Polar Vortex Motion = Pole Shifting ! Global Warming

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostWed Aug 06, 2014 6:33 pm » by Chronicnerd


There have been many weather related *anomalies* that we have seen occur over the past year.
Recently, we see in the news that there are all sorts of "oddities" a foot:
Hawaii braces for double storm impact:
http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/hurricane-iselle-to-impact-haw/31586142

A summer version of the Polar Vortex
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-summery-version-of-the-polar-vortex

Death Valley Cooler than Missoula Montana on Sunday
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/08/04/death-valley-was-cooler-than-missoula-mont-on-sunday/

These are just a 'quick pick' of the more recent news. If you do some searches you will find a bountiful of information regarding links to the polar vortex and changing weather patterns.

What sparked me to kick this thread off, for anyone remotely interested, was the most recent update on the Siberian "Giant Hole":


The above video basically references this Washington Post Article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/05/scientists-may-have-cracked-the-giant-siberian-crater-mystery-and-the-news-isnt-good/?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost

Why post about this and why the "! <not> Global Warming" portion in the title?
Well, I should make myself very clear about this. It is not that there is no *Climatic Change* happening, as we can clearly see from all of the strange weather patterns that there is ~something~ a foot here.

However, most people associate the whole "Global Warming" phrase with man-induced (via pollutants) climate change.

What we are seeing is definitively associated with the migrating Polar Vortexes (North and South), but their migration is not induced by man-made "Global Warming".

First we must *truly* understand ~what makes/generates the polar vortex~:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_vortex
A polar vortex is a persistent, large-scale cyclone that circles either of the planet's geographical poles.

All we need to do is read the very first line of the Wikipedia's definition to understand what generates the polar vortex... the Geographical Poles.

Ok, now you need to also understand that you have a *magnetic* pole and a *geographical pole*... the geographical pole is the pole in which is the center point of rotation for a planet body. The magnetic pole is based on the Earth's magnetic field (currently believe to be derived from a planet's dynamo):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamo_theory

So, you will possibly hear about theories (in the not too distant future...probably within the next year) that: "Because of the 'Global Warming' there is more liquid on the planet, this in turn will cause a bit more 'wobble' in the Earth's rotation and thus will cause a wider rotation of the Earth's Geographic poles".

However, don't be tricked by this malformed theory...I might find the time to post all of the relevant math and numbers relating to sea levels and what kind of impact it would have on the planet's rotation...but there is a much faster way to discount this.

If the poles "wobble" were to increase in diameter due to more water in liquid form (which would collect primarily in the central oceans), then we would see a seasonal polar vortex...and not a *summer and winter* polar vortex...as in...right now we would not be hearing people talking about the "Polar Vortex" as this was already talked about earlier this year.

Most current news on the "Polar Vortex":
http://www.bing.com/news/search?q=Northern+Polar+Vortex&qft=sortbydate%3d%221%22&form=PTFTNR

Earlier Reports of the "Polar Vortex":
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/1026020-469/polar-vortex-delivers-snow-and-cold-in.html
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/1026020-469/polar-vortex-delivers-snow-and-cold-in.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/us-winter-weather-2013-arctic-winds_n_2543439.html
All the way back to January 2 2013:
http://theweathercentre.blogspot.com/2013/01/multiple-stratospheric-warmings-confirm.html

So what we have learned so far:
1.) The polar vortex has migrated, which can only mean the *planet's rotational axis has moved*.
2.) The polar vortex is generated by wind currents created by both the wind currents that form at both ends of the geographical poles as well as the ionization of said currents from the magnetic fields (which tend to be not too far from the geographical poles).
3.) The polar vortex has been impacting the planet's weather patterns since the beginning of 2013 and has continued to impact the planet throughout the years. (pick a region...north or south and you will see that the geographical poles are not "wobbling" more than normal...as such the geographical poles have shifted).

Now, there is one more thing that could cause the geographical poles to "move"... a stronger magnetic field pulling a lesser magnetic field. In this case, we can look directly to our Sun:

April 2013
http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2012/04/23/unusual-magnetic-changes-in-the-sun-the-north-pole-of-the-sun-had-started-flipping-about-a-year-earlier-than-expected/

August of 2013:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/08/210184749/nasa-sun-getting-ready-for-a-field-flip

January 2014?:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/01/06/sun-magnetic-field-polarity-reverse/4306845/

Finally this is a good article to point to:
http://rt.com/news/sun-upside-down-flip-990/
"Scherrer explained earlier in December that “the sun's north pole has already changed sign, while the South Pole is racing to catch up.”


I have posted a bit on this topic in the past, but the important part to understand is that the North pole had *changed its sign and was already 65-75% of the way to its 'opposite' side*, while the South pole of the Sun had "stalled out". When this happens, there is a greater difference of potential energy built up between the two poles...and as such once the South pole did ~indeed~ start to move it created a larger delta in the Sun's magnetic fields during the South pole's motion...which in turn would create a larger pull to *Northern* magnetic fields of the planets.

Since the magnetic fields of the poles tend to stay relatively close to the axial poles, one could view them as having a "gyroscopic magnetic field relationship" with one another. If the magnetic pole of one end is pulled too much, then the geographical pole will end up moving along with it.

The end result?

More than likely we will not see too much more "pole migration" for another 10-11 years when the Sun does another field reversal. However, an axial/geographical shift of the poles can induce a slow migration of the geographic poles over time. Think of the geographical poles as having achieved a form of "balance" over hundreds of thousands of years. There is a period where the geographical poles will appear to be "constant"...however...once the geographical poles get "knocked out of balance"...if they have moved enough...then each solar cycle forward the geographical poles will ~slightly shift~... since the geographical poles of the planet alternate their facing towards the Sun they are both impacted by any radical changes in the Sun's poles.

Now, once they are out of balance enough, if we go with the Dynamo theory, then the magnetic fields will be impacted more each solar cycle, which in turn will impact the internal Dynamo (this is what is generating our magnetic field...and as such if this changes position then the magnetic fields change position).

Once the magnetic poles have become "offset" enough, then there is a much faster magnetic pole shift that can occur...as in a few solar cycles and North is South and South is North...when this happens there is an "inverted" pushing that happens between the Sun and Earth's magnetic fields...the reverse of what caused the magnetic pole shift in the first place...and eventually the Axial poles get "re-aligned" once South becomes North and North becomes South.

Then you have a long period where Earth sits in this state...until the process happens again...and you repeat the process. This is something that has been happening for almost as long as the Earth has been in existence.

What does this all mean for most of us?
It means that there will be continual weather pattern changes. Regions that were not warm will become warm...regions that were warm...will become cooler...it also means stormy weather patterns will change...dryer regions will become more moist (from rain that avoided said regions).

How fast will this happen?
Like most pole shifts, it is a long process as it takes 1 full solar cycle to shift slightly...and 1 full solar cycle is roughly 11 years. So, it could take 10 to 20 to 100 cycles to get the "final nudge" needed for a final field reversal of planet Earth...this math I am not able to calculate without spending a great deal of time creating a full working model. However, what we can expect is the following:

- Constant changes in weather patterns... areas that typically got hurricanes will not get them as much...and areas that typically don't...will...
- More Earth Quakes... some areas that stop receiving rain can dry up quickly...dry dirt is much easier to move than wet dirt...wet dirt holds that extra water...when that goes...it becomes lighter...and as such tectonic plates that are/were being held down by the weight of the wet dirt will rise...and when this happens the plates "slip"...and you have an earth quake.
- More "holes" will appear... just like in Siberia... we will see regions have some *freaky* things happen...only to discover it is most likely due to climatic shifts...which really means...water moves from one spot to another...and as such things become more brittle...crack...and/or cave in.
- More violent storms... water will accumulate rapidly in regions that were cooler but become hotter (evaporation)...and thus more water in the air...more ionized particles...more clouds...more rain.

Conclusion?
When you hear someone talking about "Global Warming"...take the above information into consideration...as we need to think more about how we can "quickly adjust regions" to climate change and not go on "witch hunts" based on theories that are funded by $$ and not science...

Whether you drive a "Smart Car" or a "Gas Guzzler"... won't really matter (other than the $$ it costs for gas) when it comes to this form of ~Climate Change~...

No one has asked the question why many of our planets have had strange things happen to them...
As an example:
Why Jupiter's Spot is gradually Shrinking...
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/05/15/312853947/why-jupiter-s-red-spot-isn-t-as-great-as-it-used-to-be

There are theories...and then there is just fact...which in my personal opinion I think we have only one real object in our Solar System that could cause radical changes in most all planets...

Our Sun!
:sunny:

Cheers,

-CN

Super Moderator
User avatar
Posts: 18907
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 4:20 am
Location: underneath the circumstances

PostWed Aug 06, 2014 7:49 pm » by The57ironman


.


:think:



Image
...you know it's autumn in New England
....when you have to run your air conditioning and heat...
in the same day..
Image

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostFri Aug 08, 2014 6:17 pm » by Chronicnerd


For anyone following this post (evidently there is not much interest in how this will impact everyone's life on this planet for the next couple of decades)...
Supersized storms spotted erupting on Uranus
http://www.disclose.tv/news/Supersized_storms_spotted_erupting_on_Uranus/107009
As hurricanes take aim at Hawaii, astronomers in Hawaii aimed their telescopes at storms raging on another planet: distant Uranus, the tilted ice giant orbiting the sun nearly 20 times farther away than Earth.


Not sayin... just sayin...

Most of the issues we have been seeing regarding weather patterns, "mysterious holes", earth quakes, etc...

Is due to the magnetic pole shift that occurred on our Sun just recently...
Typically the north and south poles move in tandem:


Upload to Disclose.tv



If you watch the above video, it shows the previous solar maximum (2001 time period) and how the poles flipped. You will see a relative "synchronous" motion for both the northern and southern fields.

The most recent solar pole flip (as described above in my first post) was much different, and I am sure as time goes by we will see a video come out that will show the Southern magnetic field (of the sun) "stall out" at an offset angle while the northern pole continues to move. The difference between the two pole shifts is that the more recent one (which is now impacting all planets with magnetic fields...and why nothing big is happening on mars) ended up in a build up of potential energy (in magnetic form) between the Sun's poles...sort of like winding a rubber band up...and once the South pole did start moving it moved at a much faster pace...

Of course, we don't have the speed delta between the two solar maximum cycles as of yet... but this delta between the two will end up being enough of an increase of rate of change where it impacted most planets with relatively high ranging magnetosphere fields (i.e. Mars has a weak magnetosphere as it is believed the dynamo stopped spinning a long time ago).

Speaking of changes in magnetic fields...
2010: A Magnetic Field Applied to the Brain Can Alter People's Sense of Morality
http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-03/bending-morality-magnetism
MIT scientists have shown that they can alter our moral judgments simply by magnetically interfering with a certain part of the brain.

Studies have shown that the right temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) lights up with activity when we engage in moral judgments like evaluating the intentions of another person, indicating the region is important to making moral decisions. But while we like to think we're very consistent in our morality, the MIT team showed that an electromagnetic field applied to the scalp impairs our ability to evaluate the intentions of others, leaving us with little by which to hand down a moral judgment.


Not sure yet if much of the "crazy things" happening around the world is related, but seeing that the solar pole flip did occur over the past two years and that our polar vortex has indeed *moved*... and that bird migrations, fish migrations, and ocean based mammal migrations have been obviously "out of whack"... not to mention an airport had to be adjusted not too long ago...
http://phys.org/news/2011-01-tampa-airport-runways-renumbered-due.html

We can safely assume that we are, more than likely, being surrounded by different magnetic fields than say we were a decade or more ago....


While I sometimes feel like my talk about the Sun... solar flares and the like... are becoming a bit like "Chicken Little"... many "nay-Sayers" quickly discounted the whole "2012 solar maximum" theory when we were not impacted by a solar flare...

Of course... now that we have some distance from the *POLAR FLIP*...NASA finally releases information that... indeed we *WERE* very close to a ~Solar Flare~ apocalypse...
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/23jul_superstorm/

I had posted about this particular flare and the impacts (as we all know by now with the media finally starting to report more information about solar flares) it could have on our planet...as many other have on this site...but am sure that most just discounted anything else I had added regarding our Sun and how it directly impacts *ALL WEATHER PATTERNS AND ATMOSPHERES* in our solar system... in many different ways.

The point being is this:
The "Solar Maximum" did not have to be entirely about "solar flares"... as the other thing that happens during a solar maximum (and why there are more flares) is that the Sun's poles flip!

So... some of the predictions (Mayan included) about the end of the "cycle"... could be a lot more about the Sun's polar field flip with a single pole that stalls...which this happens every several thousand years or so as well... it is all cyclical...

Either case, during the "critical time" of the pole flip there was much less news about how the solar flares that did occur were *very close* and would have been *devastating*...as well as much less news about the *ODD* polar flip that just recently happened...as well as there was little news about how the planets with a Magnetosphere were suddenly showing signs of...

"Global Warming"... or "Climatic/Weather Changes"...

Of course, now that we are relatively far from the actual culprit, in my opinion, news about the symptoms/after-math is trickling out... because after all...

2012 has come and gone... and we are all still here... right?

Not many people think about the fact that: Large scale objects and changes in large scale objects tend to, relatively speaking, have a slower impact on smaller bodies when they under-go larger than typical changes in their state.

Asteroids can be akin to small speed boats...small waves and fast motion
Planets can be akin to medium to large sized Yachts...medium sized waves and medium paced motion
Suns are like huge tankers...large to huge waves and slow paced motion

The results of the past solar cycle we are now seeing...and will continue to see for quite sometime..

As it always has been about our Sun...and how it impacts everything in our solar system...it was just the matter of determining "what exactly it was about our Sun that would have a 'new world' changing/impact upon our planet"...

And at this point... all of the evidence points to the polar flip of this solar maximum...as we see it impacting many of the planets with forms of "atmospheres" and "weather patterns"...which as my earlier post here pointed out...are all impacted by the polar vortexes...

Cheers,

:sunny:

-CN

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 2114
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:08 pm
Location: The outlet by the light switch

PostSat Aug 09, 2014 4:04 am » by Thebluecanary


That is really fascinating dude. And it makes a lot of sense when you look at what is going on around the world.

I live in an area of the US that is typically butt sweat hot in the summer. Over the past 5 years, it has seemed we were overall trending hotter….the USDA even upgraded our hardiness zone from 7 to 8. Because "global warming". But the past two years, we have been cooler than normal. Last summer it was super rainy and cooler than it usually is to the point that crops were impacted. (This was mostly the excess rain). Our winter was hard last year, too, to the point that they called off school for a couple of days because it was so cold in the mornings that they couldn't crank the busses. (Busses down here don't have engine block warmers the way busses up north do.) This year so far, we've only had a few days over 90F…and quite a few days way below average. My cousin got married in mid July, and it was so cool people were wearing sweaters over their fancy dresses. The forecast for this coming weekend has temperatures in the upper 70s. I'm not complaining…but it seems odd. And the "polar vortex" is something that I had not heard of at all before the last couple of years when it has been blamed for unusually cold weather. I figured it was just a fancy weather word that was being popularized by social media…like "derecho".

So, assuming that what you are talking about is what is happening…what IS the overall impact for weather? Is it something that will happen gradually but even out over time, just requiring some adaptation? Or is it apocalypse level weather change?
Remember, in a real conspiracy, all players are pawns regardless of their rank.
-----Christopher Hyatt

Initiate
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 11:21 pm

PostSat Aug 09, 2014 5:32 am » by Chaindrive2.5


This would ONLY make sense if "WE", that means everybody on this rock lived BEFORE 20th century.. BEFORE the industrial revolution and BEFORE Nicolas Tesla. Yeah, sure drill a tube down a ice hole and youll get something and thatll be just a educated guess at best, but its NOT the same (not even close) to be there in person to see actually happening.. (more or less), and I know shit doesnt happen over night neither.

Ive seen weather patterns that do thing that physics says they shouldnt. Last summer I say a high pressure system setting 500 miles south of the gulf of alaska, and it was setting there for at least 3 weeks... dont sit there and tell me this was a act of the polar vortex, if you do then Im going to start laughing.. Sure the poles always had a polar vortex.. least amount of resistance that spins in a circle and guess what you get.. polar vortex, in fact EVERY planet has a polar vortex.. and.?

In fact, name as many times (with proof) that the term polar vortex was ever used as it has been in the last 6 months.. outside a science class, I think it was used once (that I can ever recall) and that was back in 1980s.

This is FAR accurate, pump every energy in the cells and they can sit there for weeks.. WHICH they did.

Image


thats why we froze our asses off and paying OVER 200$ is gas bills.. maybe a week at most but for two months+... YEAH RIGHT!

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostSat Aug 09, 2014 5:03 pm » by Chronicnerd


Not sure what you are talking about regarding it "not making sense"...
Did you actually read all of the information provided?
What part of a geographical pole shift, as in a relatively small amount, doesn't make sense?
"Pumping energy into every 'cell'..."
What energy and from where?
Just curious as to what doesn't make sense about this post...as all information provided is accurate...the polar vortexes are the primary drive to most all jet streams which directly impact the climate.

could you expand upon what you mean a bit? If you have specific doubts then please list them and I would be happy to provide the empirical evidence as well as details to better clarify.

???

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9194
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostSat Aug 09, 2014 11:23 pm » by Noentry


I have always thought global weather change is a culmination of many different factors.

Solar factors, the sun, as well as the moon.
Planetary factors, pole shifts periodic corrections in the rotation of the planet, Earth quakes.
localized factors, pollution, over farming, wholesale destruction of lands, forest, jungles, industrial neglect.

There are many factors, some more influential then others.

CN even if mans part is just a tiny percentage of the whole, that extra % might be the straw that broke the camels back.

Can we honestly take the chance?

I think all this latest secret gioengineering is their attempt at controlling the issues you have highlighted CN.

I read some where the heart lets out an electromagnetic pulse that can if close enough to another heart ( 4m ) will cause an emergence of the two separate fields into a new frequency wave.
An example, gut instinct.

As we have distanced ourselves from what is best for this planet and nature,
We may well have a greater impact on this planet then just what we can see.
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Conspirator
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:15 am

PostMon Aug 11, 2014 4:31 pm » by Chronicnerd


Noentry wrote:I have always thought global weather change is a culmination of many different factors.

Solar factors, the sun, as well as the moon.
Planetary factors, pole shifts periodic corrections in the rotation of the planet, Earth quakes.
localized factors, pollution, over farming, wholesale destruction of lands, forest, jungles, industrial neglect.

There are many factors, some more influential then others.

CN even if mans part is just a tiny percentage of the whole, that extra % might be the straw that broke the camels back.

Can we honestly take the chance?

I think all this latest secret gioengineering is their attempt at controlling the issues you have highlighted CN.

I read some where the heart lets out an electromagnetic pulse that can if close enough to another heart ( 4m ) will cause an emergence of the two separate fields into a new frequency wave.
An example, gut instinct.

As we have distanced ourselves from what is best for this planet and nature,
We may well have a greater impact on this planet then just what we can see.


Hey hey No Entry!

There have been very in-depth studies done on all green house gases (which contribute to global warming) and how it relates to man.

This site has some very good information on it:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Image
As you can see above (and if you read the site) you will notice that there has been one *major* item in the "list of green house gases" that...for some reason *ehum*...the "Gore Global Warming" agenda has all but left out of the equation when squawking about global warming...

H20

Yep... water.... the above image shows the %'s of how man has contributed to each of the categories
(if you want a total % relative to each category keep reading below as I have included that as well).

So, you take into account the *evaporating water* and couple that with a *polar vortex* shift (which historically the polar vortexes have the coolest weather climate as the ~vortex~ part...sucks the upper atmosphere down to the surface of the planet...it is like a tornado...but the suction is downward...like when you flush a toilet...and as such the upper atmosphere is much cooler...and I think I don't need to explain why air is cooler the further you get from the planet's surface.


Soooo...what happens when a polar vortex *moves*?

The region that was being "chilled" no longer is being chilled. Now, over the thousands of years...during the more stable period of the geographical poles...water turns to ice/snow in such cool weather climates (close to the polar vortexes)...and as such water just "piles up" in the form of ice and snow.

When the polar vortexes move...the regions with the thousands of years of ice begin to melt, and in turn the water goes from solid to liquid which then the liquid flows down the path of least resistance...which typically causes it to "pool" in the lowest areas. The majority ends up in the oceans...but a good chunk of it fills rivers and lakes...and all of these pools/bodies of water have a specific evaporation rate. If you increase the amount of water (even by a couple of inches) in most, not all because there is a shift in weather patterns when the polar vortexes move, of the bodies of water (especially oceans) then there is a very large increase in the amount of water that evaporates.

Water, when it evaporates, turns into tiny balls of water...which each tiny ball of water acts like a prism...as these tiny balls migrate upwards they become ~ionized~ and start to *stick* together and form larger balls of water which in turn form clouds...which act like a large fluffy blanket-prism.

A side note on water acting like a prism:
The reason why you see people watering their yards in the morning or in the evening is two fold:
1.) It reduces the amount of water evaporating before soaking into the ground
2.) It prevents grass from getting burned on hot days...

The "burned" part is counter-intuitive because it is water after all...but because water naturally forms into "balls"/spherical objects when it is sprayed or broken apart via some external energy. However, when it lands on a blade of grass, due to the flat nature of the grass blade, the side of the water droplet that is making contact with the blade of grass becomes flat...but the rest stays round...

Since water naturally acts like a prism when in its natural "droplet/round" state:
http://water.usgs.gov/edu/rainbows.html
A similar situation happens in a raindrop, as the right side picture shows. The water drop is acting like a prism, except the light is being refracted at three different points (some of the light bounces off the back of the raindrop and back out to you as you watch). Each time the light beam bounces, it gets wider, and the rainbow you see is a combination of millions of these light beams coming back to you.


it will, in turn act like a "magnifier" if you place a drop on a flat surface:
http://www.education.com/science-fair/article/water-drop-lens/
And we all know what happens when you use a magnifying glass on dry grass or even an ant on a sunny day...they both eventually burn...and thus...water droplets on grass blades in the middle of the day is a bad thing...because water droplets are prisms that can be turned into a magnifier if one side is flat.

*However*
We should focus on the water drop acts like a prism element, because that is the culprit in the issue with the climate changes we have been seeing as of recently.

You can read up on how clouds act like a "reflector" to various types of radiation here:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Clouds/

Image

The general idea is the thicker the clouds (i.e. more water vapor) the more light/radiation from the Sun will become "trapped" once it passes through the cloud in the form of white light (i.e. the full spectrum). As it passes through the cloud and becomes separated by the millions upon millions of "little water drop prisms" the UV spectrum of light ends up becoming trapped between the Earth's surface and the clouds.

The UV radiation will either get absorbed into the Earth surface (resulting in an increase in temperature) or it will bounce off the surface...but if there are clouds then a good portion of that UV that reflected will bounce back to the Earth's surface...and most likely get absorbed.

Now, if you have something like this happening over a *body of water*... the water will end up absorbing a certain amount of the UV radiation...raising its temperature at the surface...which in turn...can cause more water vapor...which joins the clouds above...thus how many ocean based storms form.

So, if you refer back to the first link and look at Section 3, you will notice something interesting:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
Image
Total atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) -- both man-made and natural-- is only about 3.62% of the overall greenhouse effect-- a big difference from the 72.37% figure in Table 2, which ignored water!

Water vapor, the most significant greenhouse gas, comes from natural sources and is responsible for roughly 95% of the greenhouse effect (5). Among climatologists this is common knowledge but among special interests, certain governmental groups, and news reporters this fact is under-emphasized or just ignored altogether.



By looking at the %'s of what is man made...versus how much *water vapor* contributes to the green house warming effect (which is the basis of the "Gorian Global Warming Hypothi-scare-scam") you will clearly see that water vapor is such a high contributor to the green house warming effect...
Thus a few %'s added by C02/Man-Made pollutants would not be the "Straw that broke the Camel's back"...

What *WOULD* be the straw that broke the Camel's back would be if the planets geographical poles shifted by a small % that caused a shift in the polar vortexes...which in turn caused regions that had been cooled for thousands of year to start "warming up"...and thus the water in those regions that was in a solid state...would turn to a liquid state and move towards the path of least resistance...which eventually would increase the over-all amount of water in *liquid form* on the planet.

A good article on what we should expect between now and 2100:
http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/are-the-oceans-rising.htm

Here is the Wikipedia on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise
Image
Image

As you can see... the rate of sea level rising (i.e. liquid water on this planet) has been steadily increasing over the years...

What I think has added a "spike" in this has been the more recent polar vortex motion/migration (which is an indicator that the geographical poles/axis has been shifted ~ever so slightly~)...

This would be a "straw" that could push the planet "over the edge" and thus... create new weather changes/climate changes that are indicative to "Global Warming"... but not because of the cars we drive...but because of the rate of water evaporating from the surface of the planet.

Does this help clear things up a bit for you NoEntry?

If you have any other questions...please...feel free to ask. We need to stop focusing on the "Gorian Global Warming Hypothi-scare-scam" and start realizing that even if we completely stop all fuel emissions...it won't make a difference...because as I have said before this is a *cyclical thing* that we have absolutely, as much as we would like to think we do, no control over...and have had *very very very* little impact on the thing we call "Global Warming".

It is all about the Sun-Planet relationships...and how they run through cycles...and how those cycles impact each planet in this system...

Otherwise, we will just all spend time trying to reduce emissions...not that this is a bad thing...just we shouldn't focus primarily on this...maybe focus about the same percentage of our world's time/money into this as it *actually impacts* the total global warming of the planet...and then spend the rest of our time/money into figuring out how to relocate shore line cities...build stronger buildings (i.e. hurricane/tornado tough)...and understand that this is going to happen...no matter what we do...

It is a better idea to focus on what *can* be done...than to continue to debate something that is empirically and scientifically proven...measured...tested...and *known fact* amongst most anyone who has taken the time to really look at what is happening on this planet and almost every climatologist on this planet.

The only thing that I have been trying to do is make people aware of the "straw" that I believe has broken the camel's back..and that would be the ever-increasing amount of water in liquid form on our planet coupled with this past solar cycle being the final "push" that has caused this newer term "polar vortex" to show up in the news as of recently...which the polar vortexes form around the geographical poles (not magnetic)...and as such that is a sign that is indicative to some form of movement of the geographical poles (a slight movement could skew the polar vortexes as they are...so this doesn't need to be some catastrophic event...it could be a simple offset that happened between 2010-2014.

In the end...as the Egyptians and the Mayans...and many cultures have said...

It is all about the Sun...

:sunny:

Cheers,

-CN

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9194
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostMon Aug 11, 2014 5:27 pm » by Noentry


Does this help clear things up a bit for you NoEntry?



Actually very much so.
From your link.

Putting it all together:
total human greenhouse gas contributions
add up to about 0.28% of the greenhouse effect.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Can a third of a percent really make any difference?
This is the straw that broke the back of the tax payer.
Nothing more.

What is most telling for me is the effect on all planetary bodies.
My interest is in how the sun has managed to cause significant climate change in the planets in the outer reaches, almost on a parallel with the Earth's climate change.

On the average, Pluto is 40 times farther away from the Sun than is the Earth. Pluto therefore receives 40 * 40 = 1600 times less energy (in a given area) than does the Earth. No wonder that Pluto is a frozen world!!!

http://nova.stanford.edu/projects/mod-x/id-energy.html

They suspect the average surface temperature increased about 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit, or slightly less than 2 degrees Celsius.

http://www.space.com/3159-global-warmin ... tists.html
Pluto ^^^

This argument is part of a greater one that other planets are warming. If this is happening throughout the solar system, clearly it must be the sun causing the rise in temperatures – including here on Earth
Image

.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/pluto-g ... arming.htm
I see a lot of holes in their analysis^^^


I am a firm believer as you CN the Sun is the true driving force behind the global weather patterns of our solar system.


I personally find it hard to believe the sun can cause such a dramatic effect on a planet as far away as Pluto.

My suspicion CN is we may be entering a region of space in the Milky Way, that is also affecting the temperature of the planets of our solar system.
Last edited by Noentry on Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 9194
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:52 pm

PostMon Aug 11, 2014 5:37 pm » by Noentry


The Milky Way Galaxy's Spiral Arms and Ice-Age Epochs and the Cosmic Ray Connection

Image

Figure 1 - The cosmic ray link between solar activity and the terrestrial climate. The changing solar activity is responsible for a varying solar wind strength. A stronger wind will reduce the flux of cosmic ray reaching Earth, since a larger amount of energy is lost as they propagate up the solar wind. The cosmic rays themselves come from outside the solar system. Since cosmic rays dominate the troposphere ionization, an increased solar activity will translate into a reduced ionization, and empirically, also to a reduced low altitude cloud cover. Since low altitude clouds have a net cooling effect (their "whiteness" is more important than their "blanket" effect), increased solar activity implies a warmer climate. Intrinsic cosmic ray flux variations will have a similar effect, one however, which is unrelated to solar activity variations

http://www.sciencebits.com/ice-ages

Seems like my cosmic theory of Climate change is not new.
:think:
"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.
The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.
The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."
A. A. Milne


Next

  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook