Search Results for: coal ash
Geoengineers And Big Oil, The Dark Alliance
The curtain of deception continues to be pulled back on the powers that are decimating the planet while at the same time doing everything they can to confuse and bewilder the public in regard to what is actually unfolding. Climate engineering has been an essential part of the fossil fuel industry disinformation campaign. Engineered winter storms have been completely hyped by the mainstream media. The "record snow" in Boston was a primary headline all winter long while little was said about the virtually nonexistent snow pack in the Sierras. While mainstream media was trumpeting "record cold", that was consistently manipulated by the geoengineers in a few regions, global temperatures have continued to soar. Standing on solid conclusions in regard to the true state of the climate is imperative so that we do not mistakenly accept false information from those with an agenda. So who is paying to create the confusion and thus hide reality? The Union Of Concerned Scientists has shed much light on this issue in the article below. Scientists are not yet willing to face the climate engineering factor (which is making the warming worse, not better), but the biosphere destruction being caused by climate engineering will be impossible to hide for much longer.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Geoengineering Climate Change, Is This How It Ends?
By William Thomas, contributing writer for geoengineeringwatch.org
Hornby Island July 6, 2015 – Yesterday around 4 am, I awoke disturbed and opened my back door on an ominous orange sky. I'm either in an Alfred Hitchcock movie or it's the end of the world, I muttered.
Right the second time.
Last evening down at the cove, shutterbugs snapped away with giant lenses at a fat red ball that looked more like Mars than the setting sun. And this morning, I awoke hacking and choking. The smoke streaming through an open window smelled like a big building burning right next door.
But there is no big building.
And it wasn't burning.
Even more unsettling, the usual daybreak cacophony of robins, ravens, eagles and crows was… silent.
The winged ones had fled.
I flipped on the laptop and booted up…
“A haze blankets the majority of people in BC,” Global News was reporting. Comparing square-kilometers, this is the same as saying, “a haze blankets most people in California, New Zealand and the UK.” [Global News July 6/15; BCRobyn.com]
While I'd slept, across the Georgia Strait the Metro Vancouver Air Quality Health Index had gone to 10+ “Very High Risk”. Health officials are warning that secondhand wildfire smoke inflames lung and heart linings – and is especially dangerous for infants, the elderly and those who have diabetes, lung or heart disease. (Yikes! C'est moi!)
As my wounded ticker protests this latest insult, the Times Colonist confirms that wildfires burning throughout the province are increasing hospital admissions for cardiovascular symptoms. People with chronic medical conditions are being warned to avoid “strenuous exercise” and stay the heck inside. [Times Colonist July 5/15; Global News July 6/15; CBC July 6/15]
I shut the window, cranked the HEPA filter up high and popped another baby aspirin.
Somebody Call Somebody
Several burning BC communities have declared states of emergency, which means the provincial government must borrow more money to pick up the tab. With climate events cascading, we know how this ends.
With most of British Columbia officially declared an “Extreme Fire Risk”, a province-wide ban on all fires, campfires, fireworks, torches, “exploding rifle targets” and similar shenanigans is in effect. The fine for violators is 100 grand. But at this point, anyone seen flicking a glowing butt towards the woods will probably be shot. And maybe not with a tranquilizer dart. [Vancouver Sun July 5/15]
A wildfire up north near Port Hardy is burning less than 300 metres from some evacuated homes. This is extremely weird. As a frequent visitor to “Port” informed me by phone, he's been there “maybe two days when it wasn't raining.” [CBC July 6/15]
But not recently. This “wet coast” town at the northern tip of Vancouver Island hasn't seen rain in two months. “People in the north island need to understand that we are in a very unusual place,” advises Port Hardy Mayor Hank Bood. “We’re not fooling around anymore.” [Canadian Press July 6/15]
“We’re in areas where we’ve never been before. We’ve never had a dry May and June like we’ve just had,” echoes North Vancouver Mayor, Darrell Mussatto. “We’re at record low inflows into our reservoirs.” [Global News July 6/15]
Can You Say British California?
This is the first weekend of enhanced water restrictions. The “Level 4” drought rating currently in effect for southern Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands, means “water supplies are insufficient to meet the needs of communities and ecosystems.” Residents are required to try to cut their water use by an additional 20% over “regular” reductions. [CBC July 6/15]
“Level 4” drought = Panic Now And Avoid The Rush
There is no Level 5.
With nearly all of the lower mainland, most of Vancouver Island, and vast areas of northeastern and central BC now in extreme fire danger rating, it feels more like late-August 2030 than early July 2015.
Despite a massive weekend tourist blitz, at least this tinder-dry, 11 square-mile isle isn't burning yet. But with 178 total active wildfires on nearby Vancouver Island and the BC mainland, we are surrounded by burning forests and desiccated grasslands to our north, south and east. [Global News July 5/15]
According to the authorities, much of the smoke settling in the trees outside is coming from a wildfire burning in steep terrain and heavy timber near Pemberton. Tripling in size overnight, this 2,000-hectare fire “is displaying a vigorous and aggressive rate of spread, with periods of organized crown fire,” the BC Wildfire Management Branch reports. Crown fires spread flames from exploding tree top to tree top, igniting “spot fires” ahead of their advance. [CBC July 6/15]
Pemberton is 299 kilometers away.
Closer across the water, one firefighter has died fire-fighting in Sechelt, where the Shishalh Nation reports a spike in respiratory distress calls to emergency services. The 38-bed St. Mary’s Hospital is filled to capacity with health complications from smoke inhalation. [Global News July 5/15; Vancouver Sun July 5/15]
“It’s unusual for this time of year; there’s no relief in sight in the weather forecast. We’re expecting temperatures in the mid-30s [C], and absolutely no rain forecast in the near future. That’s definitely cause for concern,” worries Provincial Fire Information Officer, Kevin Skrepnek.
How about freaking out?
Knock Knock. Who's There? Carbon Karma Collectors
And how about mentioning the perils of gung-ho carbon burning? In a deluge of news reports on BC's Big Burning, repeated mentions are being made of this record dastardly drought. But not it's cause. While industrial stacks belch greenhouse gases, and holiday-makers everywhere race crazily around in cars, boats and planes – total mentions of “climate change”, “global warming” and “record-high carbon emissions” in press stories relating to major fires now burning in three provinces, Alaska and Siberia… ?
Zeeeero.
High And Dry
So go ahead and guess the number of corporate-media references to ongoing geoengineering aerosols sponging up the remaining moisture over North America's gasping western seaboard…
Right.
“With temperatures 12–18 degrees [C] hotter than they normally are this time of year,” the Canadian Press suggests, “a massive ridge of high pressure will remain anchored over the Pacific Northwest [with] ongoing dry conditions and warmer than normal” temperatures.
Canada's national wire service neglected to mention how this “Ridiculously Resilient Ridge” is being created by a flatlined jetstream, no longer driven by the usual north-south temperature differentials wiped out by human-induced warming… and daily maintained by an ongoing aerosol assault clearly visible to anyone looking up at those telltale white plumes who understands they should be seeing no icy contrails at this time of year.
Redlined
Atmospheric-heating gases at 350 parts per million are optimistically considered possibly/maybe/wait-and-see “safe”.
Right now, on this freakish morning during Earth's careening Sixth Mass Extinction, carbon dioxide-equivalent greenhouse gases (CO2e) are nudging past 478 ppm… [MIT]
Misha phoned next. “Nobody's gets it,” she said in a voice verging on despair. Indeed, frantic denialists are blaming The Big Drying on:
1. Bad luck
2. The pope
3. A vindictive sky god
4. “Cyclical” global extinction events
5. Just one of those things
A poll of 20 countries shows the United States comfortably leading the world in climate denial. Just four out of 10 Americans think climate change is a serious threat to their carbon-belching, weather-wracked nation.
More than half of USers agree with the statement: “The climate change we are currently seeing is a natural phenomenon that happens from time to time.”
But 74% of South Koreans and 78% of Japanese disagree.
The populations of France, Italy, Turkey, Spain and Argentina have also totally flunked climate denial, with 80% or more of those surveyed telling pollsters that human activity is driving climate change. While more than 60% of surveyed Spaniards and Italians and more than 70% of Japanese consider climate change a serious threat, in China 91% of those polled say we're doomed if we don't change our ways. [Think Progress July 22/14]
You Think?
Just 10 days ago, a NASA/MODIS satellite shot showed much of Baked Alaska shrouded under a 3,000+ mile cloud of smoke. Now enmeshed in the high-altitude jetstream, “it blankets much of the Northern Hemisphere in a brown-carbon haze.” [Robert Scribbler June 26/15]
Meanwhile, as the hot Pacific Ocean turns anoxic and acidic beneath the keel of my solar-electric outrigger canoe… throughout Siberia, Alaska and the high Arctic, no-longer-frozen permafrost continues to burn in vast underground peat fires. Hundreds of billions of tons of peat drying in record-high winter, spring and summer temperatures “creates an understory fuel that can keep blazes burning for weeks, months, and sometimes years,” Robert Scribbler warns, “pushing blazes to explosive size and dumping massive plumes of smoke into an atmosphere already heavily laden with Alaska’s brown carbon pulse.” [Electra Finds Some Wind; Robert Scribbler June 29/15]
Back in the White House, someone must be smelling smoke. Earlier last month at the National Hurricane Center, Obama dared suggest that climate change is fuelling extreme weather. “This is the only planet we’ve got,” came the predictable presidential sound-bite. “And years from now, I want to be able to look our children and grandchildren in the eye and tell them that we did everything we could to protect it.”
He'll be lucky if they don't whack him upside the head. This is the same guy who just green-lighted offshore Arctic oil drilling and promised to open vast tracts of public land to heavily-subsidized coal mining. [OtherWords June 7/15]
Reality 10, Denial 0
Here's the real deal:
On June 18, 2015, some 320,000 square kilometers of reflective Arctic sea ice melted into dark, heat-absorbing waters in a single day. That’s an ice cube the size of New Mexico gone in 24 hours. [Robert Scribbler June 18/15]
In Alaska, on that same day, close to a half-million more forest acres burned. The 314 wildfires raging throughout the state brought the 2015 total to 1,912,000 acres incinerated by human-powered climate shift and abetted by geoengineering madmen. (At some near-future Eco-Nuremberg trial, we're going to ask them why.)
Also in a recent single day, 138 new fires erupting throughout northwest Canada propelled that burn pile to more than 2,250,000 acres since the start of 2015. Some of those fire fronts among the 30 blazes burning near Great Slave Lake were more than 15 miles long.
Oh, Oh, Canada
Nearly eight out of every 10 Canadians say that Earth’s climate is changing and the federal government is failing to address this growing “problem”. More than half of all Canadians (56%) are convinced climate change is the result of human activities. [National Post May 18/15]
But thinking isn't doing.
With geoengineering aerosols and smoke plumes alternately obscuring our skies, the most pertinent question is:
What are you doing about it?
Access:
Stop The Geoengineers [Geoengineering Watch]
Stop Climate Change [Greenpeace]
We're Building A Global Climate Movement [350.org]
Center For Climate And Energy Solutions
Your Carbon Footprint Calculator
Be Part Of The Solution [EPA]
It’s Not About Freedom And Democracy, It’s About Oil
Many Americans celebrate and glorify wars and conflicts, that is what they have been trained and conditioned to do. We are told America's aggressive behavior all over the globe is about "freedom and democracy", but what are the real motives and agendas behind the endless wars? It is about keeping the completely unsustainable fossil fuel paradigm going as long as possible. It is about hiding a very rapidly unfolding collapse of industrialized society from the masses, which is not hard to do since the most of the population does not want to know what the reality is in the first place. Resource wars are escalating all over the planet as the fight for remaining resources escalates. I respect and regard US veterans that have served for the right motives, I have personally given to veterans causes for many years. Unfortunately those in power have used them for the primary purpose of gaining more power and control. The article below is an exceptional portrayal of the hydrocarbon fuel conundrum and the endless carnage that has been created by the quest for what is left of this finite power source that has already pushed the biosphere past the point of no return. Though climate engineering is not mentioned in the article, it is a core factor in regard to the escalating resource wars.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Aluminum Poisoning of Humanity From Geoengineering, The First Science Publication Goes Live
Now we have another weapon in our arsenal to fight back against the ongoing climate engineering insanity, acknowledgment of the atmospheric spraying in a science publication. Geoengineeringwatch.org has had extensive ongoing communication with Dr. Herndon, he attended the California Jam event in Southern California with me. My gratitude to geoscientist/physicist Marvin Herndon for his courage in directly addressing the issue of geoengineering when the vast majority of climate science community is cowering in the shadows.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Dane Wigington and Dr. Marvin Herndon conversing before Dane's presentation on geoengineering at the "California Jam, 2015" awareness conference
The Programming Of Our Children And Geoengineering, An Educator Speaks Out
The paradigm of industrialized society has been an orchestrated disaster for a very long time. How does it get so bad? The programming of children in the educational system leads to a programmed society. This in turn leads to a population that is completely blind and oblivious to the fact that they are being constantly sprayed with toxic materials. My gratitude to educator Cali Will for sharing his perspectives in the attached article.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Geoengineering And The Jade Helm Military Exercises In The US, What’s The Connection?
The unravelling of the reality we have all known is happening from countless directions and at blinding speed. Earth's life support systems are crumbling, the human assault against the planet has taken an immense toll with climate engineering being at the top of the list. Many are still living in a delusion of denial, their delusions will soon be shattered. The power structure is moving their still obedient military chess pieces into position to possibly be used against their own citizens. When reality can no longer be hidden from the masses, chaos will unfold. The article below is from a news site that has hundreds of thousands of followers, they have just woken up to the climate engineering nightmare.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Is There Any Chance Our Changing Climate Is A Natural Cycle?
The short answer is NO. Mathematically speaking there is absolutely no chance that our current warming is in any sense a part of a natural cycle. There are still many clinging to the notion that the human race has had little or nothing to do with the rapidly warming climate, but all available data and mathematical statistics say otherwise. Human activity has completely altered the biosphere in countless ways, especially in regard to the climate system. Of all the anthropogenic factors affecting the climate, the ongoing climate engineering programs are the single most significant source of disruption and decimation. To say the changes to our biosphere are "natural" would be like pushing someone off a cliff and then saying "people die, it's natural". So what are the odds of the changes in our climate being just a "natural cycle"? The Associated Press hired statisticians to find out, the results shown in the article below should paint a very clear and sobering picture. The fact that climate engineering is not mentioned or considered in the article is irrelevant. Climate engineering is still a form of human activity so the equation remains completely accurate.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Fish Die-Off And Chemically Nucleated Winter Storms
Fish are dying off all over the globe in bodies of fresh water and oceans. There are of course many underlying causes, but what part may the ongoing climate engineering contamination play in this equation? The eastern half of the US lower 48 states has been pounded with engineered "winter" storms over and over in recent years. A major part of the geoengineering process related to these storms is the artificial/chemical ice nucleation process. This process not only cools the temperatures down in a storm system and on the ground, the nucleating material also causes ice to form and remain on bodies of water often with water temperatures that would otherwise have been too high for ice to form and remain for extended times naturally. Climate engineering is contaminating precipitation around the globe, countless lab tests prove this. What effect is this contamination having on the chemistry of lakes and streams? The chemical ice nucleating material causes an endothermic reaction. What effect is this reaction having on lake and pond chemistry and available oxygen content? In regard to the particular fish kill documented in the article below, "official agencies" of course say what they always say, that there is nothing to worry about. The role of such agencies is to pacify public concerns, actual investigation and telling the truth is not part of their equation, it never has been for them. If we want the truth to be known, it's up to all of us to expose it. Governmental agencies and mainstream media will continue to do everything in their power to hide what is unfolding around us all for as long as they can.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Is Geoengineering Pushing Us Into Climate Chaos?
By William Thomas, contributing writer for geoengineeringwatch.org
The short answer is yes.
Here's how…
Start with something dynamic, like the weather and its increasing propensity toward sudden, drastic and lingering surprises. As the geologic record of mass extinctions repeatedly shows, if pushed too far by various atmospheric forcings (like mass methane releases or meltwater shutdowns of ocean circulations), the longer-term weather patterns we call climate can change drastically, for a very long time, within a decade. Or a year.
Geoengineers understand that complex weather behaviour emerges from a few simple initial conditions. Change those conditions along a broad atmospheric front by deploying aerial refuelling tankers to spread particles that accrete moisture and scatter incoming sunlight, absorb energy from ionospheric heaters like HAARP, or rapidly cool air masses by dispensing ice-nucleating chemicals like an airborne flash-mob – and you change the heat balance of that airspace and thus the resulting weather. Do this repeatedly, spreading megatons of atmospheric-forcing particulates behind hundreds of heavy aircraft for many years and even climate can be altered.
But which way will it jump? If the flapping of a butterfly's wings can randomly influence the course of a distant hurricane, consider an air force “wing” of 72 jet tankers, each spreading 200,000 pounds of aerosol particles one-tenth the diameter of a human hair along a flight path traversing thousands of miles. With our compounding emissions already hurrying heat and humidity in some places to the edge of liveable limits, geoengineering is the unwelcome bully that threatens to jerk the trigger on looming Abrupt Climate Shift. (Geoengineering aerosols over Belgium – above)
SNAKEBITE
Earth's climate system is chaotic enough to turn occasional stumbles into full-fledged flipouts. So the last thing anyone would want to do is to trigger such an upset with planeloads of monkey-wrenching aerosols.
Right?
To elevate such planetary roulette from blind swings at a constantly shifting atmospheric piñata to a reliably predictable science, the desired weather/climate output must be proportional to each atmospheric modification input. And the resulting atmospheric events must also react the same ways every time. That's why we call such predictable progressions, linear.
But the atmosphere, like life, is so nonlinear.
Nonlinear means “full of surprises”. While short-term moisture, temperature and pressure trends can presage near-term weather over a day or two, the further forecasts extend, the more variables are introduced by air masses feeding back on themselves. Other wild cards faced by the geoengineers include heat-trapping gases accumulated over the past 200 years, atmospheric and oceanic “feedbacks” like major methane burps, hyper-evaporation, warming waters and melting ice sheets, unscheduled volcanic eruptions, the fracking plague, and climax civilizations bristling with dirty stacks and exhausts – plus their own geoengineering efforts, ongoing since at least 1997, when I broke this story worldwide for Environment News Service. [Chemtrails Confirmed 2010 by William Thomas]
Because changes occur in Earth's intricately-coupled biosphere simultaneously and interactively, attempting to anticipate and alter so many constantly changing conditions makes large-scale climate modification an exercise in juggling snakes. Begin with a few characteristics of the longterm weather patterns you want to change. Just seven building blocks can interact with each other one million different ways. Jump to a hundred climate-determining factors and each one will interact with the other 99, yielding 10 billion possibilities. Some outcomes are more likely than others. But this hardly precludes unpleasant nonlinear responses to deliberate planet meddling. [“Considering Complexity” by William Thomas Southwest Airlines Spirit magazine 1994]
(William Thomas photos Mar. 21, 2015: above)
Remember, the atmosphere is an “adaptive” participant in every geoengineering mugging, responding to each input every time with widely different outcomes. Since abrupt discontinuities are a prime feature of nonlinear systems, when attempting large-scale weather modification, unintended consequences are built-in. Like turning off the African and Asian monsoons on which many billions of not-just-human lives depend. [20 Reasons Why Geoengineering May Be A Bad Idea]
WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER BUT SOME MORE THAN OTHERS
Every pound of heat-hugging carbon we transfer from deep underground into the air will be our climate legacy for the next hundred years. Every time we start our fourwheeled carbon burner, we're a geoengineer. Every time a commercial jet climbs into the stratosphere, all onboard are geo-engineers. Ditto all those power plants pumping trainloads of burnt coal into the sky.
The big difference is, it's your choice whether to turn the key, board that plane, or join a grassroots group demanding clean energy. As for your input into whether those jets overhead continue dimming the sun – not so much.
The result of all this inadvertent and deliberate atmospheric forcing is climate chaos. “Chaotic” means “unpredictable”. Punch-drunk by our ever-accumulating heat-trapping exhausts, at least 17 years of concerted geoengineering efforts, a wonky jetstream, and dozens of amplifying feedbacks from thawing tundra, clearcut forests, burning forests, melting ice sheets and the expanding ocean heat reservoir (for example) – it's no wonder so much inconvenient weather is lurching across this planet.
With global warming causing more global warming, how do increasingly destabilized weather systems respond to deliberate further prodding by targeted laydowns of particulates powerful enough to disrupt air masses and soak up residual moisture like a sponge?
Nobody knows. The atmospheric predictions produced by our best supercomputers crunching incomplete data that ignores climate feedbacks and geoengineering are falling further behind the alarming headlines resulting from a churning complexity that is ultimately unknowable.
Given all the still-ignored feedbacks we've set in motion, most notably geoengineering, it's not surprising that climate changes continue to outpace our models. Any climate activist or “scientist” who continues to ignore these well-documented aerosol assaults is working with fatally flawed data. (Aerosols & contrail over Ontario -Jim Beck photo: above)
But “gross” geoengineering outcomes can be observed. There is no question that Solar Radiation Mismanagement (SRM) by allied governments is contributing significantly to the Great Drying, which may soon segue into the Great Dying. This is why the authors who studied Mount Pinatubo's eruption do not support geoengineering. “Creating a risk of widespread drought and reduced freshwater resources for the world to cut down on global warming,” they write, “does not seem like an appropriate fix.” [This Changes Everything]
To call geoengineering an inexact science is to suggest that if you repeatedly jab a gut-shot tiger with a stick it might do something unpleasant. We know from years of airborne experimentation that attempting to impose an inherently flawed model on Earth's atmosphere under the official hubris of “Owning The Weather” invariably produces the opposite result. As Naomi Klein writes, geoengineering “may cause the earth to go wild in ways we cannot imagine, making geoengineering not the final engineering frontier… but the last tragic act in this century-long fairy tale of control.” [This Changes Everything]
WELCOME TO CLIMATE CHAOS
So what does climate chaos look like?
- It looks like dozens of craters, one more than a half-mile in diameter, caused by pockets of exploding methane in the thawing permafrost of northern Russia, where temperatures prowl up to +20°C above longtime norms, and the resulting wildfires over hundred-mile fire fronts are spreading solar heat-absorbing ash over vast stretches of the once reflective far north.
- It looks like endless pools of meltwater acting as lenses across the tundra, focusing sunlight into thawing even more super-warming methane.
- It looks like the 80 devastated islands of Vanuatu, where I once sailed my trimaran and where half the population has been left homeless by a hot ocean-fuelled Cyclone Pam.
- It looks like that blocking high over Brazil, where Sao Paulo's 11 million residents face the prospect of dry taps. Another 33 million people in the Sao Paulo region fear the same fate. And they are not alone.
- It looks like the sea level rise that has driven 100,000 people away from their Indus River delta farms due to repeated flooding and saltwater intrusion into the water table.
- It looks like California's “Ridiculously Resilient Ridge” of high pressure that anomalously persists, re-building itself after every surge of westerly winds or invading cold air threatens to collapse this weather wall, but to the continuous accompaniment of the aerosol jets… doesn’t. Weather researcher Daniel Swain can find no evidence of a North Pacific ridge of this magnitude and persistence “in the observational record.”
(Russia wildfires, summer 2010 jotman.blogspot: above)
(methane cavern -Russian Centre of Arctic Exploration: below)
WHO DONE IT?
As Rutgers University professor Jennifer Francis explains, the loss of reflective sea ice and resulting heated surface air rising from dark waters is producing a northerly bulge in the jet stream that builds high pressure in the East.
Winds flowing “downhill” from this embedded High bring cold Arctic air southward into eastern Canada and the United States, as a persistent high pressure dome off the west coast flows warm, wet air north into Alaska, where the international Fur Rondy sled dog race, held every year since 1946, cannot mush “due to warm weather and heavy rain.”
So is atmospheric warming or geoengineering responsible for California's thirst and Alaska's failed winter? The answer: Both are so intricately meshed, it's no longer possible to distinguish one from the other. At least until we shut off Teller's sunscreen.
Are all these chemical and contrail sky plumes painting us into an untenable corner? Immediately following the 9/11 attacks, David Travis measured a roughly 2°F difference over those three contrail free days between the rising daytime and falling nighttime temps across the continental USA. (In 2005, James Hansen's NASA team crunched slightly different numbers for 9/11 and came up with an average mean temperature change of just .05°F – a perfect example of a changed starting point drastically altering complex outcomes.)
There is no way a few days of absent contrails (while geoengineering continued) equate with the disrupted hydrological cycle from 5,000+ days of aerosol spraying. But the 9/11 “experiment” in mass mind control and atmospheric processes means we dare not continue an experiment that artificially desiccates air masses as short-lived speed bumps to skyrocketing air temperatures. If Hansen's right, geoengineering isn't working. If Travis is correct and we stop spraying particulates (whose tiny 10-micron size is deemed an Extreme Human Health Hazard by the EPA) we face an unknown instant temperature jump in a feedback-sensitive atmosphere already heading toward a 4°-6°C rise by 2035. Are your children down with geoengineering continuing to grease the skids into extinction? (Glenn Boyle photo)
Are you?
The geoengineers are saving us to death. Putting our planet's life-support on geoengineering life-support that can't be turned off without an instant spike in temperatures is not a wise idea, Naomi Klein suggests. While many point to geoengineering as the culprit behind the ever more disruptive climate change they otherwise deny, and geoengineers use “climate change” to disguise the climate chaos they're inciting, nearly two decades of large-scale geoengineering have erased the baseline by which we might measure climate impacts and gauge their rates of change.
GOING UNDER
When unstable systems like Earth's climate are pushed past critical thresholds, selfamplifying feedbacks cause chaos, which eventually degrades into a much simplified state.
Examples include disappeared rainforests flipping into deserts, a once-teeming ocean turning into a vast acidic dead zone, seasonal regional climates suitable for agriculture and human life “simplified” into enduring heatwaves, and seawater inching towards 634 million pairs of human feet.
Like a tightening trigger, climate change is carrying us toward explosively Abrupt Climate Shift. As Klein comments, when “university professor Rob Nixon describes the brutality of climate change as 'slow violence'; geoengineering could be a tool to significantly speed that up.”
Before we can agree to step back from the climate precipice, geoengineering is shoving us toward the kinds of social breakdown stalking Miami Beach, where “slimy green saltwater” from rising seas is filling streets, blocking doors, ruining vehicles, and inundating shops and homes. “Another foot of sealevel rise will be enough to bring salt water into our fresh water supplies and our sewage system,” warns scientist and South Miami mayor Philip Stoddard. “You won't be able to flush away your sewage and taps will no longer provide homes with fresh water.
“Then you will find you will no longer be able to get flood insurance for your home. Land and property values will plummet and people will start to leave. Places like South Miami will no longer be able to raise enough taxes to run our neighbourhoods. Where will we find the money to fund police to protect us or fire services to tackle house fires? Will there even be enough water pressure for their fire hoses? It takes us into all sorts of post-apocalyptic scenarios. And that is only with a one-foot sea-level rise. It makes one thing clear though: mayhem is coming.”
Instead of buying time, every aerosol mission is reducing the time left to act. And by obscuring the true pace of climate change under veils of artificial clouds and 40°F snow, the geoengineers are making it much harder to respond.
Every day the aerosol tankers fly, politicians beholden to Big Oil can delay meaningful action, while making Abrupt Climate Shift and a Canfield ocean more likely. “No reputable scientist I know thinks placing tiny reflecting particles in the stratosphere is a good idea,” saysPhilip Duffy, president and executive director of the Woods Hole Research Center, which focuses on climate change.
And no one's even discussing the quantum effects from aerosol technologies.
FULL STOP
So I modestly suggest: Indict the geoengineers for reckless planetary endangerment. And ground the aerosol tankers now.
How?
Use existing state/provincial, national and international air pollution and air traffic laws regulations to apply for legal injunctions to stop geoengineering experiments over cities and entire regions “if and when any such attempts are made.” Then, using the evidence needed to obtain those writs, launch class action lawsuits naming anyone responsible who can be identified by name, title/rank for trust betrayed and damage done.
Criminal charges will follow.
[Current carbon-equivalent emissions (CO2, NOx, CH4) on track to 6°+ C. Civilizations collapse at 4°.]
The US Military Is Decimating Everything In Its Path, Including Its Own Country
The military industrial complex has been completely out of control for so long that the consequences to life on Earth may soon be total. The US military leadership has virtually no regard for anything or anyone including its own soldiers. In the military's endless and insatiable quest to expand and control the entire planet and everyone on it, all is expendable. This includes the environment (even in its own country), and the citizens of the United States which it claims to defend. Though climate engineering is the epitome of the military's assault against its own citizens and the biosphere, there are countless other examples which all have dire consequences. Finally, the population is beginning to wake up to the ongoing insanity.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
The Geoengineering Frame: A War for Our Minds
Article by David Schneider, contributing writer for geoengineeringwatch.org
Some may remember the Rio Earth Summit. History points to it as a turning point, when international co-operation “got serious” around a shared problem: dumping carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) into the atmosphere. It happened back in 1992, right as the lures of “climate intervention” were gripping the power structure, who were beginning to conspire yet another quick, cheap, and easy way to escape limits set by nature, while continuing to sweep the long-term damages under the rug. Of course regional weather has been messed with for many decades prior, with lots of damage to ecosystems, but climate intervention takes manipulations to the global scale; it’s a “move-the-sulfur” approach, taking it from smokestacks and putting it into the stratosphere. Grounded on a deep belief in human exceptional-ism and mastery over the rules that govern the universe, the power structure has once again turned to faith in scientific-ism as religion, and their scientist priesthood push the “geoengineering” agenda as the next phase in building an “Earthy paradise” free from all constraint. “Albedo enhancement” technologies that shield Earth from incoming sunlight are the preferred option to dealing with global warming, because it requires little behavioral change to business as usual, it can reduce risks to current generations almost immediately, and it sings harmonically with the tune of “endless growth.” Without solar engineering, the only option would be to allow Earth to restore herself, by us relinquishing our command, and face the harsh realities of suffering consequences from a warmed planet for millennia. The scientific approach is pitched as a more “humane way” to deal with the climate pickle we’re all stuck in together. Weather warfare began back in WWII, yet decades of command and control have only made things worse, not better. More of the same thinking, continued tinkering, will only remove more parts of nature that can never be brought back. Nature can only be poked at so long before she erupts in anger against her attacker.
Interestingly, at the same time the power structure assembled in Rio for the Earth Summit twenty-three years ago, they were also busy banging out the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which became the World Trade Organization (WTO). These two contradicting worlds (climate change negotiating and free trade) collided to fashion “sustainable development.” But since then, human emissions have only skyrocketed! In fact, 26% of all human produced emissions ever dumped into the atmosphere since industrialization, occurred over the past three decades! The public may be under the impression that U.S. leaders don’t “believe” in climate science or global warming. But that’s false. It’s all about the frame! In an engineering culture, all problems have solutions. If humans created global warming, then humans will re-engineer things to eliminate the problem. Admitting to global warming under a “geoengineering frame” does not make sense, because another techno-fix will be devised. If we engineered a problem, then we can engineer a solution; so global warming is just a matter of continued intervention in Earth’s climate system. If humans are responsible, then humans will resolve it – scientific-ism preaches. But often with complex systems, there’s the butterfly effect, the unanticipated surprises of chaos, when the cure can be much worse than the disease. It becomes a game of always prescribing new aliments for the side effects caused from the previous interventions – always having to up the ante to maintain satisfaction, creating further destruction of life processes. It’s become a super wicked problem where nemesis is meeting hubris. But, survival resources that create the foundation of life cannot simply be fixed, nor substituted and replaced by more technology. Disrupting the rain, the sunlight, the ability of Earth to respond to our assault and cool herself, is only making the situation much more dangerous.
Check any mainstream source today about solar geoengineering and spraying sulfur intentionally to cool Earth, and somewhere it’s guaranteed to compare the process to what large volcanic eruptions naturally do. It’s been dubbed the “Mt. Pinatubo Option,” after the large eruption that cooled the planet in 1991. But really, it’s coal power plants around the world that are the “world’s volcano,” constantly erupting nonstop, turning down the sunlight across the planet, shooting up a continuous supply of sulfur aerosols into our shared global atmosphere. Dirty pollution from Asia and across the world increases Earth’s “albedo” (not to be mixed up with libido, albedo is simply science-speak for the measurement of how reflective something is, where Earth’s albedo is measured in W/m-2). Burning fossil fuels has “accidentally” increased atmospheric albedo – the reflectivity of Earth’s atmosphere – which dims incoming sunlight and masks the average temperature of Earth in relation to our CO2 forcing. In other words, sulfur pollution from combustion is a form of “unintentional” solar radiation management. This, we’re all contributing to, each time we plug something into the wall, order a cheap product made in Asia, eat a hamburger, take a hot shower, or drive a car.
Today, we know why the power structure is hiding. In the late 80s, industrial rich countries began shifting their industry to the “developing world,” places that were happy to have a chance to join in the “good life” of economic success. Billions of people have been lifted from “poverty” as result, but it was not accomplished sustainably. If anything, massive industrialization in Asia has only made the risk of both economic and ecological collapse even greater, and the fall harder than it otherwise would be if leaders had just let the game end right then. But no. Instead, one of the first official acts George H. W. Bush did when he took presidential office was sign into law the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (1990 CAAA), which placed heavy regulation over sulfur pollution on America’s industries. Not an expected response from a Republican President following the Regan era of deregulation and laissez-faire. What was his motivation? Bush needed to address a mounting smog and acid rain crisis, and the amendments eased public concerns by adding Article IV-A to the Clean Air Act, requiring coal power plants in the U.S. to use coal with “low sulfur” content and install smokestack scrubbers on major polluting sources like power plants, that would clean the sulfur from the emissions and prevent their release into the atmosphere. Strangely, David Keith, the most recognizable scientist in the geoengineering debate, helped design the technology to scrub sulfur from smokestacks, and sell the techno-fix to industry! Not surprisingly then, today he is also part of Carbon Engineering, a company that is presently developing a system to capture carbon dioxide from the ambient air.
Since the sulfur pollution was “accidentally” increasing the albedo of the atmosphere, the 1990 CAAA would unmask global dimming. As the world shifts from dirty to clean economies, our sulfur pollution will be cleaned out of the air, and the albedo of the atmosphere will decrease, becoming less reflective, and allowing more sunlight in. A replacement must be found to maintain this shielding from the sun, say the power structure, otherwise the true folly of our human existence and unsustainable relationship with the natural world will be exposed! The big cover-up will be impossible to hide. Like with hiding a pregnancy, eventually the baby will be born. The gig would be up, and the bubble would pop! For the power structure, “albedo enhancement” becomes a critical part of the climate plan, because losing the current reflectiveness of the atmosphere exposes Earth’s ecosystems to further dangerous temperature spikes. The 1990 CAAA just shifted the pollution burden from the West to Asia, to buy time to allow scientists to design a more permanent solution to the “problem.”
But now leaders are grasping straws, because the choking pollution in Asia is demanding response from their public, and the planet is in meltdown. Factories in Asia, the thousands of coal power plants built over the past decade, do not have Keith’s scrubbers to remove the sulfur from the pollution. The coal used in Asia has high sulfur content and is illegal to burn as a fuel source in the U.S. These were conscious policy choices made by the power structure in the early 90’s to keep the dream alive. Rather than a massive scaling down of our ecological overdraw from nature, the issue of “solar radiation management” (SRM) became the preferred pathway for bypassing natural limits to economic growth, and was disguised as a global “conspiracy” to drive fear and confusion and keep people lulled to sleep and disinterested. Policymakers intentionally shifted this “accidental” modification resulting from industrialization of the West, to another region of the planet. Where do we draw the line of distinction between “intentional” and “unintentional” SRM? And what do we make of the ongoing disruption to the biogeochemical cycles of Earth? What of the bioaccumulation of heavy metals washing from the atmosphere, which end up in our water, our body, our soil and food?
Shouldn’t we be precautionary and not make choices today that are irreversible for those after us? Isn’t it scandalous to intentionally hide a problem, while continuing to produce throw away goods and expand fossil fuel use? The power structure shifted the sourcing of sulfur pollution necessary for maintaining the enhancement of Earth’s atmospheric albedo to Asia, and kept the world from seeing that everything’s actually a mess. Instead of exposing the issue and decarbonizing, they prescribed a new techno-fix to deal with the unintended side effects created by accidentally increasing the albedo of the atmosphere from industrialization, and consulted nobody. SRM effects Earth’s hydrologic cycle, its water system, and shreds stratospheric ozone that allows UVB light to penetrate to Earth’s surface. And now the power structure aims to prescribe the next fix in its long-line of tinkering, a stratospheric shield of titanium dust particles in the shape of diamonds, 0.1 microns – small little buggers! The spraying we all see over our towns is low to the ground, and has regional effects on weather systems. They can cover an entire continental land mass with cloud decks with these methods. That’s the “old” technology, the first generation, which allowed scientists to gather their data for computer modeling. But the new technology, the next generations, deemed the “solar shield,” will envelop the entire globe, where diamond dust will be dumped way up-high in the stratosphere, where one cannot even see an airplane flying from the ground without binoculars.
As industry sprang up at a warlike pace in Asia, thanks to the global power structure’s plan, air pollution in the West has become less contentious of a public issue. The industrialized Western world has come to adore “low prices” and bargain buys made possible by companies exploiting faraway places. People consciously choose not to connect the suffocating air pollution in China with ramping-up production of the new Apple Watch. They choose not to associate their lifestyles with contributing to the SRM albedo dilemma. To consumers, ignoring the problem is preferred. That’s why many people might just think that SRM is fine, or even a good idea when they learn about it for the first time, and be OK with it, and not allow themselves to see the obvious right up overhead that’s kept them fooled all along. People are not thinking very clearly these days; they allow their own observations to deceive them. It’s a hard pill to swallow, accepting this reality, because it means we are just chasing shadows of dreams that don’t exist. This fall, in Paris, a renewed (yet familiar) call for a “universal climate deal” is being peddled by the power structure as “the last chance for humanity,” a small window of time to take needed action in keeping global warming from rocketing into total catastrophe (as though we are not already there). The plan assumes geoengineering, and the debate is going public!! Get ready activists, because when it does, there will be a war on for our minds! The American public is OK with many surprising things, so it may be hopelessly optimistic to believe that the American public will be outraged when its government finally admits that they were spraying to “protect” everybody. The framing is strong, and people are happy with their simple pleasures and mindless pursuits. We all need to remain focused, now more than ever! Keep pushing the ball forward to disrupt the geoengineering “frame,” and block minds from getting misled!
Koch Industries Funding Climate Science Denial Front Groups
By Rebel Siren for The Disinformation Directory
It's no wonder there is such rampant denial and a propagandized "debate" in the mainstream. Dirty deeds obfuscate the truth to keep us confused and in the dark in order for big polluters to keep on polluting without any responsibility to humanity or the environment.
Koch Industries and the Koch family spend millions of dollars on lobbyists to fight climate and energy legislation, millions more on politicians, and still more millions on organizations denying climate change. Through the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation as well as Koch Industries and the other Koch family foundations, numerous and substantial donations go to organizations that deny, skepticize or belittle the significance of global warming. Compared to ExxonMobil, which has spent over $27.4 million on skeptic groups since 1998, foundations linked to Koch Industries have spent over $70 million in traceable contributions to the same network of organizations, with addition untraceable funding funnelled through organizations like Donors Trust. Key Koch-backed organizations include the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which was founded and remains chaired by David Koch, the Cato Institute, which Charles Koch co-founded and David Koch remains a board member after an attempted coup, the Institute for Humane Studies, which is chaired by Charles Koch, and the Reason Foundation, of which David Koch is a trustee.
Climate Engineering Denial, The Deliberate Deception
WIth almost no exceptions, the entire climate science community is completely denying the blatantly obvious and verifiable geoengineering reality. The all out aerosol spraying of skies around the globe is absolutely inarguable and yet the climate scientists/meteorologists are still pretending geoengineering is only a "proposal". How can we explain the total denial of this reality coming from climate scientists? They fit into one of these categories, they are either completely unqualified for the job they hold, afraid to speak out, willing to lie to protect a paycheck and a pension, or they are clinically blind. None of these reasons are justification for the total deception being fed to us from the so called "experts" that are entrusted with the public welfare. We have long since lived in an Orwellian world but now it has reached a point that is difficult to even comprehend. Articles like the one below are laden with direct lies and lies of omission. They try to paint the picture that a small fleet of jets spraying aerosols into the atmosphere could cool the planet. That the only thing we need to worry about is who will control the thermostat. After 65 years of geoengineering on an ever larger scale, now involving what is likely thousands of jets, with a planet that is rapidly descending into total meltdown, we can say with total certainty solar radiation management is only making a bad climate situation far worse. Virtually none of the known unavoidable major negative consequences of SRM are even mentioned in most mainstream articles. Total disruption of the hydrological cycle, shredded ozone layer, lack of direct sunlight, and what is never ever mentioned is the fact that what goes up, must come down. Virtually the entire surface of the planet is being systematically contaminated, as is every single breath we take. How is it that this last and most dire point is never mentioned in any mainstream media articles or even in the science studies about aerosol geoengineering? Are we to think that thousands of climate scientists cannot comprehend this fact? That something sprayed into the atmosphere must settle down to Earth? Most of the climate science community should be viewed with contempt for their part in this greatest of all human crimes. Once the public is fully aware of what has been done to them, legal action should be immediately taken against all those that willfully participated in the completely illegal climate engineering assault, or in the criminal attempt to cover up these lethal programs. Make your voice heard in this battle. This does not mean to simply complain, but to help wake others up by passing on credible data on the climate engineering issue.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
Climate Engineering And Dying Oceans
Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm
Source: RobinWestenra @ Blogspot
Abstract
Although the sudden high rate Arctic methane increase at Svalbard in late 2010 data set applies to only a short time interval, similar sudden methane concentration peaks also occur at Barrow point and the effects of a major methane build-up has been observed using all the major scientific observation systems. Giant fountains/torches/plumes of methane entering the atmosphere up to 1 km across have been seen on the East Siberian Shelf. This methane eruption data is so consistent and aerially extensive that when combined with methane gas warming potentials, Permian extinction event temperatures and methane lifetime data it paints a frightening picture of the beginning of the now uncontrollable global warming induced destabilization of the subsea Arctic methane hydrates on the shelf and slope which started in late 2010. This process of methane release will accelerate exponentially, release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere and lead to the demise of all life on earth before the middle of this century.
Introduction
The 1990 global atmospheric mean temperature is assumed to be 14.49 oC (Shakil, 2005; NASA, 2002; DATAWeb, 2012) which sets the 2 oC anomaly above which humanity will lose control of her ability to limit the effects of global warming on major climatic and environmental systems at 16.49 oC (IPCC, 2007). The major Permian extinction event temperature is 80 oF (26.66 oC) which is a temperature anomaly of 12.1766 oC above the 1990 global mean temperature of 14.49 oC (Wignall, 2009; Shakil, 2005).
Results of Investigation
Figure 1 shows a huge sudden atmospheric spike like increase in the concentration of atmospheric methane at Svalbard north of Norway in the Arctic reaching 2040 ppb (2.04 ppm)(ESRL/GMO, 2010 – Arctic – Methane – Emergency – Group.org). The cause of this sudden anomalous increase in the concentration of atmospheric methane at Svalbard has been seen on the East Siberian Arctic Shelf where a recent Russian – U.S. expedition has found widespread, continuous powerful methane seepages into the atmosphere from the subsea methane hydrates with the methane plumes (fountains or torches) up to 1 km across producing an atmospheric methane concentration 100 times higher than normal (Connor, 2011). Such high methane concentrations could produce local temperature anomalies of more than 50 oC at a conservative methane warming potential of 25.
Figure 2 is derived from the Svalbard data in Figure 1 and the methane concentration data has been used to generate a Svalbard atmospheric temperature anomaly trend using a methane warming potential of 43.5 as an example. The huge sudden anomalous spike in atmospheric methane concentration in mid August, 2010 at Svalbard is clearly evident and the methane concentrations within this spike have been used to construct a series of radiating methane global warming temperature trends for the entire range of methane global warming potentials in Figure 3 from an assumed mean start temperature of -3.575 degrees Centigrade for Svalbard (see Figure 2) (Norwegian Polar Institute; 2011).
Figure 3 shows a set of radiating Arctic atmospheric methane global warming temperature trends calculated from the steep methane atmospheric concentration gradient at Svalbard in 2010 (ESRL/GMO, 2010 – Arctic-Methane-Emergency-Group.org). The range of extinction temperature anomalies above the assumed 1990 mean atmospheric temperature of 14.49 oC (Shakil, 2005) are also shown on this diagram as well as the 80 oF (26.66 oC) major Permian extinction event temperature (Wignall, 2009).
Sam Carana (pers. com. 7 Jan, 2012) has described large December 2011 (ESRL-NOAA data) warming anomalies which exceed 10 to 20 degrees centigrade and cover vast areas of the Arctic at times. In the centres of these regions, which appear to overlap the Gakkel Ridge and its bounding basins, the temperature anomalies may exceed 20 degrees centigrade. The temperature anomalies in this region of the Arctic for the period from September 8 2011 to October 7, 2011 were only about 4 degrees Centigrade above normal (Carana, pers. com. 2012). This data set can be seen on this site:- http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/arctic-temperatures.html
Because the Svalbard methane concentration data suggests that the major spike in methane emissions began in late 2010 it has been assumed for calculation purposes that the 2010 temperature anomalies peaked at 4 degrees Centigrade and the 2011 anomalies at 20 degrees Centigrade in the Gakkel Ridge region. The assumed 20 degree Centigrade temperature anomaly trend from 2010 to 2011 in the Gakkel Ridge region requires a methane gas warming potential of about 1000 to generate it from the Svalbard methane atmospheric concentration spike data in 2010. Such high methane warming potentials could only be active over a very short time interval (less than 5.7 months) as shown when the long methane global warming potential lifetimes data from the IPCC (2007; 1992) and Dessus, Laponte and Treut (2008 ) are used to generate a global warming potential growth curve with a methane global warming potential of 100 with a lifespan of 5 years.
Because of the high methane global warming potential (1000) of the 2011, 20 oC temperature anomalies in the Gakkel Ridge region, the entire methane global warming potential range from 5 to 1000 has been used to construct the radiating set of temperature trends shown in Figure 3. The 50, 100, 500 and 1000 methane global warming potential (GWP) trends are red and in bold. The choice of a high temperature methane peak with a global warming potential near 1000 is in fact very conservative because the 16 oC increase is assumed to occur over a year. The observed ESRL-NOAA Arctic temperature anomalies varied from 4 to 20 degrees over less than a month in 2011 (Sam Carana, pers. comm. 2012).
Figure 4 shows the estimated lifetime of a globally spreading Arctic methane atmospheric veil for different methane global warming potentials with the minimum, mean and maximum lifetimes fixed with data from Dessus, Laponche and Treut (2008) and IPCC (2007, 1992). On this diagram it is evident that the maximum methane global warming potential temperature trend of 50 intersects the 2 degree centigrade temperature anomaly line in mid 2027 at which time humanity will completely lose our ability to combat the earth atmospheric temperature rise. This diagram also indicates that methane will be an extremely active global warming agent for the first 15 years during the early stages of the extinction process. At the 80 o F (26.66 oC) Permian extinction event temperature line (Wignall, 2009), which has a 12.177 oC temperature anomaly above the 1980 mean of 14.49 oC, the lifetime of the minimum methane global warming potential veil is now some 75 years long and the temperature so high that total extinction of all life on earth will have occured by this time.
The life time from the almost instantaneous injection of methane into the atmosphere in 2010 is also shown as the two vertical violet lines (12 +- 3) years and this has been extended by 6 percent to 15.9 years to take account of increased methane concentrations in the future (IPCC, 1992b). This data set can be used to set up the likely start position for the extinction event from the large methane emissions in 2010.
Figure 5 shows the estimated Arctic Gakkel Ridge earthquake frequency temperature increase curve (Light, 2011), the Giss Arctic mean November surface temperature increase curve (data from Carana, 2011) and the mean global temperature increase curve from IPCC (2007) long term gradient data. The corrected Arctic atmospheric temperature curve for the ice cap melt back in 2015 was derived from the mean time difference between the IPCC model ice cap and observed Arctic Ice cap rate of volume decrease (Masters, 2009). The ice cap temperature increase curve lags behind the Arctic atmosphere temperature curve because of the extra energy required for the latent heat of melting of the permafrost and Greenland ice caps (Lide and Frederickse, 1995).
Figure 6 shows 5 mathematically and visually determined best estimates of the possible global atmospheric extinction gradients for the minimum (a), mean (b) and maximum (e) methane global warming potential lifetime trends. The mean (c) methane global warming potential lifetime trend has almost the identical gradient to the best mathematical fit over the temperature extinction interval (2 oC to 12.2 oC temperature anomaly zone) as the Arctic Gakkel Ridge frequency data (b) and the Giss Arctic mean November surface temperature data (d). This suggests that the Giss Arctic mean November surface temperature curve and the Arctic Gakkel Ridge frequency temperature curves are good estimates of the global extinction temperature gradient.
Figure 7 diagramatically shows the funnel shaped region in purple, yellow and brown of atmospheric stability of methane derived from Arctic subsea methane eruption fountains/torches formed above destabilized shelf and slope methane hydrates (Connor, 2011). The width of this zone expands exponentially from 2010 with increasing temperature to reach a lifetime of more than 75 years at 80 o F (26.66 oC) which is the estimated mean atmospheric temperature of the major Permian extinction event (Wignall 2009). The previous most catastrophic mass extinction event occured in the Permian when atmospheric methane released from methane hydrates was the primary driver of the massive mean atmospheric temperature increase to 80 oF (26.66 oC) at a time when the atmospheric carbon dioxide was less than at present (Wignall, 2009).
Method of Analysis
By combining fractional amounts of an assumed standard Arctic methane fountain/torch/plume with a global warming potential of 1000 (which equals a 16 oC temperature rise (4 – 20 oC) over one year – 2010 – 2011) with the mean global temperature curve (from IPCC 2007 – gradient data) it was possible to closely match the 5 visually and mathematically determined best estimates of the global extinction gradients shown in Figure 6 (a to e). Because the thermal radiant flux from the earth into space is a function of its area (Lide and Fredrickse, 1995) we can roughly determine how many years it will take for the methane to spread globally by getting the ratio of the determined fraction of the mean global temperature curve to the fraction of the Arctic methane fountain/torch/plume curve, as the latter is assumed to represent only one year of methane emissions. In addition as the earth’s surface area is some 5.1*10^8 square kilometres (Lide and Fredrickse, 1995) a rough estimate of the average area of the region over which the methane emissions occur within the Arctic can also be determined by multiplying the Arctic methane/torch/plume fraction by the surface area of the earth. The Arctic fountain/torch areas are expressed as the diameter of circular region of methane emissions or the two axes A and B of an ellipse shaped area of methane emissions (where B = 4A) (Table 1)
Twenty estimates have been made of the times of the various extinction events in the northern and southern hemispheres and these are shown on Table 1 and summarised on Figure 7 with their ranges. The absolute mean extinction time for the northern hemisphere is 2031.8 and for the southern hemisphere 2047.6 with a final mean extinction time for 3/4 of the earth’s surface of 2039.6 which is similar to the extinction time suggested previously from correlations between planetary orbital mechanics and the frequency increase of Great and Normal earthquake activity on Earth (Light, 2011). Extinction in the southern hemisphere lags the northern hemisphere by 9 to 29 years.
Figure 8 shows a different method of interpreting the extinction fields defined by the (12 +-3) + 6% year long lifetime of methane (IPCC, 1992) assumed to have been instantaneously injected into the Arctic atmosphere in 2010 and the lifetime of the globally spreading methane atmospheric veil at different methane global warming potentials. The start of extinction begins between 2020 and 2026.9 and extinction will be complete in the northern hemisphere by 2057. Extinction will begin around 2024 in the southern hemisphere and will be completed by 2087. Extinction in the southern hemisphere, in particular in Antarctica will be delayed by some 30 years. This makes property on the Transantarctic mountains of premium value for those people wish to survive the coming methane firestorm for a few decades longer..
Figure 9. is a further refinement of the extinction fields shown in Figure 8. by defining a new latent heat of ice melting curve at different ambient temperatures which has been calculated from the corrected Arctic atmospheric temperature trend for the ice cap melt back defined by the difference between the Piomass observed melt back time and the IPCC modelled melt back time which predicts the melt back incorrectly some 50 years into the future (Masters, 2009). This work shows that the IPCC climate models are probably more than 100 years out in their prediction of the complete melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice caps.
Method of Analysis
To melt 1 kg of ice you require 334 kilo Joules of energy (the latent heat of melting of ice) to transform the solid into the liquid at 0 oC (Wikipedia, 2012 ).
Subsequently for each one oC temperature rise, the water requires and additional 4.18 kilo Joules to heat it up to the ambient temperature (Wikipedia, 2012). An 80 oC temperature rise of a 1 kg mass of water requires almost exactly the same amount of energy input (334.4 kJ) as the amount of energy required by the latent heat of melting of ice (334 kJ) to covert one kg of ice into water at 0 oC. Because one Joule is the energy equivalent of the power of one watt sustained for one second there is also a time element in the melting of the ice and the heating up of the water, i.e. it is the function of temperature increase and the time similar to the way oil is generated in sediments (Lopatin, 1971; Allen and Allen, 1990).
If we consider the time necessary to melt one kg of ice and then raise its temperature to 80 oC, both of the above processes require the same amount of energy so we can consider that the first half of the time will simply involve conversion the solid ice into a liquid state at 0 oC and the second half of the time in heating the resulting ice water from 0 to 80 oC. This means that the ice melt curve at 80 oC will lag the atmospheric temperature line by half the time at 80 oC.
For temperatures less than 80 oC, the energy necessary to raise the water formed from the melted ice to the ambient temperature is less than that required for the latent melting of the ice (required to move it from a solid to a liquid state) and progressively more relative energy is needed at low temperatures to melt the ice.
The following formulation has been used to calculate the ratio of the time necessary for the melting of 1 kg of ice to water a 0 oC to the time necessary for the heating up of the 1 kg of water produced from the melted ice to the specified ambient temperature.
For any power n, let 2^n represent the ambient temperature of 1 kg of water which was derived from the melting of 1 kg of ice.
The energy required for the original melting of the 1 kg ice to water at 0 oC (latent heat of melting of ice) = 2^(n-3)/10 = 2^n/(2^3*10) = 2^n/80 = ambient temperature/80
Examples;
Let n=1; therefore temperature = 2^1 = 2 oC
Latent heat of melting = 2^(n-3)/10 = 2^-2/10 = 1/10*1/(2^2) =1/10*1/4 = 1/40
Let n=5; therefore temperature = 2^5 = 32 oC
Latent heat of melting = 2^(n-3)/10 = 2^2/10 = 4/10
The ratio of the time required for the latent heat of melting at any temperature is the reciprocal of the above = 10/(2^n-3)
The total time is therefore
a.) The time necessary for the latent heat of melting to covert 1 kg of ice into water
at 0 oC = 10/(2^n-3)
and:-
b.) The time required to heat up the 1 kg of water up to a temperature of 2^n = 1.
The total time = (10/(2^n-3)+1)
Therefore the fraction of time needed to simply melt the ice to 0 oC before it is raised to the ambient temperature 2^n = 10/(2^n-3)/((10/(2^n-3))+1)
Now: ((10/(2^n-3)) +1) = (10+ (2^n-3))/(2^(n-3))
The total time is therefore = 10/(10+(2^n-3))
Examples showing the calculation of the time ratio of the energy of latent heat of melting of ice to form water at 0 oC to the energy necessary to raise the water to the ambient temperature are shown below:-
N 2^n oC Fraction Formula Fraction
0 1 10/(10+1/8) 0.9877
1 2 10/(10+1/4) 0.9756
2 4 10/(10+1/2) 0.9526
3 8 10/(10+1) 0.9091
4 16 10/(10+2) 0.8333
5 32 10/(10+4) 0.7143
6 64 10/(10+8) 0.5555
6.32193 80 10/(10+10) 0.5000
The time value at each temperature of the corrected Arctic atmospheric temperature trend from the observed ice cap melt back (Masters, 2009) has been multiplied by the above fraction for each ambient temperature to determine a new “latent heat of ice melting curve” which represents the temperature – time energy necessary for the complete melting of the ice to water at 0 oC without the additional energy needed to raise the water to the ambient temperature of the atmosphere. This latent heat of ice melting curve is shown as the dark blue line on Figure 9.
The maximum mean global atmospheric temperature above which all the world’s icecaps will have completely melted away is estimated to lie between 7 oC and 8 oC above the mean global temperature which here is taken as 14.49 oC in 1990 (IPCC, 2007). The critical temperatures above which the Earth will entirely lose its ice caps are between 21.49 oC and 22.49 oC. It has been found however that the latent heat of ice melting curve first intersects the maximum lifetime stability line for atmospheric methane calculated from the methane global warming potentials (see. Figure 3) at the 20.964 oC extinction line (6.474 degrees centigrade above the atmospheric mean temperature of 14.49 oC in 1980) at 2050.1 and the 22.49 oCextinction line (8 oC above the atmospheric mean temperature of 14.49 oC in 1980) at 2051.3. Therefore the limits of the final melting and loss of all ice on Earth have been fixed between the 6.474 oC and 8 oC anomalies above the 1990 mean atmospheric temperature of 14.49 oC. This very narrow temperature range includes all the mathematically and visually determined extinction times and their means for the northern and southern hemispheres which were calculated quite separately (Figure 7; Table 1).
Once the world’s ice caps have completely melted away at temperatures above 22.49 oC and times later than 2051.3, the Earth’s atmosphere will heat up at an extremely fast rate to reach the Permian extinction event temperature of 80oF (26.66 oC)(Wignall, 2009) by which time all life on Earth will have been completely extinguished.
The position where the latent heat of ice melting curve intersects the 8 oC extinction line (22.49 oC) at 2051.3 represents the time when 100 percent of all the ice on the surface of the Earth will have melted. If we make this point on the latent heat of ice melting curve equal to 1 we can determine the time of melting of any fraction of the Earth’s icecaps by using the time*temperature function at each time from 2051.3 back to 2015, the time the average Arctic atmospheric temperature curve is predicted to exceed 0 oC. The process of melting 1 kg of ice and heating the produced water up to a certain temperature is a function of the sum of the latent heat of melting of ice is 334 kilo Joules/kg and the final water temperature times the 4.18 kilo Joules/Kg.K (Wikipedia, 2012). This however represents the energy required over a period of one second to melt 1 kg of ice to water and raise it to the ambient temperature. Therefore the total energy per mass of ice over a certain time period is equal to (334 +(4.18*Ambient Temperature)*time in seconds that the melted water took to reach the ambient temperature. From the fractional time*temperature values at each ambient temperature the fractional amounts of melting of the total global icecaps have been calculated and are shown on Figure 9.
The earliest calculated fractional volume of melting of the global ice caps in 2016 is 1.85*10^-3 of the total volume of global ice with an average yearly rate of ice melting of 2.557*10^-3 of the total volume of global ice. This value is remarkably similar to, but slightly less than the average rate of melting of the Arctic sea ice measured over an 18 year period of 2.7*10^-3 (1978 to 1995; 2.7% per decade – IPCC 2007).This close correlation between observed rates of Arctic ice cap and predicted rates of global ice cap melting indicates that average rates of Arctic ice cap melting between 1979 and 2015 (which represents the projected time the Arctic will lose its ice cover – Masters, 2009) will be continued during the first few years of melting of the global ice caps after the Arctic ice cover has gone in 2015 as the mean Arctic atmospheric temperature starts to climb above 0 oC. However from 2017 the rate of melting of the global ice will start to accelerate as will the atmospheric temperature until by 2049 it will be more than 9 times as fast as it was around 2015 (Table 2).
The mean rate of melting of the global icecap between 2017 and 2049 is some 2*10^-2, some 7.4 times the mean rate of melting of the Arctic ice cap (Table 2). In concert with the increase in rate of global ice cap melting between 2017 and 2049, the acceleration in the rate of melting also increases from 7*10^-4 to 9.9*10^-4 with a mean value close to 8.6*10^-4 (Table 2). The ratio of the acceleration in the rate of global ice cap melting to the Arctic ice cap melting increases from 3.4 in 2017 to 4.8 by 2049 with a mean near 4.2. This fast acceleration in the rate of global ice cap melting after 2015 compared to the Arctic sea ice cap melting before 2015 is because the mean Arctic atmospheric temperature after 2017 is spiraling upward in temperature above 0 oC adding large amounts of additional energy to the ice and causing it to melt back more quickly.
The melt back of the Arctic ice cap is a symptom of the Earth’s disease but not its cause and it is the cause that has to be dealt with if we hope to bring about a cure. Therefore a massive cut back in carbon dioxide emissions should be mandatory for all developed nations (and some developing nations as well). Total destruction of the methane in the Arctic atmosphere is also mandatory if we are to survive the effects of its now catastrophic rate of build up in the atmospheric methane concentration However cooling of the Arctic using geoengineering methods is also vitally important to reduce the effects of the ice cap melting further enhancing the already out of control destabilization of the methane hydrates on the Arctic shelf and slope.
· Developed (and some developing) countries must cut back their carbon dioxide emissions by a very large percentage (50% to 90%) by 2020 to immediately precipitate a cooling of the Earth and its crust. If this is not done the earthquake frequency and methane emissions in the Arctic will continue to grow exponentially leading to our inexorable demise between 2031 to 2051.
· Geoenginering must be used immediately as a cooling method in the Arctic to counteract the effects of the methane buildup in the short term. However these methods will lead to further pollution of the atmosphere in the long term and will not solve the earthquake induced Arctic methane buildup which is going to lead to our annihilation.
· The United States and Russia must immediately develop a net of powerful radio beat frequency transmission stations around the Arctic using the critical 13.56 MHZ beat frequency to break down the methane in the stratosphere and troposphere to nanodiamonds and hydrogen (Light 2011a) . Besides the elimination of the high global warming potential methane, the nanodiamonds may form seeds for light reflecting noctilucent clouds in the stratosphere and a light coloured energy reflecting layer when brought down to the Earth by snow and rain (Light 2011a). HAARP transmission systems are able to electronically vibrate the strong ionospheric electric current that feeds down into the polar areas and are thus the least evasive method of directly eliminating the buildup of methane in those critical regions (Light 2011a).
The warning about extinction is stark. It is remarkable that global scientists had not anticipated a giant buildup of methane in the atmosphere when it had been so clearly predicted 10 to 20 years ago and has been shown to be critically linked to extinction events in the geological record (Kennett et al. 2003). Furthermore all the experiments should have already been done to determine which geoengineering methods were the most effective in oxidising/destroying the methane in the atmosphere in case it should ever build up to a concentration where it posed a threat to humanity. Those methods need to be applied immediately if there is any faint hope of reducing the catastrophic heating effects of the fast building atmospheric methane concentration.
Malcolm Light 9th February, 2012
References
Arctic Methane Emergency Group
ameg.me
Allen, P.A., and Allen, J.R. Basin Analysis, Principles and Applications. Blackwell, Oxford, 451 pp.
Carana, S. 2011b. Light, M.P.R. and Carana, S. 2011c. – Methane linked to seismic activity in the Arctic.
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/seismic-activity.html
Carana, S. 2011g. Runaway Global Warming.
http://geo-engineering.blogspot.com/2011/04/runaway-global-warming.html
Connor, S. 2011. Shock as retreat of Arctic sea ice releases deadly greenhouse gas. Russian research team astonished after finding fountains of methane bubbling to surface. The Independent.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/shock-as-retreat-of arctic-sea-ice-releases-deadly-greenhouse-gas-6276134.html
DATAWeb, 2011. Combined Data Earth Policy Institute.
www.earth-policy.org/datacenter/…/update29_5x
Dessus, B., and Laponche B., Herve le Treut, 2008. Global Warming: The Significance of Methane bd-bl-hlt January 2008.
http://www.global-chance.org/IMG/pdf/CH4march2008.pdf
Hansen, J. E. 2011. GISS Surface Temperature Analysis. NASA. Goddard Institute for Space Physics. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgibin/gistemp/do_nmap.py?year_last=2011&month_last=08&sat=4&sst=1&type=anoms&mean_gen=02&year1=2009&year2=2009&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=1200&pol=pol
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1992a. Climate Change. The IPCC Scientific Assessment (Edited by J. J. Houghton, G. J. Jenkins and J. J. Ephraums). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. U.K.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1992b. Climate Change in 1992. The Supplementary report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment (Edited by J. J. Houghton, B. A. Callander and S. K. Varney). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. U.K.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007a. Fourth Assessment Report on Climate Change 2007. FAO 3.1, Figure 1, WG1, Chapter 3, p. 253.
http://blogs.ei.colombia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/graph-2-600X422.jpg
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007b. Synthesis Report
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spms1.html
Kennet, J.P., Cannariato, K.G., Hendy, I.L., Behl, R.J., 2003. Methane Hydrates in Quaternary Climate Change. The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis, Washington D.C., American Geophysical Union. ISBN 0875902960
Lide. D.R. and Frederikse H.P.R., 1995. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 75th Edition, CRC Press, London. pp. 1-1 – 1-33.
Light M.P.R. 2011a. Use of beamed interfering radio frequency transmissions to decompose Arctic atmospheric methane clouds. Edited by Sam Carana.
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/decomposing-atmospheric-methane.html
Lopatin, N.V. 1971. Temperature and geologic time as factors in coalification (in Russian). Akad. Nauk SSSR. Izvestiya. Seriya Geologicheskaya, 3, pp.95 – 106.
Masters. J. 2009. Top Climate Story of 2008. Arctic Sea Ice Loss. Dr Jeff Masters Wunderblog.
http://www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1177
NASA, 2002. Global Temperature Anomalies in 0.1C. Goddard Institute for Space Studies., NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Earth Sciences Directorate.
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data, updated December 2002.
Norwegian Polar Institute, 2001. Svalbard, Climate:
http://www.npolar.no/en/the-arctic/svalbard/
NOAA 2011a. Huge sudden atmospheric methane spike Arctic Svalbard (north of – Norway)
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/need-for-geo-engineering.html
NOAA 2011b. Huge sudden methane spike recorded at Barrow (BRW), Alaska, United States. Generated ESRL/GMO – 2011. December 14-17-21 pm
http://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/need-for-geo-engineering.html
Rianovosti, 2011. Russian, US scientists set to study methane release in Arctic. ScienceRSS
http://en.rian.ru/science/20110902/166364635.html
Semiletov, I. 2011. Quoted from Itar-Tass. Heavy methane emissions found in the Arctic Eastern Sector. Itar-Tass. September 26, 2011.
http://www.itar-tass.com/en/c154/233799.html
Shakel M., 2005. Sustainability: Our Environment.
http://www.earthethicsinstitute.org/facultycurriculum-pdf/sustainability%20exploration20in%Mathematics.pdf
Shakova N., Semiletov, I., Salyuk, A., and Kosmach, D., 2008. Anomalies of methane in the atmosphere over the East Siberian Shelf. Is there any sign of methane leakage from shallow shelf hydrates? EGU General Assembly 2008. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 10, EGU2008-A-01526
http://meetings.copernicus.org/www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU2008/01526/EGU2008-A-01526.pdf
Shakova, N. and Semiletov, I., 2010a. Methane release from the East Siberian Shelf and the potential for abrupt climate change. Presentation in November 30, 2010.
http://symposium2010.serdp-estcp.org/Technical-Sessions/1A
Shakova N., Semiletov, I., Leifer, I., Salyuk, A., Rekant, P., and Kosmach, D. 2010b. Geochemical and geophysical evidence of methane release over the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Journal Geophys. Research 115, C08007
http://europa.agu.org/?view=article&uri=/journals/jc/jc1008/2009jcoo5602/2009jc005602.xml
Shakova, N., Semiletov, I., Salyuk, A., Yusupov, V., Kosmach, D., and Gustafsson, O., 2010c. Extensive methane venting to the atmosphere from sediments of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Science.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5970/1246.short
Wignall, P. 2009. Miracle Planet; Episode 4, Part 2. Coproduced by NHK (Japan) and the National Film Board of Canada (NFB).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exfNNDExxic&list=PL0200B1S24E220C5A&feature=playerembedded#
Wikipedia., 2012. Enthalpy of Fusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthalpy_of_fusion
The following is a diagram by Sam Carana illustrating the progress
Source: RobinWestenra @ Blogspot
Less Wind, Rain and Sun, Welcome to Geoengineering
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
The science relating to the effects of an atmosphere saturated with particulates is clear and disturbing: less rain, wind, and sun. Numerous environmental engineering studies have found that the levels of rain, wind, and sun around the world today are likely far less than they should have been and would have been without chemical aerosols decimating our atmosphere. Such studies discuss these problems that can occur with atmospheric aerosols, however most articles, like the one cited below, ignore the “elephant in the room” that geoengineering is by far the largest single source of atmospheric aerosols. A recent report from NOAA even admits to the fact that they just don't know where all these particles are coming from.
‘Warmest year’ warning is issued
Source: Guernsey Press
The UK is on course to experience the warmest and one of the wettest years since records began more than a century ago – sparking fears that future droughts and flash floods could cost lives.
Climate Engineering, Aluminum, And Alzheimer’s
There is no hiding from the toxic brew of heavy metals and chemicals (from global climate engineering programs) floating down through the atmosphere forcing us all to inhale it with every breath. Aluminum is the primary element named in numerous geoengineering patents. Extreme quantities of this highly toxic heavy metal is showing up in lab tests of precipitation from around the globe. If it’s in the rain, it’s in the air. Aluminum has been connected to Alzheimer’s disease by peer reviewed studies, how is it that the “Alzheimer’s Association” refuses to acknowledge this fact? Who is pulling the strings in the Alzheimer’s Association? Why do they want to hide the aluminum/Alzheimer’s connection? The article below is a very complete summary of the dangers aluminum poses to the human neurological system and the body as a whole.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
