowing red hot on high setting is emitting more SWIR than a rod on low setting that isn’t glowing red. But both are emitting SWIR.”
Thanks Nepal that does make things clearer.
Another physics question from a UV metrologist:
https://ton.twitter.com/1.1/ton/data/dm/1501328528138244105/1501328056950034433/eQIF3Vy5.png:small
” Do you know how to convert the y-axis on this infamous chart from mW/m2 sr-1 cm-1 to regular W/m2? I want to know how many W/m2 total UWIR is reaching space vs the CO2 band total UWIR not reaching space. Then to see how those compare to the earth e-balance charts W/m2.”
Now the maths averages on this are calculated with absorption and scattering which either way is 50/50% so I’ve heard but technically I disagree with that. Multidirectional scattering isn’t 50/50. Now the claim is all “down” is reabsorbed. I have nothing I know of that proves or disproves that.
The rest I’ll defer to your explanation.
“Doc Snow” gave this.
https://www.energetiq.com/technote-understanding-radiance-brightness-irradiance-radiant-flux
Anyone want to take a poll?
Note that the options are:
1) “Yes, he’s doing great!”
-and-
2) “I’m waiting to see what he does next!”
… but there’s no:
3) He and his policies suck harder than a 120 volt Hoover hooked up to 240 volts!
And there’s a reason for that… because aside from the truly brainwashed tiny minority of socialist NPCs they’ve been kowtowing to for years now, everyone else would choose option number 3. And the DNC doesn’t really want to know how much they and their policies really are detested.
This should be called “How Democrats spike a poll”.
The the western MSM shills for Zelensky’s regime and the Alt-media sounds suspiciously a lot like RT.
They have literally all gone insane.
I now realize the bunker craze in the 1960s doesn’t sound so insane now.
I’m stealing that for the new Florida bill on Twitter.
Clarification the Bill is preventing teachers from keeping things from parents, which would protect children more from pedos. Personally, I think Disney is full of pedos. A concept supported from this comment…
“Wife lived in a suburb of Orlando and worked at Disney and will tell you it is full of degenerates and kiddie ‘stuff’. As far as Tampa Bay it’s been a 💩hole for 25+ years. Crime, drugs(some acceptable) and mass immigration.
Yes, and the stories Disney covered up are very concerning. It concerned families picked by ?? to stay at prepaid rooms. Children were invited to parties, which the staff heard rumors of half dressed children leaving to alert parents. Dark stuff, plus the degenerates they hired.
Furthermore, Disney as policies and the propensity to hire sexually diverse people, that talk openly of it which work with children and the staff will admit it. I heard these stories for almost a year, until I moved my ‘to be’ wife here. Disney is disgusting.
Little insight to Disney, while dealing with woke degenerates, you made $7 hr to paint on a child face every 20 minutes. Context: Disney pays you $7hr, charge $70 per child to make themselves $210 an hr while dealing with pervertz at the ‘Pirates League’. Fact.”
I live and work on Windows…
but I mean holy fns, Windows 11 is retarded af…it comes across as a student project visiting interns were asked to write for a class credit…and they’re not developers, just “human interface specialists”, who think in terms of writing interfaces for toddlers like smart phones, and have no idea how actual developers might use a computer.
Now I gotta spend the rest of the day back-grading to Windows 10.
Gerald Kutney, (who evidently has a PhD in chemistry but no climate education)
“You have no training in the climate sciences … you RT climate-denial blogs and climate deniers … why should anyone care what you have to say about the science of climate change⁉️ You don’t need any training to accept science … but you do to challenge it.”
Joe this guy is a physicist not an advocate but seems on the fence, you might want to take this one you can relate {hopefully}.
We were discussing the “energy budget” by activists.
Me: “The COE is around 940 in and out. Or if you want to go by their math, 2354 out 4702 in.
You missed the 168 absorbed by surface does not equal 390 surface radiation. That’s not COE that’s claiming E out of nothing.”
HIm: “168 + 324 = 24 + 78 + 390
Energy in = energy out.
CoE only applies to total energy, not each separate energy type. Energy can convert from one form to another.”
Sorry took out my ? (2354/47o*2)
I did it again! 2354/4702 🤦♂️
LOL I give up
Good video.
That was a good watch that video CD. Got most of the points across about CO2 and how it’s wrongly demonised.
Also, tellingly at the end of the video at the 1:07:55 mark it says:
Former Canadian Minister of the Environment Christine Stewart said, “using pseudoscience, no matter how phony, is permissible if the objective is to bring about a New World Order.”
Margaret Thatcher’s advisor, Lord Christopher Monckton, divulged that the Paris Accord calls for a
“New World Government” and warned Americans that, “unless you stop it, your President will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your prosperity away forever.”
Moreover its also a population growth reduction scheme as divulged here:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/climate/global-warming-is-about-destroying-capitalism/
Heres a good article about peer review in medicine, but it equally applies to the physical sciences as well:
https://globalfreedommovement.org/the-failure-of-peer-review/
Boomie, I haven’t forgotten about discussing your two competing factions. You are definitely on the right lines, but it goes very deep, thousands of years deep, and I’m having problems making it palatable for readers on here. Some of it, well most of it, will probably get me criticised like I have been recently lol. I don’t mind criticism; I just don’t want to waste my time if no-one is interested. Keep posting. I read all your stuff.
@Zelator
I agree with you Z, right on the money. GW is about control and fear (our govs fear) and to appease the lab rats they make it profitable.
PS you will have disagreements, nobody knows 100% what is going on, we can only make educated guesses. This world is primed for physical realities, seldom is the spiritual and the mind explored. So much so when I say “mind” the NPCs think I refer to intelligence. 😒
CD you nailed it. Mind is so much more than intelligence, it is everything and nothing. Alpha and Omega. I think you will enjoy Joe’s videos.
“PS you will have disagreements, nobody knows 100% what is going on, we can only make educated guesses”. That is so true.