by Susanne Posel
September 4, 2012 (TSR) – Under the Arctic ice-sheets are supposed more than 400 billion metric tons of carbon that is assumed to slowly seep out with methane as the effects of global warming continue. The permafrost of the Antarctic has nearly the same amount stored in the frozen soil.
Methane is 25 times more potent than CO2 and would have drastic effects on the temperature of the earth, say alarmists like Jemma Wadham, professor of Glaciology at the U.K.’s University of Bristol. “There’s a potentially large pool of methane hydrate in part of the Earth where we haven’t previously considered it.
Depending on where that hydrate is, and how much there is, if the ice thins in those regions, some of that hydrate could come out with a possible feedback on climate.”
The latest insinuation in alarmist circles is that methane is affecting the temperature of the earth through carbon dioxide emissions. Regardless of the scientific data refuting CO2 as a defining factor in the planet’s natural cycle of rising and lowering temperature, this new ploy appears to have more punch tan just blaming CO2 alone.
As Wadham and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assert , methane will cause pressure to the climate in the Arctic, thereby heating the area, causing the ice-sheets to melt faster and allow those methane and carbon “gas bubbles” to be released.
In the Arctic, peat bogs which are a natural source of atmospheric methane, foams and breaks down organic material. As the permafrost melts the methane is released in these areas.
In justification of a need for a cooling effect, David Keith, director of the Institute for Sustainable Energy, Environment and Economy is pushing the releasing of nanotechnology with sulfuric aerosols into the Earth’s atmosphere to reflect sunlight back out into space. Keith manages the million-dollar geoengineering research that is funded by Bill Gates and the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research.
Keith disregards his peers who assert that this action will alter earth’s natural weather patterns while environmental groups decry that geoengineering nullifies their efforts to purport their campaigns to convince the public that man-made climate change is directly causational to human emissions of CO2.
Keith hopes to alter the ozone layer by way of future assaults of sulfate aerosols. Keith explains: “The objective is not to alter the climate, but simply to probe the processes at a micro scale. The direct risk is very small.”
Solar engineering will directly amplify specific areas of study as the have chosen sulfuric dust the mimics the emissions of volcanoes. An intended consequences of solar geoengineering is the whitening of our skies because of the nano particles being released to reflect sunlight. Sulfate aerosols cause whiter daytime skies and sunset to glow brighter.
According to a study conducted by the International Energy Agency in 2011, the Arctic is currently cooling and the effects brought on by sulfuric aerosols would cause more damage to the planet’s natural ability to cycle through its temperature fluxuations.
The focus of solar geoengineering is in the Arctic where the alarmists theorize that the necessity is the greatest to combat the melting of the ice-sheets. However, their disregard for natural cycles of the earth and the cyclical flow of melting and refreezing of these ice-sheets are the real danger to our planet’s normal seasonal cycles.
Alarmists continue to blame CO2 and decry that the planet has reached its “tipping point” which could mean one small event could send the plant into an extreme temperature flux that would be beyond human control.
Klaus–Ekart Puls, physicist and meteorologist, has analyzed the UN’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that regulating CO2 will “regulate climate change.” Puls found that the IPCC’s assertion is based on “speculative model projections, so-called scenarios – and not prognoses. Because of climate’s high complexity, reliable prognoses just aren’t possible.”
Puls agrees that sea levels have risen, however “it’s important to remember that mean sea level is a calculated magnitude, and not a measured one. There are a great number of factors that influence sea level, e.g. tectonic processes, continental shifting, wind currents, passats, and volcanoes. Climate change is only one of ten factors.”
Leighton Steward spoke before Congress in 2009 and explained how carbon dioxide does not affect the earth’s temperature. Steward pointed to the carbon tax scheme that follows the false assertion that amounts to having humans pay for breathing. CO2 levels are lower than they have ever been. This is causing a real danger to the future of plant life on earth as they need carbon dioxide to live.
The American Geophysical Union commented on research into the melting of ice sheets that: “It turns out that past studies, which were based on computer models without any direct data for comparison or guidance, overestimate the water temperatures and extent of melting beneath the Fimbul Ice Shelf [in the Antarctic]. This has led to the misconception, Hattermann said, that the ice shelf is losing mass at a faster rate than it is gaining mass, leading to an overall loss of mass. The team’s results show that water temperatures are far lower than computer models predicted.