Climate For All

An All Around Science Blog

The Inconvenience of History

What Alarmists Fail to Mention

CO2 can take care of itself.

Molecular Structure of H2CO3

Much has been written about the subject of carbon dioxide and the disaster that it will bring if too much of it is released or stored in the atmosphere.

Some of what has been said about an increase in CO2 goes as follows:

  • Erosions of coastlines and islands due to rising sea levels.
  • Rising temperatures from man-made increases of CO2.
  • Arctic sea ice to withdraw and disappear by the middle of this century.
  • Increase in Hurricanes and Tornadoes.
  • Ad Nauseam. (This Latin phrase comes from a term in logic, the argumentum ad nauseam, in which debaters wear out the opposition by just repeating arguments until they get sick of the whole thing and give in.)

What I would like to provide to my readers is a little history of what the leaders of anthropogenic global warming omit from their discoveries and how it may impact your decision regarding climate change.
In the July, 1901 issue of Popular Science, Bailey Willis of the U.S. Geological Survey, wrote an article called, “Climate and Carbonic Acid”.
Much of what is written in this article is still considered fundamentally sound in todays colleges and institutions. A major contributor to the facts supplied in this paper comes from Professor T.C. Chamberlin
(1843-1928), University of Chicago.

Here are some visual excerpts from that article:



From this excerpt, one will notice that the geological makeup of earths crust from the mountain tops to the coast lines suggest that while terrestrial forces raise the elevation of earthworks, carbon dissolves those elevations to keep earth in balance.

Carbonic acid, known to be that portion of carbon dioxide that is dissolved in water,  H2O + CO2 ->H2CO3, adjusts so that both CO2 and H2CO3 are in balance with each other.


In relationship to the warming based on air growing rich in carbon dioxide, this effect is NOT the initiative in the carbonic cycle. It states that the periodic rest and unrest of earths forces are the leading forces for CO2 being captured in the atmosphere.

There are 15 pages dedicated to this article from Popular Science, and though I’ve only scratched the surface of the article,  It should be apparent that in todays media, nothing of what is written here is ever conveyed to the public.

Some of you might put it off that the science of today is no longer in agreement with this hundred year old review. Well, that is not the case.

I stumbled across this website from Columbia, that seems almost in complete agreement with the findings that were printed in PopSci.
Here is a quote from that website:

“Because of the role of CO2 in climate, feedbacks in the carbon cycle act to maintain global temperatures within certain bounds so that the climate never gets too hot or too cold to support life on Earth. The process is a large-scale example of LeChatelier’s Principle. This chemical principle states that if a reaction at equilibrium is perturbed by the addition or removal of a product or reactant, the reaction will adjust so as to attempt to bring that chemical species back to its original concentration. For example, as carbonic acid is removed from solution by weathering of rocks, the reaction will adjust by producing more carbonic acid. And since the dissolved CO2 is in equilibrium with atmospheric CO2, more CO2 is removed from the atmosphere to replace that removed from solution by weathering.”

There is so many nuggets of inconvenience for the alarmist here that I can almost feel sympathetic towards their troubled future. Politicians and scientists and activists that support global warming have only been sharing what misguided facts they want you know.  The alarmists seem to have omitted the real facts in the case of carbon, only to gain control of a substance that seems the earth will , in due course, correct and balance as the earth sees fit.

Maybe this post will help everyone involved come together and stop the nonsense, that CO2 is not the smoking gun for climate change.

Speaking of climate change, it seems that the phrase has been around much longer than I suspected and was being used by scientists in reference to global cooling. Go figure.


Advertisements

4 responses to “The Inconvenience of History

  1. Pingback: 8. “Завершающие штрихи” к объяснению влияния углекислого газа на изменения климата. Чамберлин, 1899

  2. Pingback: 8. “Завершающие штрихи” к объяснению влияния углекислого газа на изменения климата. Чамберлин, 1899 | Блог о науке

  3. Pingback: Рождение "глобального потепления" | Социальный Компас

  4. Agen Judi Taruhan Bola sbobet January 27, 2017 at 10:09 am

    Wonderful post! We are linking to this great post on our site.
    Keep up the great writing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: