OT Russians expose climate-nazis' foolishness
- From: agaxxan <agaxxan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:19:58 -0700 (PDT)
Can't dismiss this one as coming from a 'neocon' source...
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080103/94768732.html
MOSCOW. (Oleg Sorokhtin for RIA Novosti) - Stock up on fur coats and
felt boots! This is my paradoxical advice to the warm world.
Earth is now at the peak of one of its passing warm spells. It started
in the 17th century when there was no industrial influence on the
climate to speak of and no such thing as the hothouse effect. The
current warming is evidently a natural process and utterly independent
of hothouse gases.
The real reasons for climate changes are uneven solar radiation,
terrestrial precession (that is, axis gyration), instability of
oceanic currents, regular salinity fluctuations of the Arctic Ocean
surface waters, etc. There is another, principal reason--solar activity
and luminosity. The greater they are the warmer is our climate.
Astrophysics knows two solar activity cycles, of 11 and 200 years.
Both are caused by changes in the radius and area of the irradiating
solar surface. The latest data, obtained by Habibullah Abdusamatov,
head of the Pulkovo Observatory space research laboratory, say that
Earth has passed the peak of its warmer period, and a fairly cold
spell will set in quite soon, by 2012. Real cold will come when solar
activity reaches its minimum, by 2041, and will last for 50-60 years
or even longer.
This is my point, which environmentalists hotly dispute as they cling
to the hothouse theory. As we know, hothouse gases, in particular,
nitrogen peroxide, warm up the atmosphere by keeping heat close to the
ground. Advanced in the late 19th century by Svante A. Arrhenius, a
Swedish physical chemist and Nobel Prize winner, this theory is taken
for granted to this day and has not undergone any serious check.
It determines decisions and instruments of major international
organizations--in particular, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change. Signed by 150 countries, it
exemplifies the impact of scientific delusion on big politics and
economics. The authors and enthusiasts of the Kyoto Protocol based
their assumptions on an erroneous idea. As a result, developed
countries waste huge amounts of money to fight industrial pollution of
the atmosphere. What if it is a Don Quixote's duel with the windmill?
Hothouse gases may not be to blame for global warming. At any rate,
there is no scientific evidence to their guilt. The classic hothouse
effect scenario is too simple to be true. As things really are, much
more sophisticated processes are on in the atmosphere, especially in
its dense layer. For instance, heat is not so much radiated in space
as carried by air currents--an entirely different mechanism, which
cannot cause global warming.
The temperature of the troposphere, the lowest and densest portion of
the atmosphere, does not depend on the concentration of greenhouse gas
emissions--a point proved theoretically and empirically. True, probes
of Antarctic ice shield, taken with bore specimens in the vicinity of
the Russian research station Vostok, show that there are close links
between atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and temperature
changes. Here, however, we cannot be quite sure which is the cause and
which the effect.
Temperature fluctuations always run somewhat ahead of carbon dioxide
concentration changes. This means that warming is primary. The ocean
is the greatest carbon dioxide depository, with concentrations 60-90
times larger than in the atmosphere. When the ocean's surface warms
up, it produces the "champagne effect." Compare a foamy spurt out of a
warm bottle with wine pouring smoothly when served properly cold.
Likewise, warm ocean water exudes greater amounts of carbonic acid,
which evaporates to add to industrial pollution--a factor we cannot
deny. However, man-caused pollution is negligible here. If industrial
pollution with carbon dioxide keeps at its present-day 5-7 billion
metric tons a year, it will not change global temperatures up to the
year 2100. The change will be too small for humans to feel even if the
concentration of greenhouse gas emissions doubles.
Carbon dioxide cannot be bad for the climate. On the contrary, it is
food for plants, and so is beneficial to life on Earth. Bearing out
this point was the Green Revolution--the phenomenal global increase in
farm yields in the mid-20th century. Numerous experiments also prove a
direct proportion between harvest and carbon dioxide concentration in
the air.
Carbon dioxide has quite a different pernicious influence--not on the
climate but on synoptic activity. It absorbs infrared radiation. When
tropospheric air is warm enough for complete absorption, radiation
energy passes into gas fluctuations. Gas expands and dissolves to send
warm air up to the stratosphere, where it clashes with cold currents
coming down. With no noticeable temperature changes, synoptic activity
skyrockets to whip up cyclones and anticyclones. Hence we get
hurricanes, storms, tornados and other natural disasters, whose
intensity largely depends on carbon dioxide concentration. In this
sense, reducing its concentration in the air will have a positive
effect.
Carbon dioxide is not to blame for global climate change. Solar
activity is many times more powerful than the energy produced by the
whole of humankind. Man's influence on nature is a drop in the ocean.
Earth is unlikely to ever face a temperature disaster. Of all the
planets in the solar system, only Earth has an atmosphere beneficial
to life. There are many factors that account for development of life
on Earth: Sun is a calm star, Earth is located an optimum distance
from it, it has the Moon as a massive satellite, and many others.
Earth owes its friendly climate also to dynamic feedback between
biotic and atmospheric evolution.
The principal among those diverse links is Earth's reflective power,
which regulates its temperature. A warm period, as the present,
increases oceanic evaporation to produce a great amount of clouds,
which filter solar radiation and so bring heat down. Things take the
contrary turn in a cold period.
What can't be cured must be endured. It is wise to accept the natural
course of things. We have no reason to panic about allegations that
ice in the Arctic Ocean is thawing rapidly and will soon vanish
altogether. As it really is, scientists say the Arctic and Antarctic
ice shields are growing. Physical and mathematical calculations
predict a new Ice Age. It will come in 100,000 years, at the earliest,
and will be much worse than the previous. Europe will be ice-bound,
with glaciers reaching south of Moscow.
Meanwhile, Europeans can rest assured. The Gulf Stream will change its
course only if some evil magic robs it of power to reach the north--but
Mother Nature is unlikely to do that.
Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, Merited Scientist of Russia and fellow of the
Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, is staff researcher of the
Oceanology Institute.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT Russians expose climate-nazis' foolishness
- From: Terraholm
- Re: OT Russians expose climate-nazis' foolishness
- Prev by Date: Re: Prediction 0330 WAS 1830
- Next by Date: Re: Isaiah Rider arrested
- Previous by thread: wholesale evisu bapesta adidas LV shoes, cheap lacoste puma gucci jordans sneakers
- Next by thread: Re: OT Russians expose climate-nazis' foolishness
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
