For acceptable weather data to be gathered there used to be strict rules about where the measurements are takes with instructions on how to site them and at what height above the grass they are bases with particular attention to interference from nearby heating and cooling devices. The degree od control over the recordings was even extended to the exact type and colour of paint used to provide weather protection.
A recent scandal has surfaced with environmentalist promulgating treason with the debacle focussed on the siting of weather stations in the USA. Ever since the scandal of the Hockey Stick, stations were being moved into locations that served to massage annual statistics, raising the temperatures submitted in reports from weather stations parked near heating vents. jet engine exhausts and even on power station property next to walls facing the sun. Further information on the missing data-data can be found on the climate-gate website:
KMPlayer (Linux)
I don't know how to get the video directly on here, it doesn't open for me in Windows Video Fail so I put it on my own computer and tried posting to this blog. But where it went from there is beyond my reach.
The importance of verifying my link is unusual for me because the article I am writing about is linked to a magazine called Forbes an American mass media; famous these days for fake news.
As far as I can find out Forbes seems responsible. Not that I am going to let Forbes have access to my browser. (I just don't need to.)
How much carbondioxide is emitted from volcanoes?
I am trying my best to work around this problem but the only data source I can find is Forbes'. Even NAS is faking satellite data according to Breitbart:
Their graph of surface temperatures is not supported by any satellite data, which show little or no warming over land this century. Additionally, NASA has bumped up their fake land surface temperatures even further in the past couple of weeks (see below). Their data sources are not credible.As for the attempts to draw a trendline showing that, even without El Niño and La Niña, global temperatures are warming: this is pure junk science.
You’ll find a full analysis of why this is so in this article by Dr. David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Forum. It’s titled Despite Denial Global Temperatures Are Dropping Fast.
https://youtu.be/pHqPF30jg2w compare:
https://youtu.be/UhdymoRTz6M
The problem with global warmongers is that they rely on an extremely small amount of carbondioxide to do all the hard work for them. How much heat can a molecuel contain and hold onto overnight?
Is it posible that warm carbondioxide can get into the upper atmosphere?
If it can how much heat can it take with it?
Logic dictaes that the warm molecules will remain at height until they cool. Is that not so?
If not why not?
A litre of water can hold over a pint of carbondioxide gas in solution. This is gas that would be in the open air at 15 pounds per square inch (1bar=15PSI.) this obviously depends upon temperature.
Also it is impossible to count how much is used or produced by fish. Shellfish -coral in particular, make beautiful islands from it. I have heard that most sand on tropical beaches is coral. How true is that I don't know. I am sure that a lot of it is diluted with the debris from volcanoes.
Recent estimates have calculated that 26 percent of all the carbon released as CO2 from fossil fuel burning, cement manufacture, and land-use changes over the decade 2002–2011 was absorbed by the oceans. (About 28 percent went to plants and roughly 46 percent to the atmosphere.) During this time, the average annual total release of was 9.3 billion tons of carbon per year, thus on average 2.5 billion tons went into the ocean annually.
To work out how much a given volume of water will hold place a can of pop in a fridge and cool it to about 0C. Use a can that is sealed so that it can be shown to have all the content trapped until unsealed.
You can rate this comparatively without exact measurement by comparing the gas fizz with a warm can. And since most oceans are below the surface, logic dictates the depths are coolest. I have the impression that they have been the same since Adam was a child. I am giving up looking for the actual data. Water at depth is not only able to dissolve more that I thought possible because it not just colder than the surface but unr pressure the carbon dioxide level can become unlimited.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world's volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.
Thank goodness for the recession!
Now all out cement and iron production can evolve to carbonates. Speaking of which; during which part of the ocean cycle is mass plankton produced?
I think it is the warm one.
Do you know what that means?
