They say the victor writes the history of a period, and that may be so. But when enough time has passed it must be the case that the present will be seen as truly bizarre when it comes to the demise of the natural sciences and our understanding of the physical world around us. This must especially be the case when it comes to how energy moves in it, especially heat.
Thermal energy, or heat, is the energy that comes from the movement of atoms and molecules in a substance. Heat increases when these particles move faster.
Rather than acknowledging that most of the heating on planet Earth comes from the Sun, and how this energy is distributed changes with the seasons because of the tilt of the Earth relative to the Sun. Instead of acknowledging this – and considering how most of the heating occurs at the equator with the heat transferred to the poles – we have even the right of politics promoting the nonsense idea that global warming from carbon dioxide is real and it’s manmade. I’m quoting Bjorn Lomborg, that is what he keeps repeating, and Jordon Peterson has made him the chief scientists, for the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship that is attempting to rewrite the story for the right of politics in The West.
This is the meme that has swept across the West with the ruling class pretending their scientists, who are often just political scientists, can not only know the average temperature of the Earth, but also control the temperature of the Earth.
To be able to do this, they will, of course, need to be able to dial back this heating as it moves from the equator to the poles, or should they be dialling it up?
Which should it be?
To dial down the average temperature of the Earth, should we be seeking to increase the yearly average heat transport poleward, or slow it down?
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Please keep up the good work Jennifer.
I worry that “global warming” is the new religion, and its advocates/supporters have lost the capability for rational thinking…
Nobel and Wolf Prize Winner-Maybe this guys know something. But he is not a climate, good.
https://rumble.com/v5a9379-climate-change-is-a-myth-john-clauser-phd.html
I could never tell which side Bjorn was batting for.
It’s obvious Global Warming scratches a lot of backs.
Jennifer refers to Bjorn Lomberg: “I’m quoting Bjorn Lomborg.” She is right to lament that, though he says some useful things, he regrettably fails to understand the outstanding fact that there is no detectable man-made carbon-dioxide-emissions global warming. ‘Man-made carbon-dioxide-emissions global warming’ is a scam of Marxist and world-government agitprop, tragically accepted by many otherwise sober thinking persons. It’s practically a religion, a way of expressing moral feelings, a group delusion, without scientific basis, and harmful to the people of the earth, particulary to the poor; the rich can escape its economic effects and can afford to indulge in it. It’s a pity that Jordan Peterson hasn’t quite got the message.
The scam is often said to be based on an imagined instability, due to imagined positive feedback, of the earth’s energy transport process. That is a deep misunderstanding. Stability of a complicated dynamical process such as that is no simple matter. The earth’s energy transport process works on a very wide range of time scales, from perhaps billions of years to seconds. It is practically impossible to give an accurate and precise mathematico-physical account of it, though the conventional acceptance of the scam pretends that it can be done, by massive computer modelling. Consequently, political debate often quotes degrees of global warming in amounts such as 1.8°C or 3.6°C. Such quantities are fantasy, based on imagined instability due to imagined ‘positive feedback’. It can be shown by mathematical and physical reasoning, however, that man-made carbon-dioxide-emissions global warming, if it occurs at all, must, because of overwhelming negative feedback, be less than 1.2°C, an amount too small to resolve by practical measurement, against the background of the natural variability on its many time scales. This is an expression of the negative feedback dynamical stability of the earth’s energy transport process. It is regrettable that meteorologist stalwarts on the side of sanity, such as Roy Spencer and Judith Curry, do not have the mathematical background to understand this, and they regrettably talk of carbon dioxide warmings more than 1.2°C.
The negative feedback stability of the earth’s energy transport process is often tested by volcanic eruptions. Many volcanic eruptions cause detectable transient cooling of the process, because they put into the atmosphere a lot of reflective microscopic sulphate particles, which soon fall out. A rare volcanic eruption on 15 January 2022 caused a detectable transient warming, because it put a lot of water vapour into the stratosphere. If the earth’s energy transport process were unstable, with positive feedback, the many coolings would have persisted and grown colder, and the recent warming would have grown more than it has, though we don’t yet know how long it will last. The composition of the stratosphere changes slowly because mostly there is little convective circulation up there.
You are ‘on the ball’ Christopher.
The progressive orbiting Solar-induced Dry Cycles described in ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ – thirty years on….(see link) remove water vapour albedo from the atmosphere – therefore raising atmospheric temperatures under the orbiting cycle’s ‘footprint’.
The Wet/Normal ‘default’ position prevailing either side of the orbiting Dry Cycle reduces atmospheric temperatures again after the Dry Cycle passes.
The overall effect of a general increase in global volcanic activity, however – means an overall colder and dryer climate phase.
The major volcanic eruption you speak of was that of the submarine Hunga Tonga – Hunga Ha’pia which erupted from Dec 20, 2021 – 15 Jan, 2022. This created a destructive tsunami event – and blasted an ash cloud circa 58 kilometres into the atmosphere.
This occurred during a Wet/Normal phase (between orbiting Dry Cycles) – and resulted in
major flooding across Eastern Australia, from early March 2022, to mid-April 2022.
There is currently a Regional Dry Cycle, (which began circa August 1 2024,) progressing (orbiting) from 50 degrees East longitude(Madagascar,) at a rate of 15 degrees longitude from East to West. This Dry Cycle means severe drought conditions will prevail under its influence for the next two years – affecting Australia from early January, 2026.
I am monitoring the progress of this Cycle via global daily precipitation satellite mapping.
I can report that the results are conclusive(so far,) over Eastern Africa and Western Europe.
I will provide more comprehensive results in November, when the prevailing Dry Cycle Footprint has moved more completely over Africa and Europe.
Jordan Peterson and his cohort are finished.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TFFDXyhe5b0ZfLCiFt23W4PbubQaQfQo/view?usp=sharing
On 25th November 2021 the UK Government admitted that actual measured global temperatures had been altered to reinforce the global warming scam. Urban heat islands are used as evidence for global warming. If you ask the politicians “where does the heat emanating from poorly insulated buildings go?” they cannot answer, because it contradicts the CO2 narrative.
“To dial down the average temperature of the Earth, should we be seeking to increase the yearly average heat transport poleward, or slow it down?”
Neither. There is no reason to try to prevent supposed ‘man-made carbon-dioxide-emissions global warming’, because it is just imagined or fabricated, a scam from the world-government gang. And we have no satisfactory way of doing it, even if there was a reason.
Don Gaddes says: “a rate of 15 degrees longitude from East to West.” Do, please tell us the denominator: 15 degrees longitude per what time unit?
‘Don’ not ‘Do,’ !!
Hi, Don Gaddes. Can you tell us how much water was catapulted into respectively the troposphere and the stratosphere? I haven’t seen an estimate for the troposphere, and I have seen various estimates for the stratosphere.
Hi Christopher,
I direct you to the link I provided….’Tomorrow’s Weather’ – thirty years on….
The Dry Cycle ‘vanguard’ moves at 15 degrees longitude per 30 Day/Night Interval Month,
(as per the Earth/Solar Orbital Calendar, pp 172 – 173)
It was not the water ‘catapulted’ into the atmosphere that caused the flooding event – rather it was the ‘heat source’ and the orbiting ash and aerosol cloud….the floods occurred two months after the eruption.
Thank you for many years of good articles o coral. I will miss them in the future. I will miss them because you apparently believe manmade CO2 emissions have no effect on the climate. That is a ridiculous claim from a Ph.D. scientist, and contradicted by almost 100% of scientists in the world since 1896, BASED ON EVIDENCE. A consesus that has withstood a 127 year test of time.
When I read a significant false statement by a scientist, such as the quote below, I no longer read anything else by that scientist.
In this article, I read and assumed the author agreed with this false statement:
“politics promoting the nonsense idea that global warming from carbon dioxide is real and it’s manmade.”
Radical conservatives who attempt to refute CAGW scaremongering by claiming AGW is fake are the enemies of intelligent, logical conservatives. They are a gift for leftist fact checkers. Shame on you, Ms. Marohasy.
Hi, Richard Greene. Jennifer is right: CAGW is fake. It’s groupthink supported by world government WEF agitprop.
Richard Greene,
There is no climate crisis caused by CO2. There is a social health crisis caused by mass obsession over CO2.
And even if Jennifer has it wrong on CO2, what leads you to reject her regarding coral? Frankly your rejection of everything someone says if they say something you disagree with is selective and circular. If you were honest about applying that you would have to reject every consensus climate scientist. They have all made agregious errors.