Remember me
▼ Content

Potential Effects of Broadcast Induced REP on Climate Change



Page 4 of 8<<<23456>>>
07-11-2018 18:57
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
"Energetic particle precipitation (EPP) refers to highly energetic electrons, protons, neutrons, and ions that are accelerated into the atmosphere through various heliophysical and geomagnetic processes. They enter the atmosphere mainly in the geomagnetic polar regions. When energetic particles enter the atmosphere they ionize and dissociate atmospheric constituents, resulting in the formation of reactive odd nitrogen (NOx = NO + NO2). EPP has been shown to contribute up to 10% of the stratospheric NOx budget and up to 40% of the polar stratospheric NOx budget. Once in the stratosphere, NOx produced by EPP (EPP-NOx) interferes with catalytic cycles involving ozone (O3). Theoretically, changes in O3 can lead to changes in temperature and winds, which means that EPP has the potential to impact climate as well.

Plentiful observational evidence of the EPP IE has been obtained since LIMS, along with observational evidence for the destruction of O3 by EPP-NOx."

http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/mag/research/energetic-particle-precipitation/



..What you haven't shown is what % of NOx emissions is caused by radiowaves. Without that information then you can say anything you want about radiowaves but you wouldn't be showing any research that supports your claims of radiowaves causing NOx to occur in any meaningful quantity.
.


This is the million dollar question in my Original Post James and I don't claim to know how significant it is. Remember I'm asking the same question and THIS is the question we need to be asking!!

Once we accept that according to some of the worlds leading ionospheric physicists broadcast CAN stimulate ozone depletion.. HOW MUCH does it really matter??????

I came to this point right here ten years ago and dove deep into learning and understanding how our broadcast affects the atmosphere, from the early ionospheric research experiments of Marconi exploring the lower ionosphere, to the MINIX rocket, SPS - Solar Powered Satellite experiments using 2.45GHz on the ionosphere and the discovery of Thermal Self Focusing Instability, HAARP experiments using multiples of the gyrofrequency and generation of plasma turbulence along the ion acoustic line.

THEN I learned that there were actually physicists that not only knew about this, but were warning the public!
And these guys aren't nuts, they are literally writing the book on electromagnetic physics and ionospheric research.

THEN I learned about the history of radio and how we reallocated our use of the frequency spectrum, the birth of the FCC, went to college and got a science degree, got a HAM radio license, volunteered with Auxiliary Comms, Law Enforcement and FEMA in case the shit really hit the fan I wanted to be a part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Since learning that broadcast was capable of depleting the ozone layer according to some of the worlds leading ionospheric physicists ten years ago:

1) We've now firmly established that Electron Precipitation can cause ozone depletion through the stratospheric EEP-NOx reaction.

2) We've now learned that our VLF is actually creating a force field around the frigging planet that's capable of blocking high energy radiation from space (a force field that we know stimulates this ozone depletion reaction)!

3) We've learned that EEP-NOx can deplete the ozone layer as much as solar proton events - SPEs.

4) That the only thing we can link to the hottest spot of climate warming in the entire Southern hemisphere is -->Yep! Energetic Electron Precipitation!!

5) That when you look at the global temperature graph spanning our historic use of broadcast frequencies, you can see a shift in temperature every time we started using them differently on a global scale.

6) The ozone layer is depleting, primarily right over mid latitudes and major cities where broadcast is highest. We can even see specific broadcast transmitters causing EEP in the conjugate hemisphere!!

7) From about 1980 - 2000 the global temperature and ozone depletion showed the same trend.

8) Now REP/EEP/EPP-NOx is one of the hottest topics in atmospheric research and in 2022 we're getting a major upgrade in our ability to map ionospheric currents with new technology.

I don't know how significant it is James.. that's why I'm here asking. Because as I see it this is the smartest question we should ALL be asking. If anybody has any good scientifically based answers, hints, tips, thoughts or questions.. that's why I'm posting this.

Let's have a conversation here.

How do we determine what is or isn't significant when looking at our climate system? What do we determine as worth our time?
Edited on 07-11-2018 19:03
07-11-2018 19:34
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Links about the energy bubble around the planet:

Cue NASA's cheesy video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFYoYUBGw4s

The Atlantic article: https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/527193/

YouTube video of James Munder reading The Atlantic article:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Q8K-UFkJs

Anthropogenic Space Weather research paper: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11214-017-0357-5
07-11-2018 19:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Once we accept that according to some of the worlds leading ionospheric physicists broadcast CAN stimulate ozone depletion.. HOW MUCH does it really matter??????

It doesn't. The ionosphere does not affect the ozone layer.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
I came to this point right here ten years ago and dove deep into learning and understanding how our broadcast affects the atmosphere, from the early ionospheric research experiments of Marconi exploring the lower ionosphere, to the MINIX rocket, SPS - Solar Powered Satellite experiments using 2.45GHz on the ionosphere and the discovery of Thermal Self Focusing Instability, HAARP experiments using multiples of the gyrofrequency and generation of plasma turbulence along the ion acoustic line.

No gyro. No acoustics. Buzzword fallacies.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
THEN I learned that there were actually physicists that not only knew about this, but were warning the public!
And these guys aren't nuts, they are literally writing the book on electromagnetic physics and ionospheric research.

No, they aren't.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
THEN I learned about the history of radio and how we reallocated our use of the frequency spectrum, the birth of the FCC, went to college and got a science degree, got a HAM radio license, volunteered with Auxiliary Comms, Law Enforcement and FEMA in case the shit really hit the fan I wanted to be a part of the solution, not part of the problem.

I don't believe you.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Since learning that broadcast was capable of depleting the ozone layer according to some of the worlds leading ionospheric physicists ten years ago:

The ozone layer is not being depleted.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
1) We've now firmly established that Electron Precipitation can cause ozone depletion through the stratospheric EEP-NOx reaction.

The ozone layer is not being depleted.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
2) We've now learned that our VLF is actually creating a force field around the frigging planet that's capable of blocking high energy radiation from space (a force field that we know stimulates this ozone depletion reaction)!

The ozone layer is not being depleted. The ionosphere does not block UV. There is no magick force field blocking UV light from the ozone layer.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
3) We've learned that EEP-NOx can deplete the ozone layer as much as solar proton events - SPEs.

Lightning doesn't occur in the ionosphere.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
4) That the only thing we can link to the hottest spot of climate warming in the entire Southern hemisphere is -->Yep! Energetic Electron Precipitation!!

No link. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
5) That when you look at the global temperature graph spanning our historic use of broadcast frequencies, you can see a shift in temperature every time we started using them differently on a global scale.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. There is no global temperature data.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
6) The ozone layer is depleting, primarily right over mid latitudes and major cities where broadcast is highest. We can even see specific broadcast transmitters causing EEP in the conjugate hemisphere!!
The ozone layer is not being depleted.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
7) From about 1980 - 2000 the global temperature and ozone depletion showed the same trend.

Argument from randU fallacy. There is no global temperature data. The ozone layer is not being depleted.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
8) Now REP/EEP/EPP-NOx is one of the hottest topics in atmospheric research and in 2022 we're getting a major upgrade in our ability to map ionospheric currents with new technology.

No currents in the ionosphere.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
I don't know how significant it is James.. that's why I'm here asking. Because as I see it this is the smartest question we should ALL be asking. If anybody has any good scientifically based answers, hints, tips, thoughts or questions.. that's why I'm posting this.

You are not interested in science. You are denying it as well as mathematics.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Let's have a conversation here.

How do we determine what is or isn't significant when looking at our climate system? What do we determine as worth our time?

There is no such thing as a global 'climate system'. There is no such thing as a global climate.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
07-11-2018 19:48
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
"Another persistent anthropogenic radiation in the magnetosphere is that produced by the widespread distribution of VLF and RF transmitters around the world. The radiation from these transmitters, used for navigation and communications, is known to disturb the trapped electron population of the magnetosphere. In addition, over several decades, purposeful VLF transmissions in the form of controlled experiments have been conducted from space craft and from the ground (one of the more notable and long-lasting set of ground experiments was from Siple Station, beginning in the early 1970s and extending to the late 1980s).

The permanent existence, and growth, of power grids and of VLF transmitters around the globe means that it is unlikely that Earth's present-day space environment is entirely"natural"—that is, that the environment today is the environment that existed at the onset of the 19th century. This can be concluded even though there continue to exist major uncertainties as to the nature of the physical processes that operate under the influence of both the natural environment and the anthropogenically-produced waves. As new techniques are considered for human modification of elements of Earth's space environment, it is important to carefully assess the short-term and long-term implications of anthropogenic modifications in order to arrive at final experiment design, and even decision to proceed."

Anthropogenic Space Weather research paper:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11214-017-0357-5

!-->EEP-NOx<---! = ?
07-11-2018 19:55
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Peculiarities of Long-Term Trends of Surface Temperature in Antarctica and Their Possible Connections with Outer Belt Electron Precipitation

"Both experimental and model explorations of long-term trends of surface temperature in various places in Antarctica indicate with definite certainty presence of a vast area of climate warming around the Antarctic peninsula which strongly contrasted with clearly expressed tendency to cooling in other parts of Antarctica. This area of climate warming is the most intensive one in the whole Southern hemisphere and it is comparable with similar climate warming places in the Northern hemisphere (Alaska and Eastern Siberia). This phenomenon attracts close attention of the world scientific community but its real origin remains to be insoluble so far. Among many factors, which could explain existence of area of climate warming in this region the scientists mention peculiarities of atmospheric circulation around the Antarctic peninsula, influence of the El Nino effect, dynamics of cloud formation in the area etc. However,
none of these explanations could be considered as a complete solution of the problem.

In this report we attract attention to a fact that the global maximum of the outer belt energetic electron precipitation is localized in a narrow longitudinal belt centered in the Weddell Sea i.e. in the area of climate warming in the Southern hemisphere. It was shown by several explorers that energetic resources of this electron precipitation are sufficient to change temperature regime of the stratosphere and troposphere."

https://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EMS2006/00027/EMS2006-A-00027.pdf?PHPSESSID=3
_________________________________________________________________
Into the Night.. I'm just laughing at you now.. I just don't know what to say about you.. flying your troll flag. It's beyond obvious you know.. right!? I mean you get that everybody in the room can see that your a troll? Do you? Or are you completely oblivious to this?
Edited on 07-11-2018 19:58
07-11-2018 20:46
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Scientists Say We Accidentally Created Protective Shield Around Earth:

Global1 News Network - Published on May 22, 2017

"NASA announced May 17 that very low frequency (VLF) signals sometimes mix with space particles and form a protective "bubble" around Earth."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggK6jR_s4C0



NASA Finds New Radiation Belt Around Earth:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs-sEO0jlz0
Edited on 07-11-2018 20:59
07-11-2018 22:58
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.
08-11-2018 00:49
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Our climate is changing as many of us are aware

Name one point in time when the climate was not changing.


https://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/impacts.jpg?w=500&h=333
08-11-2018 01:01
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Wake wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Our climate is changing as many of us are aware

Name one point in time when the climate was not changing.


https://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2018/10/impacts.jpg?w=500&h=333


Um.. no.. can you come up with a point to argue more compelling than this Wake.. please.. or not..
08-11-2018 01:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
1.45MHz is ALSO the electron cyclotron gyrofrequency of the E layer of the ionosphere. This is why the frequency stinmulates plasma turbulence so effectively. Stimulating the ionosphere with it's own resonant frequency causes turbulence in the plasma and secondary electatic emissions along with electron precipitation. If your transmitted frequency is lower it just bounces, if it's a bit higher it will go right through the E layer and go right up the the F layer of the ionosphere where it will bounce or couple if it's at the F layers resonant gyrofrequency which is approximately 2.45GHz.

This is also WiFi and microwave frequencies, but our use of those frequencies aren't strong enough to get even close to the ionosphere.


..There might be more to it than that. That might only be a basic cause and effect while the underlying behavior is overlooked. This kind of goes back to Einstein's light moves away from the Sun while gravity is an attractive force. An attractive force doesn't repel something.
.This kind of goes to Mercury having precession while all diagrams show it as having postcession. Postcession is a decaying orbit while precession uses conserved energy to increase linear velocity.
.This seems to be something fundamental with a planet or star's gravitational field.


Hmmmm


..All this suggests is that a planet that has precession has a circular motion while post cession would cause an elliptical orbit.
And if you notice, neither the mesopause or the tropopause try to reach an equilibrium with the layers of the atmosphere above or below them.
..Thermodynamics requires an equilibrium to be sought. Just isn't happening. One way of looking at this is when it's -50° C. in the tropopause heat is flowing from there to London so London can be +20° C. Thermodynamics does not allow for heat flowing from cold to warm. This means that something is going on that we don't understand yet.

https://goo.gl/images/TycNXK


There is a temperature inversion, but there is not an energy density inversion. Energy is still steadily less as you rise in altitude, even in the stratosphere and mesosphere.

The reason is that there is less mass to have thermal energy as you rise.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 01:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
1.45MHz is ALSO the electron cyclotron gyrofrequency of the E layer of the ionosphere. This is why the frequency stinmulates plasma turbulence so effectively. Stimulating the ionosphere with it's own resonant frequency causes turbulence in the plasma and secondary electatic emissions along with electron precipitation. If your transmitted frequency is lower it just bounces, if it's a bit higher it will go right through the E layer and go right up the the F layer of the ionosphere where it will bounce or couple if it's at the F layers resonant gyrofrequency which is approximately 2.45GHz.

This is also WiFi and microwave frequencies, but our use of those frequencies aren't strong enough to get even close to the ionosphere.



..There might be more to it than that. That might only be a basic cause and effect while the underlying behavior is overlooked. This kind of goes back to Einstein's light moves away from the Sun while gravity is an attractive force. An attractive force doesn't repel something.
.This kind of goes to Mercury having precession while all diagrams show it as having postcession. Postcession is a decaying orbit while precession uses conserved energy to increase linear velocity.
.This seems to be something fundamental with a planet or star's gravitational field.


Hmmmm


..All this suggests is that a planet that has precession has a circular motion while post cession would cause an elliptical orbit.
And if you notice, neither the mesopause or the tropopause try to reach an equilibrium with the layers of the atmosphere above or below them.
..Thermodynamics requires an equilibrium to be sought. Just isn't happening. One way of looking at this is when it's -50° C. in the tropopause heat is flowing from there to London so London can be +20° C. Thermodynamics does not allow for heat flowing from cold to warm. This means that something is going on that we don't understand yet.

https://goo.gl/images/TycNXK


Understanding physics is like climbing a ladder. You cannot do run 50 untill you have done all the ones below.

Given that you don't understand kinetic energy/temperature or the gas laws you cannot even start to understand what is happening in the upper atmosphere. Unlucky. Just live with it.

Atmospheric physicists do fully understand how this all works and none of it breaks any laws of physical reality.



..Tim,
.The stratosphere is 0° C. The tropopause below it is -50° C. (it's actually colder).

Ummmm...I think you mean the stratopause, not the stratosphere.
James___ wrote:
The ozone layer is found where the atmosphere above the tropopause starts warming.

True. It's caused by the formation and destruction of ozone.
James___ wrote:
Thermodynamics would require heat to move into the tropopause.

It does.
James___ wrote:
..At the same time the tropopause has slightly more air pressure than the stratosphere.

Quite a bit more than the stratopause, actually.
James___ wrote:
Above the tropopause there is no relationship between altitude and air pressure or temperature.

Yes there is. Air pressure decreases fairly rapidly, while temperature increases with altitude through the stratosphere, up to the stratopause.

Energy density continues to decrease due to decreasing pressure, while temperature continues to increase.
James___ wrote:
.Thermodynamics requires an equilibrium to be sought. That just isn't happening.

Yes it is. Energy density still decreases with altitude.
James___ wrote:
This requires work such as what insulation allows for.

Insulation doesn't produce work.
James___ wrote:
That's why homes stay warm in the winter.

They don't, even with insulation, if the furnace is shut off.
James___ wrote:
Without a barrier heat will flow to cold.

It flows anyway. No barrier is perfect.
James___ wrote:
. There is a plausible explanation but this forum isn't the place to discuss theoretical physics.

All physics is theoretical. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. That includes physics.
James___ wrote:
We don't know everything yet.

Theories are not knowledge.
James___ wrote:
If we did then there wouldn't be any debate over climate change.

Define 'climate change'. There are no theories of science about any meaningless buzzword.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 01:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
I've provided plenty of research from some of the worlds leading ionospheric physicists showing that broadcast can stimulate Electron Precipitation and that Electron Precipitation can deplete the ozone layer altering the thermal budget of the atmosphere. Those same ionospheric physicists say the public should be concerned at the role broadcast could play in climate change! Earlier in a post here I mentioned the possible link between our historic use of broadcast frequencies as broadcat technology evolved and spread across the globe AND various shifts in global temperature over the last 100+ years since the dawn of broadcast. Again if you look at the logo for this climate debate website, the temperature graph used is from the World Meteorological Organization. Here's a more detailed presentation of that graph with major changes in our broadcast pointed out.



I'm not saying there is a link. I'm asking? Once we understand that broadcast can deplete the ozone layer as previously shown. Could there be a link here?? Could it be that we've been stimulating this stratospheric ozone depletion mechanism since 1909? Especially seeing as how 1.45MHz in the AM broadcast band has been shown to stimulate Electron Precipitation quite efficiently.


..And it was about 1910 that the Moon made it's closest approach to the Earth in over 1,000 years. Excessive calving of glaciers on Greenland's western side was observed. Also around 1920 the waters adjacent to Greenland's southern coast and you it's western coast close to the Arctic suddenly warmed causing white whales to move up around Hudson Bay.
..I don't think radiowaves caused all of that. In fact in the 1920's they started monitoring seismic activity around Greenland.


The Moon's perigee (closest approach to the Earth) takes place every 27 days, 23 hours, 56 minutes, and 11.2 seconds.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 01:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
From the same temperature graph [WMO] we can also see that the later temperature rise has three distinct bumps which also happen to correspond to ozone depletion levels at that time. Again, just askng here!?



..This might be where they need to relate the ozone column height to w/m^2 of reflected solar radiation. The column does vary but have seen conflicting reports on just how depleted the ozone layer is. I could go more into this based on what different agencies have said but will refrain for the time being.


The ozone layer is not being depleted.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 01:49
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
.. i'm drowning in trolls here ..
08-11-2018 02:50
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.
08-11-2018 04:22
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I didn't say that.. I'm asking James..
Even if I did.. how would that violate the laws of thermodynamics?? <-- Is that what your saying?
Edited on 08-11-2018 04:23
08-11-2018 06:17
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I didn't say that.. I'm asking James..
Even if I did.. how would that violate the laws of thermodynamics?? <-- Is that what your saying?



I was answering Tim. Even so you've not really shown anything.
08-11-2018 06:24
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I didn't say that.. I'm asking James..
Even if I did.. how would that violate the laws of thermodynamics?? <-- Is that what your saying?



I was answering Tim. Even so you've not really shown anything.


I'm asking James.. you just don't really get it.
08-11-2018 06:43
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194
Edited on 08-11-2018 06:44
08-11-2018 13:40
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.
08-11-2018 13:43
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194


And?

So 200keV is more active?

What does that do way way up in the very top of the atmposphere do down here?
08-11-2018 16:13
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.
08-11-2018 16:36
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194



..NOx emissions are about 6% of what's considered GHG emissions. What % of that is claimed to be from VLFs (technically called UTI)?
..You've posted that you don't know yet keep posting that it matters. Do you see the irony in this?
.. And Mr. Carlson, I have considered that ozone depletion is one component of warming. For most of what I could say, I can show where it's allowed by accepted principles in physics.
.. Where I differ is believing that there is more to the Earth's atmosphere than what we know at this time.
. An example of this is that ozone absorbs heat. It does not become warmer in a vacuum. Yet as vacuum (air pressure lowers) in the ozone layer, it becomes warmer. This should not be happening unless something is influencing our atmosphere that we don't understand yet.
Edited on 08-11-2018 17:01
08-11-2018 18:21
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.

You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.
08-11-2018 18:51
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.

You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.


.. That's funny Tim. ROFLMA!!! Trump disliked somewhere? I've never heard of it. He should be leading the U. N.!!

.. As for v = vl, that is probably why light from a distant star moves away from the Sun. The field around the Sun is causing it to be dispersed. And it's most likely that if a satellite directed different wavelengths of light past the Sun that a pattern would emerge. But with only one source of light it's not possible to observe a dispersal pattern.
.. I also did not vote during the last presidential election in the US because I didn't like either candidate. And in the US it has been said that if you do not vote you do not have the right to complain.

.. With what you mentioned about v = lf, in our upper atmosphere it might best be observed by the distribution of matter. And this would show a more complex behavior in a give field or layer of our atmosphere. I'm glad you brought that up


.. I'll give you an example, okay? The ozone layer gets warmer with elevation even though atmospheric pressure decreases. If the field the ozone layer is in causes it to be dispersed according to v = fl then it would be in agreement with the laws of thermodynamics.
. I know that v = fl is for wave energy and not matter. The same principle can work for both because there could be a common underlying cause.
Edited on 08-11-2018 19:03
08-11-2018 19:04
Tim the plumber
★★★★☆
(1319)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.

You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.


.. That's funny Tim. ROFLMA!!! Trump disliked somewhere? I've never heard of it. He should be leading the U. N.!!

.. As for v = vl, that is probably why light from a distant star moves away from the Sun. The field around the Sun is causing it to be dispersed. And it's most likely that if a satellite directed different wavelengths of light past the Sun that a pattern would emerge. But with only one source of light it's not possible to observe a dispersal pattern.
.. I also did not vote during the last presidential election in the US because I didn't like either candidate. And in the US it has been said that if you do not vote you do not have the right to complain.

.. With what you mentioned about v = lf, in our upper atmosphere it might best be observed by the distribution of matter. And this would show a more complex behavior in a give field or layer of our atmosphere. I'm glad you brought that up


.. I'll give you an example, okay? The ozone layer gets warmer with elevation even though atmospheric pressure decreases. If the field the ozone layer is in causes it to be dispersed according to v = fl then it would be in agreement with the laws of thermodynamics.


v = fl has nothing to do with ozone.

velocity = frequency wave-length

If you don't understand what that is all about you have no clue about physics at all.

Stop talking about it.
08-11-2018 19:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
.. i'm drowning in trolls here ..


How typical. Everyone that disagrees with you is a 'troll'.

You have no idea even what a 'troll' is. That is a meaningless buzzword to you just as most of your stuff is.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 19:32
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


Radio signals are not additive. They do not affect global temperature.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 19:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194


I think we have another version of litebeer here.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 19:35
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have a boring way of losing your temper. You go off in rants about completely unrelated things that have nothing to do with any comment that set you off.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 19:42
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194



..NOx emissions are about 6% of what's considered GHG emissions.

No gas or vapor is capable of warming the Earth.
James___ wrote:
What % of that is claimed to be from VLFs (technically called UTI)?

None possible.
James___ wrote:
..You've posted that you don't know yet keep posting that it matters. Do you see the irony in this?

Apparently he doesn't. I think he's another version of litebeer.
James___ wrote:
.. And Mr. Carlson, I have considered that ozone depletion is one component of warming.

The ozone layer does not warm or cool the Earth.
James___ wrote:
For most of what I could say, I can show where it's allowed by accepted principles in physics.

You don't understand any physics, other than possibly the effects of hitting your thumb with a hammer.
James___ wrote:
.. Where I differ is believing that there is more to the Earth's atmosphere than what we know at this time.

We actually know quite a lot about our own atmosphere.
James___ wrote:
. An example of this is that ozone absorbs heat.

All substances absorb heat. Big deal.
James___ wrote:
It does not become warmer in a vacuum.

There is no ozone in a vacuum.
James___ wrote:
Yet as vacuum (air pressure lowers) in the ozone layer, it becomes warmer.

It becomes warmer with altitude because ozone is being destroyed by UV-C light. See the Chapman cycle.
James___ wrote:
This should not be happening unless something is influencing our atmosphere that we don't understand yet.

We do understand the Chapman cycle.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 20:12
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Tim the plumber wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194


And?

So 200keV is more active?

What does that do way way up in the very top of the atmposphere do down here?


The Electron Precipitation reacts with stratospheric Nitrogen forming NOx which depletes the ozone layer.

If you aren't getting this yet then your really not paying attention here as I've had to repeat this many times and have backed all this up with tons of research as it is already well established.

And will continue to do so until you get it.. so here.. read it again:

"When energetic particles enter the atmosphere they ionize and dissociate atmospheric constituents, resulting in the formation of reactive odd nitrogen (NOx = NO + NO2). EPP has been shown to contribute up to 10% of the stratospheric NOx budget and up to 40% of the polar stratospheric NOx budget. Once in the stratosphere, NOx produced by EPP (EPP-NOx) interferes with catalytic cycles involving ozone (O3). Theoretically, changes in O3 can lead to changes in temperature and winds, which means that EPP has the potential to impact climate as well.

Plentiful observational evidence of the EPP IE has been obtained since LIMS, along with observational evidence for the destruction of O3 by EPP-NOx."

http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/mag/research/energetic-particle-precipitation/

Go to the link ^^^ seriously Tim!


Edited on 08-11-2018 20:26
08-11-2018 20:25
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

This is normal reaction when he loses his temper.
Tim the plumber wrote:
I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.
Pretty much all U.S. presidents are laughing stocks outside the USA. So is Congress. Meh. They are often laughing stocks here inside the USA too. Our comedians love these guys as source material.
Tim the plumber wrote:
You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

I don't recall where he ever tried to use that equation.
Tim the plumber wrote:
You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.

Careful, for everybody stumbling around on this planet of ours is dishonest according to that statement, including you.

You have asked legitimate questions about your wind generator. You have discussed areas where you can better measure the efficiency of the machine. You have introduction of marketing your machine and finding people more familiar with this area.

You discuss things about which you have no clue as well. The difference is that you are asking questions and trying to get information. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with that.

No, dishonesty in and of itself is dishonest. There it basically ends.

Oddly enough, James is more about proposing ideas that are not constrained with the laws of physics. He is simply not aware that a theory of science cannot conflict with any other theory of science, and that a theory of science can only be destroyed (and discarded) through falsification of that theory.

This isn't dishonesty so much as illiteracy. He really does believe his viewpoints. His own lack of knowledge in physics (and science in general) means there is nothing to tell him that what he is proposing is wrong.

He also has a paranoid trait, which triggers the temper tantrums into random rants from time to time when he is called on his lack of knowledge in science.

There is a difference between betting on a lousy poker hand because you're bluffing, and betting on a lousy poker hand because you think it's actually going to win (then getting angry when it doesn't).


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 20:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.

You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.


.. That's funny Tim. ROFLMA!!! Trump disliked somewhere? I've never heard of it. He should be leading the U. N.!!

The U.N. is led by an individual nominated from the Security Council, and is known as the Secretary General. Currently, that position is held by António Guterres.
James___ wrote:
.. As for v = vl, that is probably why light from a distant star moves away from the Sun.

v does not equal vl, unless l is one. I'll consider this a typo of v=fl, which has nothing to do with why light from a distant star moves away from the Sun (it doesn't).
James___ wrote:
The field around the Sun is causing it to be dispersed.

Not what that equation is about.
James___ wrote:
And it's most likely that if a satellite directed different wavelengths of light past the Sun that a pattern would emerge.

How would you measure it? Another satellite on the other side of the Sun?
James___ wrote:
But with only one source of light it's not possible to observe a dispersal pattern.

You just described two sources of light, then say one of them doesn't exist???
James___ wrote:
.. I also did not vote during the last presidential election in the US because I didn't like either candidate. And in the US it has been said that if you do not vote you do not have the right to complain.

Glad you didn't vote. You haven't the wits.
James___ wrote:
.. With what you mentioned about v = lf, in our upper atmosphere it might best be observed by the distribution of matter.

Nope. The equation has nothing to do with the distribution of matter either.
James___ wrote:
And this would show a more complex behavior in a give field or layer of our atmosphere. I'm glad you brought that up

It does not create any layer in the atmosphere.
James___ wrote:
.. I'll give you an example, okay? The ozone layer gets warmer with elevation even though atmospheric pressure decreases.

Nothing to do with v=fl (or v=lf, or v=vl).
James___ wrote:
If the field the ozone layer is in causes it to be dispersed according to v = fl

The ozone layer is not in a 'field' other than the usual gravity field of Earth. Nothing to do with v=fl. There is nothing to 'disperse'. Energy density still decreases with altitude, even though temperature (thermal energy) increases, simply because there is less matter for thermal energy to occur in as you increase altitude.
James___ wrote:
then it would be in agreement with the laws of thermodynamics.

It never left it. v=fl has nothing to do with the ozone layer, the light of a distant star 'avoiding' the Sun, or 'dispersal' of matter.
James___ wrote:
. I know that v = fl is for wave energy and not matter.

Then you ARE intentionally being dishonest.
James___ wrote:
The same principle can work for both because there could be a common underlying cause.

Matter is not a wave propagation.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 20:46
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
James___ wrote:
..By the way Tim, can you please post the explanation for the reason the ozone layer is between the tropopause at -56° C. And the stratosphere at 0° C.? And why no heat is being transferred from the stratosphere to the tropopause which has more atmospheric pressure? It's just that I haven't heard of it yet.


I don't know.

You could ask on some science forum. There you would probably find an atmospheric physicist or somebody else who would know.

I can guess that the very low pressure zones of the atmosphere don't really have a temperature and the collisions between atoms, temperature, that happen are generally at high speed due to them being often from a long way away from the last time they hit something so it it likely that they are going some.

Or that there is an effect where only the fast atoms get fired into the higher levels of the atmosphere.

But you will be lot better off asking somebody who has actually studied this otherwise you will listen to endless guessing.


The current explanation violates the laws of thermodynamics.
Just like Mr. Carlson saying AM radio caused global warming in 1910. He's not show how many watts are broadcast and how that relates to an increase in global temperature.


I don't know enough about the way the physics applies to the atmosphere.

I do know that people who know a vast amount more than me do understand it well. That they have worked out how and why it has the temperatures it has. I have met such people. They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it. They would be facinated by any bit of it they could not account for. They would be doing their pHd's on that.

Find a science forum and discss it wih tem. They will explain it to you.

Nobody here has the physics for that.



.. Now you're implying that I'm lying about it.
They are not the sort (atmospheric physicists) who would be quiet if there were lies about it.


.. That makes everything simple Tim. I'll just agree with whatever you post. That's not debating something. I don't know your friends. President Trump said he's going to make America Great. Just ask his friends. Isn't it nice to have that issue resolved? I think so.
..I know you feel better now as well. Press. Trump cares about you even though you're not an American. He's that nice of a guy.
.. Here in the US. we actually call him Gramps because he's like that grandfather that everyone has and loves.
.. See? Now we've found something else that we can both agree on. And Gramps says that we don't need any environmental regulation. The environment has always taken care of itself.
.. I feel better now that we've discussed this and are both in agreement.

.


You have shown yourself mad just with that post.

I do not like Trump. Outside USA he is a laughing stock.

You have no clue about physics. That you cannot understand what v=fl is all about means that you have never done any physics.

You should not talk about things you have no clue about. It is very dishonest.


.. That's funny Tim. ROFLMA!!! Trump disliked somewhere? I've never heard of it. He should be leading the U. N.!!

.. As for v = vl, that is probably why light from a distant star moves away from the Sun. The field around the Sun is causing it to be dispersed. And it's most likely that if a satellite directed different wavelengths of light past the Sun that a pattern would emerge. But with only one source of light it's not possible to observe a dispersal pattern.
.. I also did not vote during the last presidential election in the US because I didn't like either candidate. And in the US it has been said that if you do not vote you do not have the right to complain.

.. With what you mentioned about v = lf, in our upper atmosphere it might best be observed by the distribution of matter. And this would show a more complex behavior in a give field or layer of our atmosphere. I'm glad you brought that up


.. I'll give you an example, okay? The ozone layer gets warmer with elevation even though atmospheric pressure decreases. If the field the ozone layer is in causes it to be dispersed according to v = fl then it would be in agreement with the laws of thermodynamics.


v = fl has nothing to do with ozone.

velocity = frequency wave-length

If you don't understand what that is all about you have no clue about physics at all.

Stop talking about it.


That's about as simple as anyone could explain it.

You see what I mean when he actually believes this stuff. If anything, he is dishonest with himself. His last post created a paradox of his own making.

1) v=lf applies to waves and not matter.
2) v=lf applies to matter due to common mechanism between waves and matter.

Any further attempt to argue both sides of this paradox is simply irrationality.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 08-11-2018 20:49
08-11-2018 21:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Tim the plumber wrote:
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Radiation belt electron precipitation due to VLF transmitters: Satellite observations

"In the Earth's inner magnetosphere, the distribution of energetic electrons is controlled by pitch‐angle scattering by waves. A category of Whistler waves originates from powerful ground‐based VLF transmitter signals in the frequency range 10–25 kHz. These transmissions are observed in space as waves of very narrow bandwidth. Here we examine the significance of the VLF transmitter NWC on the inner radiation belt using DEMETER satellite global observations at low altitudes. We find that enhancements in the ∼100–600 keV drift‐loss cone electron fluxes at L values between 1.4 and 1.7 are linked to NWC operation and to ionospheric absorption. Waves and particles interact in the vicinity of the magnetic equatorial plane. Using Demeter passes across the drifting cloud of electrons caused by the transmitter; we find that ∼300 times more 200 keV electrons are driven into the drift‐loss cone during NWC transmission periods than during non‐transmission periods."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2008GL033194


And?

So 200keV is more active?

What does that do way way up in the very top of the atmposphere do down here?


The Electron Precipitation reacts with stratospheric Nitrogen forming NOx which depletes the ozone layer.

Insufficient energy to form NOx.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
If you aren't getting this yet then your really not paying attention here as I've had to repeat this many times and have backed all this up with tons of research as it is already well established.

Science is a set of falsifiable theories, not any 'research' or 'study'. There is nothing about the number of research programs that proves or legitimizes any theory.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
And will continue to do so until you get it.. so here.. read it again:

"When energetic particles enter the atmosphere they ionize
Electrons are not ions, not even energetic ones.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
and dissociate atmospheric constituents, resulting in the formation of reactive odd nitrogen (NOx = NO + NO2).

Insufficient energy.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
EPP has been shown to contribute up to 10% of the stratospheric NOx budget and up to 40% of the polar stratospheric NOx budget.
There is no 'budget' for NOx or any other gas or vapor.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Once in the stratosphere, NOx produced by EPP (EPP-NOx) interferes with catalytic cycles involving ozone (O3).

NO is consumed by O3,making NO2 and O2. It is not a catalyst. NO does not react with oxygen, and NO2 does not react with ozone. Sunlight acting on O2 makes O3.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Theoretically, changes in O3 can lead to changes in temperature and winds, which means that EPP has the potential to impact climate as well.

The ozone layer does not warm or cool the Earth, and does not affect the winds, either in the stratosphere nor in the troposphere.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Plentiful observational evidence of the EPP IE has been obtained since LIMS, along with observational evidence for the destruction of O3 by EPP-NOx."

...deleted Holy Link...


EPP is not NOx.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 21:19
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Into the Night wrote:
Radio signals are not additive. They do not affect global temperature.


Radio wave induced plasma turbulence amplifies as it travels through the E layer of the ionosphere toward the polar regions in ion acoustic ducts along magnetic field lines.



And yes there are magnetic field ducts:

"Furthermore, there are often density irregularities that stretch along the magnetic field lines. These irregularities (either excess density or density depletions) act as ducts for the chorus waves. Similar to the trapping of light within a fibre optic cable, the ducts trap chorus waves along the field lines, forcing them to travel along the field line toward the ground."

https://www.ucalgary.ca/above/science/chorus
_________________________________________________
[For the troll --> Into the Night]

Nobody is saying EEP is NOx, if you'd even looked at the link you deleted you might get that. Try again.. here you go:

http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/mag/research/energetic-particle-precipitation/
Edited on 08-11-2018 22:17
08-11-2018 23:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Radio signals are not additive. They do not affect global temperature.


Radio wave induced plasma turbulence amplifies as it travels through the E layer of the ionosphere toward the polar regions in ion acoustic ducts along magnetic field lines.

This statement doesn't even make any sense. Try English. It works better.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
...deleted Holy Links...
And yes there are magnetic field ducts:

Nope. Just another buzzword.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
"Furthermore, there are often density irregularities that stretch along the magnetic field lines. These irregularities (either excess density or density depletions) act as ducts for the chorus waves.

No chorus. Nonsense use of the word. Density does not deplete or have an 'excess'.
Lewis Carlson wrote:
Similar to the trapping of light within a fibre optic cable, the ducts trap chorus waves along the field lines, forcing them to travel along the field line toward the ground."

More nonsense and buzzwords. Fiber optic cable does not have 'chorus waves' either (unless you're transmitting music upon it).
Lewis Carlson wrote:
...deleted Holy Link and buzzword...
Nobody is saying EEP is NOx, if you'd even looked at the link you deleted you might get that. Try again.. here you go:
...deleted non-functional Holy Link...

You did. That's why I called you on it.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
08-11-2018 23:52
Lewis Carlson
★☆☆☆☆
(131)
Into the Night wrote:
You did. That's why I called you on it.

It is referred to as EEP-NOx in scientific literature because EEP reacts with stratospheric nitrogen to form NOx.

http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/mag/research/energetic-particle-precipitation/

Seriously sound like a 15 year old troll.
Edited on 09-11-2018 00:25
09-11-2018 01:11
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Tim the plumber wrote:


velocity = frequency wave-length

If you don't understand what that is all about you have no clue about physics at all.

Stop talking about it.[/color]


.. Tim, we've already discussed this in a different context.
Do you want me to say velocity = frequency times time?
The "l" refers to lambda which is wavelength.
.. About all this says is that waves of different frequencies vibrate differently and will interfere with each other. This will cause them to disperse and could even cause waves to become white noise (static).
. What we actually discussed was that v/f = l just as v/l = f. By knowing any 2 of v = fl will let you know the 3rd value.
.. With ozone, if it's in a field where as it ascends it's relationship to ozone changes then it can disperse it accordingly. See? Now we know how to consider the field it's in. We have helped to find a solution to understanding a problem.

Edited on 09-11-2018 01:33
Page 4 of 8<<<23456>>>





Join the debate Potential Effects of Broadcast Induced REP on Climate Change:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
volcanic effects on acid rain121-09-2020 02:49
Doctors to study possible long-term effects on patients that died from COVID-19428-08-2020 06:09
Climate change - effects, impact and solutions601-06-2020 03:21
Will Warm Winters Balance Out The Effects Of Greenhouse Gases?1410-02-2020 18:23
Migrations induced by extreme climatic events7808-11-2019 19:33
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact