The Hubert Lamb CRU headquarters, center for worldwide global warming and climate change alarmism. The Paris Agreement would have gone a long way toward furthering their Luddite agenda. The Hubert Lamb CRU headquarters, center for worldwide global warming and climate change alarmism. The Paris Agreement would have gone a long way toward furthering their Luddite agenda.

Polar Vortex, Part 2: Facts

Editor’s note: in Part 1, Dwight Kehoe introduced the overblown Polar Vortex narrative. Below he lists several relevant facts that give the lie to that narrative. He might never convince certain liberals. But maybe he can set at rest any minds that might think they have any cause to worry.

The Polar Vortex: what are the facts?

Carbon Dioxide is not a toxic or poisonous compound.

The Polar Vortex: what are the facts?If it were, anyone drinking soda, beer or champagne would be dead or sick.  CO2 is as vital to all life on this planet as is oxygen.  Without CO2, plants and vegetation would not exist nor would the animals which feed on it.  Algae and plankton (parts of which are plant life) would not exist, nor would the fish and marine mammals which feed on them.

CO2 is heavier and denser than oxygen by almost 4 times.  For CO2 that reason carbon dioxide would displace oxygen and in enough percentages, well over 80%, would cause suffocation as a result of lack of oxygen.  CO2 does not poison but could prevent oxygen from getting to the blood.

Higher amounts of CO2, in any possible percentage, does not affect global temperature.

Actually it’s the converse.  Global temperatures effect CO2 levels.  Core samples which indicate both temperature and CO2 percentages, spanning centuries, show time after time that CO2 levels rise following rises in temperature.  Not as a result of or before.

CO2 has not risen significantly over the last 100 years of the industrial age.

At the turn of the 19th century CO2 levels were .0038% of the atmosphere. The latest global reading shows levels are now .0045%. That means, even if mankind was causing the rise in CO2 levels, which there is no proof of, it has risen just .0007% in well over a century.

Referencing the core samples above, the CO2 levels, 100’s of years before humans could have any effect on them, were as much as 4 and five times higher and global temperatures many degrees lower, than today.

Global temperature increases in relation to CO2 elevations:

If CO2 levels increased because of humans and if that rise created elevated global temperatures, which neither do, at the rate humans are supposedly rising CO2 levels and comparing the actual global temperature increase during the  .0007% rise in CO2, the danger to mankind’s existence would certainly not be imminent.

For example, during the 100 year period referred to in the above paragraph, global temperatures have increased by just under 1 degree. With none of that increase coming over the last 17 years.  To put this into terms relative to a typical human life span, if the average temperature where you were born, and you are now 50 years old, was 68 degrees, you would now be sweltering in an unbearable 68 and a half degrees.  And if you lived to be 100, you would have to endure as much as 69 degrees.

Or to put it another way, if we were the only factor in CO2 increases, and at the rate we have been accused of increasing it, it will take 1,425 years to increase CO2 levels by just 1%.  (Note: TPATH does not agree that man is responsible for this latest rise.  We are using their numbers simply to show the absurdity.)

Man’s contribution to CO2 :

Still supposing the CO2 humans are putting into the atmosphere is actually contributing to global warming, we have prepared some very interesting calculations for you.  This is where running the numbers gets to be fun. (But not for the lefties.  They come to conclusions by employing emotions and lunacy)

During any given year there is an approximated 41 billion, 120 million tons of CO2 inhabiting earth’s land, sea and air.  Incorporating the data the hoaxsters love to quote, …..”humans are pouring 6 billion tons of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere.”   Keeping in mind we are using their estimation of human contribution.  And if you believe they have not jacked up that estimate, my friend, you have not been paying attention.  Be that as it may, we used their data not our’s, and have come up with these interesting results.

Using the hoaxster’s reported data, man is responsible for just 0.00014% of the earth’s total carbon dioxide.  Running the numbers on this little piece of information is interesting as we contemplate reducing our “carbon footprint”, as they love to say.

Try this out for size.  If half the human population were eliminated, half of the cars, trucks, planes and trains were removed from use and half of every factory, home and building on the planet were shut down, mankind would lower its carbon footprint by 0.00007% which is over 14 thousand times less than 1%.  Given this, it’s not likely driving a Yugo will make much of an impact.  Unless that impact is the sound of metal collapsing under the wheels of a tractor trailer.

Polar ice, sea levels and idiots:

Let’s run the numbers on some of these global warming alarms.

  1. We have been told that 12 cubic miles of Greenland’s ice is melting away every year and that will cause the sea levels to rise by 24 feet.  So if this were true, which it has proven not to be, but still we calculate melting and time relating to sea level rises, again using their numbers, we find this.  Greenland, at last estimate, has 604,800 cubic miles of ice.If, as they say, 12 cubic miles are melting every year, hold on to your row boats, because at that rate it will take 50,400 years before it’s all melted.  You may consider selling your beach front property, just to be safe, in say 25,000 years or so.
  2. Of course typical with most information they pretend to have calculated, this 24 feet rise is also much exaggerated.  We have done real and complete calculations based upon the world’s connected waterways, the density of ice as compared to water and the total ice mass of the entire northern hemisphere.  What we found was the sea levels would rise just under 11 feet, but only after more than 2,500 generations, if it continued to melt at the rate they claim.

Here is the basis, without showing all the calculations, which you can do yourself or request from us, in which we made these calculations.  There are 150,826,300 square miles of connected sea level bodies of water on this earth.  If every single particle of ice in the entire northern hemisphere were to melt, the sea levels would rise just 19 feet.  This takes into account that large percentages of northern ice are incorporated in the oceans and seas.  Water volume increases by about 20% when frozen.  That means that all ice melting in the waterways would actually decrease the over all sea levels for that quantity.

A little about what really causes global warming.  Hint, it’s a big hot ball in the sky.

As we have shown, CO2 plays no role in planetary heating.  So what does?

Our planet is kept warm or drops to freezing by three major natural phenomena:

  1. The Sun
  2. Ozone
  3. H2O (Water, or more precisely, water vapor)

When the sun shines, it not only creates thermal heat which reaches the earth, but more importantly, solar particles crash into the oxygen in the atmosphere and create Ozone.

These solar particles vary in intensity as a result of sun activity known as solar flares.  The more active the solar flares, the more intense the particle collisions and the more Ozone is created.

Ozone is the number two rated greenhouse gas which follows the number one greenhouse gas, no its not CO2, its H2O, humidity.   Ozone serves two major purposes the most important is its ability to filter harmful radiation from the sun.  Without it life would end on this planet.  The second is its ability to block echoed or bounced heat from leaving the earth and dissipating into outer space.

Ozone is very toxic to humans as well as viruses and bacteria.  It also has a very short life span as it breaks down into other elements less than 14 days after its created.  Either by man or the sun.  Because of its ability to kill germs and its property of quick dissipation, hospitals and industry use it to disinfect entire rooms and buildings.

Bad news for man-made global warming pirates:

The sun has a consistent set of solar flare activity with long and short periods of more and less activity.  The sun has been moving towards a less active period for several years now, and if patterns of the past continue, many years of less active solar flares are ahead.

As we continue to cool, as we have been doing for several years, you will need to decide if its the Polar Vortex or the Solar Vortex.

Reprinted from Tea Party Advocacy Tracking Hub

Research Links

LINK ONE

LINK TWO

LINK THREE

LINK FOUR

LINK FIVE

Without a doubt the best research data available: CLICK HERE

[subscribe2]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Comments (6)

  • It’s not worth refuting this line-by-line, but here are the two things that made me chuckle the loudest:

    “CO2 does not poison but could prevent oxygen from getting to the blood.”

    I don’t know of any AGW advocates who are arguing that CO2 will rise to levels that are directly toxic to humans or other mammals. If they do, then they are wrong. Be that as it may, carbon dioxide is a waste product of oxidative metabolism and the body must expel excess CO2 in order to keep tissue CO2 levels within an acceptable range. Failure to eliminate CO2 produces the condition hypercapnia, which can certainly be fatal. The body can only eliminate CO2 if the concentration in exhaled breath is higher than that in inhaled air. As inhaled CO2 concentrations rise, the CO2 concentration in the blood rises in parallel, the body is less effective at expelling CO2, and a number of unpleasant effects begin to set in, including severe and disruptive cellular acidosis. Concentrations of CO2 in inspired air that are greater than ~10% cause severe respiratory distress, and those above ~15% are fatal, even in the presence of adequate oxygen (say, a 15% CO2 / 25% O2 / 60% N2 mix). 30% inspired CO2 leads to unconsciousness within 30 seconds. This level of atmospheric CO2 is orders of magnitude higher than current levels, and I am unaware of anyone who predicts that atmospheric CO2 will get that high. Still, elevated inspired CO2 can cause illness and death, and not by “prevent[ing] oxygen from getting to the blood” at “enough percentages, well over 80%”.

    My second LOL moment was this one:

    “This takes into account that large percentages of northern ice are incorporated in the oceans and seas. Water volume increases by about 20% when frozen. That means that all ice melting in the waterways would actually decrease the over all sea levels for that quantity.”

    Oh, so many problems. For one, water expands by 9.05% when it freezes, not 20%. Second, ice floats in water because it is less dense than water, having undergone that 9% expansion. As a result, ice floats with some of its mass above the waterline and most below. The ice displaces a total amount of water that weighs as much as the ice does. When that ice melts back into water, you can think of it as shrinking down to fill the hole that it had displaced in the water in the first place. Hence no net change in the water level. This is middle-school science class type stuff: put some ice in a glass and fill the glass to the brim with water. Make sure the ice is floating freely. Then let the ice melt and check whether the water level in the glass has risen or fallen as a result.
    If you’re counting on the melting of floating ice to _lower_ sea level, you might want to try that tabletop experiment first, and then recheck your math.

    Predictions of sea level rise as a result of melting ice are based on two main factors: first, that the ice in question starts out resting on land, not floating free in the ocean. Second, that the water of the oceans itself expands as its temperature rises. The maximum density of seawater is at 4º C; so seawater actually shrinks slightly as it warms up from 0º, then expands again from there. Whether you believe in AGW or not, I doubt you can claim that warm water is less dense than cold water. On the other hand, you have already claimed that water expands 20% when it freezes, so who can say what other sorts of false claims you might make?

  • Well, I see that there’s an error in my comment above. The second-to-last sentence should read “…I doubt you can _deny_ that warm water is less dense than cold water.” Because yes, in fact warm water is less dense than cold water, as I stated in the sentence before that (see here: http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/AllenMa.shtml). I apologize for the mistake, and I will try to do better in the future. Still, even this post may contain errors. Please let me know if it does.

    Something else I only noticed today: Mr. Kehoe states that atmospheric CO2 is 0.0045%, up from 0.0038% at the turn of the 19th century. The actual values are ~0.04% and ~0.03%, or ten times what Mr. Kehoe reports.

    Mr. Kehoe also states that “CO2 is heavier and denser than oxygen by almost 4 times”. The density of CO2 at STP is about 1.98 kg/m^3. The density of O2 at STP is 1.43 kg/m^3. Thus CO2 is 1.98/1.43 = 1.38 times as dense as O2. Perhaps Mr. Kehoe was thinking of the density of _air_, which at STP is 1.29 kg/m^3. Still, CO2 is only 1.98/1.29 = 1.53 times as dense as air.

    Next, taking at face value Mr. Kehoe’s stated number of 41.12 billion tons of total atmospheric CO2, the 6 billion tons of CO2 added per year by humans represents 6/41.12 = 14.6%, not 0.00014%. I don’t know where he got that 41 billion ton number, though – the numbers that I can find are closer to 3000 billion tons of total atmospheric CO2. That would make the annual human contribution 6/3000 = 0.2%, which is still over 1400 times greater than Mr. Kehoe’s stated 0.00014%.

    It’s impossible to review Mr. Kehoe’s “research links” to investigate the bases for these errors further as all the links give 404 errors, including the ones on the TPATH site itself.

  • How odd. Those links work just fine for me. Maybe you should try following the links from another IP address.

  • Nope. Links two through five still give 404 errors from a different IP.
    Any comment on the other issues raised? As a physician I believe you will be familiar with hypercapnia, for example.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.



© All Rights Reserved. Conservative News and Views.

Back to Top