All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 25, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
56:53
The Real Deal: Climate Change: Myth vs. Reality, Part 4 (23 January 2022) with Joe Olson, P.E.
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Fetzer, your host, on a Real Deal special about climate change, the fourth in our series with Joe Olson, who's doing a masterful job of presenting the evidence that the climate change agenda predicated upon the claim that The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere affects the temperature of the Earth is completely fraudulent, has no scientific basis.
It's a false premise for an agenda that would have the economic effects of destroying America.
Profoundly disturbing, which is why we regard this series as indispensable for every American to understand.
Joe, you're doing a great job.
Oh, bless you, James.
Yeah, what people need to realize is that when Ronnie Reagan was President of the United States, U.S.
government funding for climatology was $20 million a year.
When Big Bush took over in 88, he immediately started ramping that up.
And by the time he left office in 92, the spending on climatology was $1 billion a year.
When Clinton took over, he increased that to $2 billion a year, and it's remained that or greater ever since then.
And like I say, so we've squandered a total of $100 billion on this goofy fake science about carbon dioxide warming the planet and that is enough money to have given clean drinking and sanitary water to every human being on earth if that was important to these people but it's not and so like I wrote in one of my articles if all you fund is findings for danger
Danger is all you will find.
And that's the only way you could get a grant approved was for carbon endangerment findings by the DOE and the EPA and the FDA.
Every group that could possibly be involved on part of the federal mafia was involved in making this fraud happen for the last 30, 40 years.
Now, Joe, what the public needs to understand is what could possibly motivate a fraud of this magnitude?
We understand the COVID hoax is justified to bring in the deadly vax in order to bring about the massive depopulation of Earth.
Desired by the genocidal globalists.
We understand the fake pandemic but the all too real but lethal vax.
What is there for us to understand about this fake climate change agenda where already in our very first Presentation.
You explain.
There's no correlation over 600 million years of the history of the Earth between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the Earth's temperature.
No correlation whatsoever.
They are completely independent.
Which means, of course, absent any correlation, there can be no causal connection, which means the entire thing is scientifically refutable by a single graph.
So what in the world is motivating, say, George H.W.
Bush and Bill Clinton and others since from funding a myth, a fantasy?
What is the objective, which clearly must be political and economic?
This is a trifecta of energy control, and it involves global warming, where use of thermal fuels is what's causing the climate to change, which is what we've been discussing, a complete fraud.
But add to that the fraud of sustainable, quote, green energy, where it takes more energy to produce these goofy eco-trinkets than you ever get out of them.
So they're net Energy losers and you're going to find out in about 20 years when every windmill and every solar cell has to be put in a landfill or and replaced that these things were never profitable and never stable and then the third thing is peak oil where oh we've got to quit using it because it's dead dinosaur juice and we're going to run out
That's another lie.
So you put all three of those lies together, and then you have one component of what one of the ringleaders of this rotten Nazi fascist organization has been doing since they took over the United States in 1913, and that is Henry Kissinger, who said, if you control energy, you control a nation.
If you control food, you control the people.
And that's what these SOBs are doing.
By destroying energy, they're also destroying the food network.
And so bottom line is, this is all part of the same agenda by the same fascists that have been running the planet and stage set every war, including the Civil War, all the way up till now.
There's a great article...
Look, we know the Bush family was a Schiff family, that they're descendants from Germans, from those who would be regarded as authoritarians or Nazis.
So the question is, why would they want to introduce an energy program that's a net energy loser?
I just think others like myself want a little more understanding of the motivation.
Okay, well we had a very energy use dependent relationship.
When people bought gasoline, the companies that sold gasoline made enough profit that they could afford to build filling stations.
When people built hydroelectric dams and built coal-fired steam generator plants, there was enough profit margin that those could be built with private sector.
Now we're faced with a situation where we need eco-trinkets that we know can't produce enough,
so they have to be government subsidized to the tune of about 20% in the manufacturing of the
material components and then another 20% on the installation cost. In Texas, rate payers are
required to spend 25% of their new capital improvements on goofy green energies like
windmills and solar stills.
Texas has more windmills than the whole rest of the nation combined and you saw what effect they had last February when we had the cold snap.
We had a week of weather where Almost 100 people froze to death or died because of accidents with the traffic lights out.
But bottom line is, you have a very dangerous situation when you have a very intermittent power supply.
And that's one of the things that these people are motivated to do, is to kneecap humanity.
Because fossil fuels are an extension of your muscle system.
Just like I wrote in my article that was at Principia Scientific.
Let me see.
I can pull that one up pretty quick.
Let me just show an image of Principia Scientific, which you co-founded.
This is absolutely sensational, where you debunk these political views that are being promoted as science, when they're in fact pseudoscience.
In my judgment, your most important point about Solar and wind as a source of energy is that they're energy consumers, that it requires more energy to produce them than they provide, and of course you observe they're intermittent.
They depend on circumstances beyond the control of man, and What happens if the electrical grid goes down, Joe, once we've shifted to all electrical?
In my opinion, this is so harebrained, I find it difficult to imagine any serious person could take it for real.
Yeah, well, back when we had the original energy crisis under Jimmy Peanut Carter here in Texas, there was a big move by the Northeast to not allow any more pipelines, and then they had a big freeze up there in the Northeast, and a common bumper sticker here in Texas is, let them freeze in the dark in the North.
Well, that's exactly what they're trying to do to the whole nation right now.
Why do you think they call this dark winter?
They're planning on shutting down all the power so they can freeze out another 15-20% of the population and just go, oh, natural disaster.
Well, there's nothing we can do about it.
You know, the horrible thing about having natural gas as a main supply is that it's also very interruptible.
You can't store natural gas in any practical method and so what they do is they depend on pipelines and just like we saw in Texas last year if the pipelines are connected to the electric grid because they used to be on gas fired compressors that use the portion of the natural gas piped in the pipeline to to continue to pressurize the pipeline.
Some brainchild said, well, these things are noisy in their maintenance, and let's just go ahead and switch them over to electrical.
But let's don't tell the electrical grid that these are vital components that need to be supplied with power all the time.
And so those pumps shut off, and so we lost natural gas.
The advantage to coal is that you can very, very accurately determine what your daily use is, and you can stockpile coal, and they typically did stockpile coal for three months at a time.
And so we had this enormous self-funding method of electrical generation, which now we're in a subsidized electrical generation system that's going to be even more subject to fluctuations in the future.
So this is an absolute perfect nightmare of energy, and it's all based on this phony baloney carbon, the phony baloney sustainable, and the phony baloney peak oil.
And that's the debate that we really need to be having across the board, and that's the debate that nobody does have.
I wrote an article prior to my fifth time on Coast to Coast AM, and this is, From Muscle Power to Carbon Empowerment.
And this goes through the basic geologic processes of producing hydrocarbons, which we'll get to in today's discussion, because we had previously, in Chapter 3, we discussed The astronomical and geological forcing, but today we're going to focus a little bit more on geological.
Number one, because it's more variable, and number two, things that happen on an astronomical scale can have minor impacts on Earth, and certainly undeniable impacts, and certainly if one of those is fluctuations in the sun, then that certainly is an impact.
But what happens geothermally, 100% of that energy flows through the biosphere on its way into radiating into outer space.
And so that's why that is such an important factor.
And that's one of the ones that's been absolutely neglected by both sides of this phony baloney, warmest, lukewarmest climate debate.
So I think that's a brilliant job of debunking all of this.
Shall we go to your very first slide, my friend, for Oh yes, let's talk about tsunamis.
Let's talk about the largest tsunami ever recorded.
Got it.
Okay, this is Lituya Bay, Alaska, July 9, 1958.
There was a tsunami that was 1,720 feet high.
This happened from an earthquake that happened near the location, and a cliff face fell with 30.6 million cubic feet of rock.
Rock weighs 125 pounds per cubic feet.
It fell 3,000 feet.
Well, they don't say if that was the bottom or the top or the center, but we'll just call it center.
You reach maximum terminal velocity falling to Earth in about 1,500 feet, and that is 120 miles per hour.
So, bottom line is, you have an energy equation, kinetic energy equation, which is one half m which is mass velocity squared. If you've
got 30 million cubic feet of 125 pound per cubic foot rock moving at 120 miles per hour and you
square that velocity, you're talking an enormous amount of energy that is capable of throwing a
1700 foot tall wave.
And since tsunamis are in the news recently over Tonga, I'm going to demonstrate to you how rotten the press is and how rotten the established geology departments are.
So let's move to the next slide.
This is January 26, 1700.
26 1700. The Cascadia quake hits Japan. Got it.
Okay, now the Oregon Coast was discovered by a Spanish explorer Juan de Fuca.
And that's F-U-C-A in 1592.
And they've actually named one of the subduction plates along the Oregon coast as the Juan de Fuca Plate.
And so then it was pretty much neglected until Juan Perez went in in 1774, another Spanish explorer, and started actually trying to chart the place.
And then James Cook from England went and discovered Oregon in 1778.
Now, Lewis and Clark got there in 1805, and that's where U.S.
got their claim to that particular real estate.
But when they were there, and we're talking, you know, 100 years after this January 26, 1700 Cascadia event, the natives had all talked about that there had been a massive tidal wave.
But because there was nothing but oral transmission of history at that time, they didn't have enough Spanish explorers to verify it, and so, bottom line, they could see in a hundred years later that there was tree damage, particularly along inlets where rivers were, and we'll get to that in a little bit later.
So, anyhow, What happened is that the Japanese had very accurate calendars and very good record keeping, and on January 26, 1700, they recorded a tsunami with no earthquake.
They were familiar with tsunamis following earthquakes that they could feel, but they've never had a tsunami just pop out of the ocean and slap the crap out of Tokyo.
But that's what happened on this particular day, and so After geologists got into Oregon and started digging around, they found seashells 300 feet high up inside these river valleys, and what you have to think of is we're talking wave motion, and when the wave hits the shore, it gets funneled by the topographic features, which is the underlying shelf, and it also gets affected by the shoreline configuration.
So, it can hit a funnel where a wave that would be 50 feet high as it hit the shoreline could be multiplied up to 300 feet by being forced into an inlet because you're talking an enormous mass of tidal waves.
We'll get to that in this next little segment.
How high was the tidal wave when it hit Japan?
I don't really remember that.
I think it was like from what I remember is about 10 feet.
It wasn't as high as the Fukushima because it had to cross all the way across the Pacific and it does dissipate over that amount of distance.
Remember again that the Pacific Ocean is half of the surface area of the entire globe.
So, when it's sunrise in Thailand, it's sunset in Peru, and so that's what we're dealing with.
We're dealing with a vast, enormous-sized ocean, but now I'd like to switch to this goofy BDC article about what happened down in Congo, Congo, Tonga, Tonga, or wherever the heck that was.
Pacific volcanoes.
Science will explain events ferocity.
By one Jonathan Amos, who claims to be a science correspondent for BBC Amos.
That's very troubling, Joe, if this is nonsense that the BBC should be promoting it.
Well, here's the problem.
You have nobody at BBC, and I hate tablets because if you blink at them, they absolutely will flip a screen on you.
And it's impossible to not to be able to scroll up.
I'm trying to scroll down to the part where we've got a guy named Dave Tappan.
Okay, so this is a BDC article which proves that they don't have anybody in their writing staff, research staff, or in their editorial staff that's capable of making any informed decision about scientific hypothesis.
Okay.
So here we have meteorologists, both professional and amateur, immediately recognize they might be able to detect a signal even on the other side of the world.
In the UK, which is about as far away from Tonga as barometers wiggled at the expected moment.
So what they did is they recorded a wave moving through the atmosphere, an airwave moving through the atmosphere as barometric pressure change of one point five millibars in UK that moved at the exact speed of what they calculated the explosion would take to travel through the air as a pressure wave.
So that verified that particular thing, but then trying to find the exact portion with the quote by... Sure, okay.
So anyhow, we have a professor And his name is Dave, and I'll just go ahead and refer to what I have written down in my notes because I can't find it exactly right this second.
Dave Tapman with the British Theologic Society said that air pressure is what causes tsunamis.
And he's with the British Geological Survey, and he's professor, and his name is Dave Tappan, T-A-P-P-I-N.
So here you have a group at BDC who can quote a guy saying that because of the violent explosion, the air pressure change forced the surface of the ocean to rise up and create tsunamis that hit Alaska and the West Coast and Japan and Australia.
So, you know, that...
Was he implying the creation of a vacuum that caused the water surface to rise?
No, it's a pressure wave.
This is just incredibly stupid.
I mean, the relative density of air and water is so vast, this could not happen.
It's a physical impossibility.
Yeah, okay.
Well, here's the problem.
You have geologists that are never required to take a course in fluid dynamics.
We have phony baloney scientists that are at these major news agencies that probably, if they had any science at all, it was like, poli-sci, and there's no science in political science.
are social science, and there's no science in social science, but bottom line is they have no hard science, so they're not able to differentiate between what's provable and what's an absolute fiction.
So, I went ahead and looked up.
We had previously discussed a phenomenon known as earth tide.
We're all very familiar with ocean tides vary about three feet based on the gravity of the moon.
Well, it turns out when they got GPS satellites in, they were able to measure the vertical deflection of the earth's crust which is at most 40 miles thick sitting on 3500 mile radius of mostly molten plastic rock and as the moon goes by every day it lifts the crust of the earth up an average of 18 inches at the equator
And then it drops it, that 18 inches, and it gets on the other side of the Earth.
So that's called Earth Tide, and you can look it up on Google, Earth Underlined Tide.
But then I was aware that the Moon also has an effect on the Earth's atmosphere, and so I checked that, and every day there's a one millibar movement of the atmosphere because of the Moon's gravity.
So here is this guy sitting in England reading a 1.5 millibar barometric pressure change and he gets a one millimeter bar every day from the moon and he's claiming that's what caused tsunamis all the way across the pacific absolutely preposterous what we learned in fluid dynamics is the actual motion of waves and there's a thing in fluid dynamics which i cannot seem to find it on google to verify but this is from what i remember and and have used in engineering for the last 50 years and it's called the
Period of the wave, and so if you consider the wave as just a segment of a giant radiused circle, then the further down the depth of that wave front is in the ocean, the more amount of energy you're going to be able to carry.
So consider when you're out in the middle of the ocean, you have a giant swell, and the swell could be 500 feet wide, And only two or three feet high.
And out in the ocean, you don't even detect it.
It's like you pop up and you just kind of sit on this plateau and then you pop back down.
But as that wave front, which is probably generated from a radius point that's thousands of feet deep, as it approaches the shoreline, the bottom continental shelf will start forcing that up.
And as it does, the wave rises up.
And this is the typical wave reaction you see every day on the beach.
You see a swell coming over, you see the swell gathering together and rising up, and then you see it curling over.
That's typical wavefront behavior based on the geometry of the swell out in the ocean, and also based on the geometry of the land front that shortens the period of that wavefront.
And we did those calculations in fluid mechanics with a stupid freaking slide rule 50 years ago.
We know exactly how this happens.
has absolutely bum-fricking-nothing.
But here you have a professor in England who can make a goofy statement
about air pressure causing it, and he's representative of the British Geological Society,
and you have a goofy news reporter at BBC who doesn't have enough scientific information
to differentiate that this is completely bogus.
One of the things I've done is I've studied an enormous amount of history,
and I wanna get to something else that happens in the ocean.
Um, what?
One of the books I read is The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors, and this was about the goofy little escort destroyers that they made during World War II that were pretty much a use once and throw away destroyers.
The skins on them were so light that armor-piercing shells that Japanese fired at them, even giant You know, 15-inch artillery shells would go all the way through the boat and come out the other side without exploding because they didn't get enough impact.
So anyhow, one of those boats was the USS Johnson, which was built by Brown and Root in the Houston ...port and then shipped up and fitted in the northeast with all the electronics, and it was captained by the first Native American commander of a ship in the United States naval history, a guy named Evans, and they were on their way to the Battle of Leyte Gulf in the Philippines.
1943 and so anyhow they were crossing the Pacific Ocean and he said most of the crew they had like a maybe a half dozen seasoned sailors on board the boat and the rest of them were all raw recruits and so the Captain Evans is in the wheelhouse, and he's got a young ensign in there working the wheel, and they hit some swells.
Well, these swells out in the ocean can combine and end up what's causing super waves, which are even augmented when you hit tsunamis, and so you end up with documented cases of wave fronts in the middle of the ocean rising up just suddenly out of nowhere and being 300 feet high.
So this boat's in the middle of a storm, and the boat is only 200 feet long.
It's going over these 300 foot high waves, and the inclinometer inside the wheelhouse is swinging 45 degrees, which means it's just as easy to walk on the bulkhead walls of the wheelhouse as it is to walk on the floor.
So the ensign is standing there hanging on to the wheel, and the captain's just like, you know, full steam ahead, blah blah blah.
And the ensign says, Captain, how often does a boat this size sink?
And the captain said, usually only once.
So that's the situation we're in right now, is that we're in a stormy sea, and this boat is only going to sink once, or it's going to make it.
And so that's what I want people to understand.
We're dealing with forces that are so much further beyond what A single three atom gas molecule can do, and that doesn't matter whether it's water vapor or carbon dioxide.
What humans have produced in the way of components in the atmosphere is not measurable by any extent, warming or cooling or whatever.
It's absolutely absurd, and we'll get to some more of that when we get to fluorocarbons here in just a second.
Now, we've discussed that now, and we've discussed airtide, which is the moon has the ability to lift the atmosphere, and you can look this up yourself, because I don't have a slide on that, but just look up air underlined tide on wiki.
And what happens is that the moon lifts the atmosphere, which causes another barometric change every day, which is when we talked about the one millibar.
But the sun also does, but it's only half a millibar.
So you've got these astronomical forcing things, and what that does is that you lift up the atmosphere, you create more density, and that creates airflow patterns, which are also contributed to by the rotation of the planet, which is called the Coriolis effect.
And those set up Eddy systems, like the Hadley cells, which operate within the different traffic of cancer and Capricorn
trade winds patterns and also the jet stream. So all of that atmospheric air movement is
complicated, but it's there again nothing that humans control through gas molecules.
Now, we can control it with electronic ionization, which is what's being done with HAARP, and we can control it with chemtrails, which is being done constantly and denied by our rotten criminal governments.
But those are separate issues, and we'll discuss those in a future date.
Joe, it still boggles the mind that so-called scientific correspondents for the BBC don't understand the difference between gases, liquids, and solids.
I mean, just to an elementary degree, they are massive scientific ignorants.
Disqualifies them.
Surely if the BBC had a tad more integrity, they would not be employing individuals who are so massively ignorant.
I am appalled.
Well, part of it is the compartmentalization of science.
You have these people that are so pigeonholed into what they're taught, and then they don't bother to learn any parallel sciences, and so they don't have any overall perspective.
If you can't take a 30,000 foot view of what's going on, you're going to just sit there and repeat whatever you've been forced to do, and that's what they We got a series of puppets and parrots that are dictating reality to it.
It has no basis on reality across the entire board, just exactly like Casey said.
We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.
Well, that's where we live.
We live in this stupid false paradigm reality across the board, and that includes everything in history, too.
It's absolutely insane, but we are going to win, and we're going to overturn this stupidity.
Now the next slide I want to get to is geologist1011.com or .org.
Okay yeah this is a guy named Timothy Casey.
I became aware of probably about 2008 as I was doing research on geothermal forcing.
His site is absolutely wonderful, and I want to just briefly highlight three of his articles.
One of his articles is about Fourier, and it's labeled Fourier 1824, and it also includes some work on Tyndall.
Now, Fourier was a brilliant French mathematician.
And in 1824, he kind of made an offhand remark about maybe the atmosphere works like a greenhouse, because greenhouses were becoming popular in Europe at that particular time.
But let's put these things in context.
This man was an absolutely brilliant mathematician.
He developed the Fourier series, which is how you calculate trigonomic functions and also logarithmic functions.
But you have to put it in context.
In 1824, there was no periodic table.
There was no atomic model.
There was no knowledge of electromagnetic radiation.
There was no knowledge of vision.
So, bottom line is no periodic table of elements.
So, bottom line is he made an offhand statement, but he also made a statement in his 1824 writings that the amount of magma that's in the center of the earth is residual from the creation of the earth which they thought was about a billion years old at that time and by his calculations it wouldn't have enough to melt an ice block that was 100 feet high and 100 feet wide so basically he's saying the whole
Heat from the whole planet wouldn't be enough to melt that in a whole year's period of time, based on his limited calculations abilities at that particular time.
Well, if you don't understand that fission produces a million times more energy than the most volatile chemical reaction we have, then you don't understand the variable force that's involved in volcanoes, but certainly somebody like Timothy Casey does.
So I want to direct you to the Fourier 1824 for corrections about him being the father of the greenhouse gas theory, which is just another diploma mill-generated fake history on the part of the clima-clown-ologists.
Well, it's an interesting I know, isn't that ridiculous?
That's how shameful these people are.
been such a formidable, accomplished, brilliant mathematician, if you could gain his support for
a greenhouse gas theory, that clearly would give it greater credibility in the eyes of most who were
familiar with Vaurier if they assumed the claim was well-founded.
I know, isn't that ridiculous?
That's how shameful these people are. They'll just cherry-pick everything they want to create,
the mosaic that they're trying to present to you as being reality, and it's as fake as a Hollywood
Now the next thing I want to touch on is his Volcanic CFC which originally was posted as Volcanic Halocarbons.
What we have is Fluorine which is number nine on the periodic chart.
It's a highly reactive halogen.
And we've discussed that before.
It's highly reactive, and it's the 13th most common element on the planet.
So, there's tons and tons of fluorine, and basically, he goes through the natural production of fluorine-related compounds by volcanic action is thousands of times greater than anything produced in the way of Freon by human beings, and that's what we're calling CFCs, chlorinated fluorocarbons.
But anyhow, bottom line is the Montreal Treaty was fake.
If you have probably 100,000 times more fluorine compounds being put into the atmosphere by volcanoes than you do from Free on, then how can you claim that free on is what's eating up the ozone, when the ozone is created daily by the ionization of oxygen molecules in the upper atmosphere coming in from UV light, and it's also produced instantaneously by lightning.
Which is, there's 1,800 thunderstorms simultaneously on the planet every minute of every day.
You look at the weather satellites, and the whole entire equatorial belt of the Pacific Ocean is just one thunderstorm after another, and it goes all the way across the planet.
So we're generating ozone, which has a half-life of 30 minutes, and so what if a little bit of it's being eaten?
Okay, I can understand that there's frivolous uses of things, but as far as Freon, the reason we had to ban Freon in its original form was because the DuPont and Dow patents for it were running out and they needed something that was patent protected the same way as their patent protected medicines are right now.
It's the same group of Nazis running the same total totalitarian scheme on us, and one of the things that was a real downside to that was the use of halon fire suppression systems.
If you release a halon CFC into a room, it is automatically attracted to combustion, which means if you had a Fire in a big computer room or electrical room or anything that had sensitive equipment that you didn't want to be destroyed with water or chemical sprayed fire suppressant systems.
You spray a dose of halon in the room, it migrates all the way across the room, goes directly into the site of combustion and extinguishes it without any damage to any equipment.
But they made that illegal along with the rest of the Freon family because these SOBs would rather have a patent to extort you in perpetuity and that's why they keep updating the Montreal by going well the Freon that we used to allow we're not allowing anymore because it's dangerous and so now you have to have this super super Freon.
It's like they've been playing this scam exactly on that.
Now the next thing I want to mention is his article Volcanic CO2.
And what he states on that is that when you have these underwater volcanoes, and there's over a hundred thousand miles of undersea floor rift zones, which are constantly exuding gases, and we'll get to that in just a second, but I just want to state one of the quotes in that article is that at the bottom of the ocean there are vast pools of liquid CO2 Think about that for a second.
There's also vast quantities of frozen methane that are captured in what's called calthrates underneath the ocean, or hydrates in the tundra.
And we'll get to that in just a second.
We're going to bring up next... Joe, I just want to observe that when you have, you know, Mental midgets like AOC and the Squad going hysterical over climate change, which they think is an existential threat to all life on Earth,
They're driven by this massively provably false belief to take extreme measures.
They actually believe in the Green New Deal because of their extraordinary scientific illiteracy.
They actually believe methane and CO2 are a risk to life on Earth.
I mean, Joe, it staggers the mind when you appreciate the enormity of the actions they would take in response to Scientifically disprovable beliefs in which they believe with utter sincerity.
Well, it's the childlike state that we live in today.
We have Pied Piper professors using chicken little science to promote Jack and the Beanstalk energy solutions and the whole thing.
It's wall-to-wall insanity.
But the next thing I want to bring up, read the article at Timothy Casey's website on volcanic CO2.
It's very enlightening.
Next thing I want to bring up is slide number five, which is liquid CO2 PDT chart.
Okay, now what happens is that we know there's a relationship with pressure, temperature, and volume between all gases, and these vary, and they are limited by the physical property of those gases to the three states of physical matter, which would be solid, liquid, and gas.
For engineers, it's very important to know where these thermal and pressure changes happen so that we can keep Calculate what's going to happen inside a particular reaction or within, you know, whatever we're dealing with.
So here we have a chart that shows, and there's a point called a triple point, where within just a few millibars of difference in pressure or a fraction of a degree temperature change, a substance can go from solid to liquid to gas, all within a relatively small area.
There's an example of that in water, which water absorbs in 37,000 spectral lines, so it can go directly on the surface of the earth from ice to atmospheric water vapor without ever having a visible transition to liquid.
You can see snow sitting outside your house when sunlight's shining on it.
The snow just disappears, but you don't see giant puddles of water running out.
You may see a little bit coming out on the ground, but bottom line is it's disappearing right in front of your eyes.
This is what's called sublimation.
Is that it's able to switch states because it's gotten energy even as an ice state to transition to water vapor without going through the liquid state based on the absorption spectrums of water vapor, but for CO2 those are slightly different.
So, we're going to discuss a little bit more about that.
I had somebody in the comment section on the last chapter when I mentioned something about polynomials.
And he said, polynomials.
And I just want to state that anytime you have anything that has a curved function, so if it's linear, okay, that's pretty easy to understand.
But anything that has a curved function is going to be defined by a polynomial.
For quadratic equations, this involves the four conic sections, which is circle, ellipse, hyperbola, and parabola.
And depending on which way you slice through, those pvc charts that we previously put up you're going to end up getting a curve which will define at a certain pressure what the behavior of those gases are going to be and then you can change the axis and define it across a temperature axis
And so, bottom line is, anything that has a curved surface is going to be defined by either a square, which would be a quadratic equation, or a polynomial, which is included in the radiant energy calculations, which are defined by the Stefan-Boltzmann relationship, which is a fourth degree polynomial, which are difficult to solve with just a slide rule.
I just want to inform all of you intellectual snobs that are going to be down in the column section.
Yes, I use the Ronskan method of Laplace transforms when I'm solving periodic partial second degree differential equations.
Quit trying to lecture me on mathematics.
Excellent point, Joe.
Okay, so now I want to go to my article number six, which I wrote 20 years, 10 years ago.
Earth's missing geothermal flux.
What I had noticed by watching National Geographic videos, and we're going to show one of those in just a second, about rift zones, was that the very first ones I saw, they had robots that would go down, and you could see these rift zones where the gas was extremely hot, 2500 degrees hot, coming out of these rift zones, and within Six inches or a foot of the rift zone, the gas bubbles would disappear.
Well, if you go back to your pressure chart, and you put in that you get one atmosphere of pressure for every 33 feet of depth as you go down, and you're down 10,000 feet deep, and you've got a rift zone, and you're blowing gas out.
Well, the water temperature is four degrees centigrade.
The pressure is hundreds of atmospheres of pressure.
And if you go back to the PVC, the PVT chart, There it is, plain as day.
Carbon dioxide is going to go to liquid carbon dioxide at that point, where the gas bubbles disappear.
And the way you have proof of that was that the very first videos I saw, they said, well, they had trouble doing the videos because the robots would generate bubbles just from the propellers that were trying to move them around.
They had to use extra low-speed propellers to keep from doing that.
That's called cavitation.
What cavitation indicates is that you're at maximum gas saturation point at the very bottom of the ocean where you'd expect there would be no entrained gas.
Now the simple example of that from an engineering standpoint is if you've got a cooling tower, you're taking uh heated water out of the chillers that are inside the building and you're taking it up in the cooling tower or out of your power generation plant and you're dropping it down and you're letting it evaporate removing heat by evaporation but in the process you're also exposing it to air molecules and it will absorb a little bit of oxygen so when we're sizing
Pumps for condenser water.
We cannot go over 1,700 revolutions per minute on those pumps or we get cavitation of the entrained oxygen that's in the water.
But if we're doing evaporator water systems where we're pumping the chill water through the evaporator coils, we can use the 3,500 because we don't have any entrained oxygen.
The oxygen that was entrained in the Chilled water has been driven out by pressure and goes out through air bleeds and over time there will be zero entrained air so you have zero cavitation.
Bottom line is they have 100% saturation of those gases and as those gases rise up just like explain in Earth's missing geothermal flux
is it switches back into bubbles, which are bubbles are ubiquitous
all the way through the water column.
You go on scuba diving, you see bubbles all over in the bottom of the ocean
because the ocean's constantly being bubbled just like an aquarium at your house
in order to keep your fish alive.
It's being bubbled by natural fission processes.
Otherwise the whole entire ocean would end up being a dead sea
with no CO2 coming up to create the life forms that are necessary in the ocean,
the plankton that goes off of photosynthesis that depends on seawater.
And the seawater is constantly outgassing CO2 and it will never absorb CO2 from the atmosphere
because it's always at a higher saturation point than the atmosphere can possibly
force carbon dioxide back into it.
And there again, we have the goofy acidification of the ocean and I've gone to that
and we'll go into that in some more detail.
So bottom line is let's show them the Rift Zone video real quick.
Hi, I'm Jessica here at Nautilus Mission Control at the Interspace Center in Rhode Island.
This expedition season, we'll be exploring a rift zone between Italy and North Africa.
Here's the science behind how it's formed and the kinds of volcanoes we hope to find there.
In the Straits of Sicily, there's what scientists refer to as a rift zone.
In this area, the tectonic plates are moving away from each other, creating an opening in the Earth's crust.
This opening creates a pathway for magma to rise to the surface, and is therefore an area ripe for volcano formation.
A rift zone volcano forms when magma moves up through the rift in the Earth's crust.
When it erupts, this magma hardens, and over time and multiple eruptions, eventually forms a submarine volcano.
During a large eruption, the volcano can even grow above sea level and create a new volcanic island.
This year on the Nautilus, we will be exploring a rift zone volcano called Ferdinand Deya.
It last erupted in 1831, and that eruption created an island.
This island was immediately claimed by Spain, Italy, France and Great Britain, but has eroded below sea level since.
This year we'll be sampling gas bubbles that are coming out of the volcano, and hopefully our work on the Nautilus will help provide warning for future volcanic eruptions.
Again, I'm Jessica here at Nautilus Mission Control.
Stay tuned at NautilusLive.org for more live exploration.
Joe, that was just a wonderful little video.
I loved it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Well, let me tell you what kind of gases they're going to find spewing out of those things.
It's going to be SOX, which involves sodium or sulfur dioxide.
Dioxide, trioxide, monoxide, whatever.
There's a whole range of sulfur and oxygen gases.
They're going to find nitrogen oxide gases.
They're going to find methane.
They're going to find propane.
They're going to find all of the hydrocarbon families bubbling out of these things and then being incidentally converted into liquids where they disappear, come up through the water column where they reach the low enough pressure temperature where they cross over the PV uh t barrier and go back into air where they come out as bubbles manifests as bubbles all the way up through the water column the ocean's constantly bubbling stuff out and the stuff that's bubbling out there the ocean's responsible for the methane the ocean's responsible for probably 90 volcanic actions responsible probably 90 of the
CO2 that's in the air.
The other portion that's in the air is responsible from decay of organic matter, which was previously in the air, removed by photosynthesis and placed in cellulose, which as it decomposes goes back to being CO2.
And another one is from acidification, which happens from the sulfur that's coming out of the volcanoes, getting mixed with the clouds and forming sulfur dioxide, which is melting the Carbon is rock forms and released in the carbon dioxide
that was stored as calcium carbonates in the rocks.
Now the next thing I want to discuss briefly is the Bridgman effect.
So let's bring up the thing on Percy Bridgman.
There you go. Okay, Percy Bridgman was a physics professor at Harvard University and he did
extremely high pressure and extremely high temperature measurements in order to determine
where the boundaries were and where the limits were for specific heat and specific heat
capacity on a wide range of elements and he got the Nobel Prize in 1946.
And a little bit on specific heat.
Sometimes people don't understand the relationships between things because they're based in units that you don't normally deal with and you don't know whether something's bigger or smaller.
So for gravity, for instance, we use specific gravity where you use Standard air as a assigned value of 1.0 and then you can take elements within the air and you can find out what the specific gravity of them is so you find out what it is relative to standard air.
So for instance, hydrogen has a A specific gravity of like 0.16 and helium has a specific gravity of 0.3 whatever.
You can look up the specific gravities.
The point is not that I'm doing this extemporaneously and I didn't unfortunately write this down in my notes and I don't have Excellent memory command of every physical property in the entire universe.
So let me say, if I make a misstatement, it's not because I'm trying to intentionally lie to anybody.
It's just that there's so much wealth of material that it would be impossible for anybody to know in absolute 100% accuracy.
You can look these things up on your own.
Bottom line is, The specific gravity for carbon dioxide is 1.5.
So carbon dioxide would naturally want to sink, yet there's carbon dioxide up in the troposphere.
And we'll get to that on the next chapter when we go into the goofy things about measurements that go into this whole fake hypothesis about reality.
But bottom line is You have gases that have specific gravity, but they also have specific heat.
And specific heat is a coefficient that tells you what it is relative to a standard.
There again, air would be an assigned value of 1.0.
Specific heat of carbon dioxide is 0.8.
What does that mean?
That coefficient is a function of the rate of change.
And that means that carbon dioxide absorbs heat faster, but it also gives heat off faster.
And there's another thing, engineers are not brilliant about naming things so that they're easily identified.
There's another thing called specific heat capacity, and specific heat capacity is a different property which actually has units, so it's not unitless like like you have with specific gravity or specific heat.
For liquids the specific gravity is water and there again if something's twice as heavy as water you'd have a specific gravity of 2.0 and if it has a specific heat that's higher than water it you know it would be greater than 1.0 and if it's less than water it'd be 1.0.
So the bottom line is that's what Percy Bridgman was doing, but what he discovered in the process of testing all these different materials is that the entire metallic series, which is the center portion of the periodic table, are metallic series, and under 50,000 atmospheres of pressure, these things undergo fission.
Natural fission.
So, in addition to having the fissionable uranium of 700 parts, I mean 700 million cubic miles, or a thousand cubic miles, and 1.2 million cubic miles of thorium being natural fission producing energy inside the core of the planet.
You also have this metallic series which Percy Forman, and this was brought forward in one of the articles that was under nuclear education at Veterans Today, and the original posting of the September 1st, 2019 Breathtaking Solving Nuclear 9-1-1 at Veterans Today has an 80-article bibliography.
Jim was an editor at Veterans Today back in 2015 when they only posted about two dozen articles on that, and that's when we first started discussing the Nuclear 9-1-1 event, which is on a whole different series.
Go to Fetzer BitChute channel and find that interview.
But bottom line is they mentioned in there the Bridgman effect and that brings up a whole nother range of nuclear energy that's inside the core of the planet that's capable of causing these kinds of reactions.
And just as kind of a closing statement I did interviews on a crooked rail system proposed by one of the four City of Houston mayors that I had hour-long conversations with in the course of discovering how crooked Houston was, and this was on a
Metro 14 mile billion dollar rail project which had 200 million dollars of illicit no-bid rigging kickbacks involved in it and I was able to stop that but in the process I was being interviewed by a radio station KPRC in Houston and one day the radio station was in the basement of the same building with the TV station and you had to sit in the lobby for them to call you down for the interview So I'm sitting there in the lobby, and I'm watching the meteorologist giving you the up-to-minute report, and he says there's zero percent chance of rain today in Houston.
And I look outside, and there was a cloud that had just passed over, and it was raining in the parking lot.
And so here I'm sitting there, and you want to tell me about how, you know, pure science is?
Let's just talk about meteorology.
Those guys can't tell you what the weather's doing as it's happening, much less give you anything in the way of a three-day forecast.
We had a horrible drought here in Houston, and the weatherman one day promised that it looks like the massive front's coming through.
We're all going to get about two inches of rain over the next 24 hours.
Well, 24 hours came and went and not a drop fell anywhere in Harris County, and so when the weatherman came back on, he goes, well, I know I promised you rain yesterday, but the weather underperformed.
Yeah, right.
The weather underperformed.
So, when all these predictions that they make about carbon dioxide don't happen, then we can say, The weather underperformed.
And so bottom line is that that's my closing statement on on one branch of fake science, which I have zero respect for, and that's meteorology, but even flimsier respect for climatology.
Completely imposed system of thought that is defective from start to finish.
Well, this has been another magnificent chapter in our ongoing series on climate change, debunking myths that are motivating political decisions and allocating scarce resources for the purpose of a monstrous fraud.
I've interviewed thousands of people in different areas of expertise, but I know of no one with a mastery of applied science across a board, physics, chemistry, other areas, as Joe Olson.
It's a great privilege for me to conduct this series, where I learn something every time we have a conversation.
Thank you for joining us.
This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Real Deal with my very special guest, Joe Olson.
We shall continue with our next chapter very soon.
Thank you for joining us.
▲
Export Selection