Thursday, 23 May 2013


Twenty facts about CO2 that have been kept 'top secret' by the man-made global warming community

1. We know everything about physico-chemical properties of CO2 there is to know since its discovery 200 years ago, and categorical statement can be made that the physico-chemical properties of CO2 in its pure state, including IR properties, have nothing to do with its properties as part of the mixture called air.
2. We know that no gas molecule of the open system, as our atmosphere is, can possibly control temperature.
 3. We know that there are two very different mechanisms that drive dynamics of CO2 exchange between air-water and air-biomass and therefore there is no such thing as global levels of CO2. Levels of CO2 above the water mass, covering 70% of the Earth surface is controlled by solubility of CO2 in water which is solely driven by temperature; while levels of CO2 above the biomass that covers most of the land surfaces is solely driven and controlled by photosynthesis.

4. We know that the only way to know exact numbers about CO2 concentrations above the water and biomass surfaces is to measure them at the surface levels, which we do not do, and therefore use of CO2 levels measured at a single point on the globe and at 4000 meters altitude (Mauna Loa Observatory, MLO, at Hawaii) represents one of the most mis-used high accuracy dataset in the history of modern science.

5. We know that the total emissions/reabsorption of CO2 by nature makes emissions of CO2 by burning fossil fuels totally insignificant and lost in the instrumental accuracy levels.

6. We know that the levels of CO2 that we live amidst in our everyday lives have nothing in common with the observed CO2 levels at MLO based at an altitude of 4000 meters above sea level.

7. We know that there is no difference between CO2 levels accurately measured 200 years ago and last year – they all go up and down depending when and where you measure them.

8. We know that there is no possible correlation between CO2 levels dissolved in water in its liquid state and CO2 levels found in ice, i.e. water in its solid state.
9. We know that it is CO2 that makes major contribution to the width of tree rings. So, no CO2 means no tree rings and no life.
10. We know that the human body ignores CO2 levels in air when breathing in and the only function of breathing out is to get rid of CO2 that is created in every cell of the human body by the complex bio-chemical process that maintains life.
11. We know that CO2 levels would need to reach concentration in air of 60,000 ppm (from current levels of 390 ppm) to become toxic for humans.
 12. We know that every single molecule of CO2 is surrounded by 2500 molecules that are NOT CO2 and therefore any theoretical blanket built from CO2 fibres that supposedly is surrounding the Earth is practically made of NOTHING.
13. We know that every single molecule of CO2 is surrounded by 2500 molecules that are NOT CO2 and therefore one has to offer some explanation as to what those 2500 ‘other or NOT-CO2’ molecules are doing while 1 molecule among them is receiving and ‘back radiating’ all that heat energy.
14. We know that every molecule of CO2, irrespective of which source it comes from, can go up-and-down (in Z-axis) due to its molecular weight, its heat capacity and its solubility in water (rain or snow) and along (X-Y space) carried by wind. Therefore someone has to be able to explain: how does a molecule of CO2 generated by an SUV in Los Angeles gets transported across 2500 miles of water mass to Hawaii and then go up another 4000 meters, while avoiding all the biomass available within few miles of land surface in California and all the water mass along its journey to the CO2 detector at MLO, Hawaii?
 15. We know for certain that at 200 ppm of CO2 plants stop growing and that the optimum levels for plant grow is between 1300 and 1500 ppm, and yet the advice to all governments around the globe is to commit mass suicide of all species by reducing CO2 concentrations to 200 ppm levels.

16. We know that there is no difference whether we grow or dig fuel in terms of CO2 emissions, we know that CO2 emissions from burning fuel are irrelevant to the CO2 dynamics of emissions/absorption and yet we use our precious food-growing surfaces to grow fuel and thus create famine and kill life.

17. We know that there is no such a thing as self-heating greenhouse and yet new theories have been invented to argue something that cannot be argued.
18. We know that there is nothing in common in IR spectra between CO2, methane and water and yet they have been classified together as ‘greenhouse gasses’ because they absorb infrared radiation, together with millions of other molecules.

19. We know that CO2 in the atmosphere could not be detected by a standard IR-spectrometer and yet that property of CO2 has been used to argue for the existence of a greenhouse effect.

20. We know that all the knowledge about the physical world comes from experiments that can be validated and not from calculations that cannot be validated. And yet, everything about man-made global warming is about calculations and NOTHING about measurements.

Tuesday, 7 May 2013




While trying to come to grips with these two news items and raising a query, I received this comment in return:

against the likes of Eric Ferguson you can simply reply by stating that the greenhouse gas “theory” - the cornerstone of all climate alarm – is refuted on many levels. For example, it is refuted by 400,000 years of Vostok Ice core data that show levels of CO2 follow changes in temperature; as such CO2 is a symptom, not a driver of climate. Also, CO2 is proven to be a coolant gas because it is one of nature's best EMITTERS of energy. As such it cannot “trap” heat. The only known trapper of heat in our atmosphere is water vapour that temporary holds energy in the form of latent heat.  To create climate alarm doomsaying junk climatologists wrongly assign to CO2 the latent heat storage properties of water vapour because governments can tax us for exhaling CO2 but they can't control our planet's water cycle.

The most absurd logical fallacy in Eric's argument is his invoking of the arbitrary and subjective pseudo-intellectual device known as the “precautionary principle.” He says we must apply an “insurance” against global warming. But history tells us climate always changes and cold is a greater enemy to life than warmth. Life flourishes in warmer climates but struggles in colder (compare the barren Arctic to the rich Amazon rainforest).

If we wanted to “insure” against climate change we should be preparing for the coming ice age. As Dr. Pierre R Latour tells us:  [Dr. Pierre R. Latour is noted for his engineering prowess in helping design and develop the docking system for NASA’s Apollo space mission; he turns film critic to lambast the latest film sold in the name of junk science. See the quoted link below].

  •  If you discover glacial cycles have a period of about 100,000 years with an interglacial period of about 15,000, your discovery has been made already.
  •    If you realize Chicago is covered by an ice sheet >1 mile thick 85% of the time, you get it.
  •   If you realize humanity prospers during interglacials, not glacials, you get it. 
  •   If you discover Earth’s temperature has stabilized at a local high since 1998, you can expect it to  begin cooling soon. Maybe -15C. Because a new glacial has begun.  
  •   If you accept Lucy walked around Kenya 3 million years ago, you can conclude your ancestors survived 3,000,000/100,000 = 30 glacials.  Her ancestors appeared about 7 million years ago so they survived 4,000,000/100,000 = 40 more glacials. 30 + 40 = 70. 
  •  If you have enough faith in current humanity to believe we will survive at least one more = 100,000 years (year 102,013) you are a climate realist. 
  •  Remedy? Invest in property near the Equator. This is not good or bad news, it’s just news. 
  •  Don’t be provocative. Have a fabulous day. Breathe your COeasy.

John O'Sullivan
Principia Scientific International

Two further recent news items offered for consideration: