The "polluters" give much more money to Climate Alarmists than skeptics - why isnt that front page news? ...
Excerpts from http://climate-change-theory.com/ ...
FALLACY IN GREENHOUSE GAS THEORY: The GHG theory appears to consider only heat (actually photons of electromagnetic radiation) coming from space. Some get through the clouds and heat the earth, or get reflected. Others are also sent into the atmosphere. These photons that go up from the surface have varying frequencies and only some of them will be emitted back to earth by COmolecules. There will always be some getting through to space. However, the theory claims that some of those that return will enter the crust and warm it - probably just the first few centimetres. Yes they will, but if the crust gets warmer it will emit more back than it would otherwise have done, and some of those will get through to space. Each time the process is repeated some more photons will escape. So the process is slowed down a bit, but given that the photons travel at the speed of light, there is plenty of time all through each night for lots of return trips. The main point is that, by the end of the night, the top few centimetres will cool down to the same equilibrium temperature that they would otherwise have reached anyway. This is because, as we have seen, there is in fact a lot more heat flowing through from the Earth's core, and it has been escaping to space for the life of the Earth. It is the rate of flow of this heat which determines the equilibrium temperature, and that depends on the core temperature. To draw an analogy, think of a lake with an inlet between it and the ocean. Water from a heavy unending inland storm represents the heat from the Earth's core. The ocean represents space, the inlet is the atmosphere and the lake is the outer few centimetres of the crust, its level representing the temperature of that crust. High tide represents a sunny day, and low tide the night. At high tide (daytime) some water will flow up the inlet, raising the level of the lake, but at low tide (night) both the water from the rain and the extra water that had come in from the ocean will flow back out to sea until the level of the lake lowers to that of the ocean. Adding COmay make the inlet perhaps 1% or 2% narrower, but there is still plenty of time for all the water to escape. What we are adding is a drop in the bucket. The lake will not dry up because of the unending inland storm: if there were no heat coming from the Earth's core there would never have been human life on this planet.
1. THE 60 YEAR CYLE: Nicola Scafetta and John Dodds are not the only ones to have observed the 60 year cycle. Mathematical statistical analysis of the data confirms its existence. John Dodds explained why it is due to variations in the gravitational energy from planets (Footnote 2) leading to irregularities in the pattern. These irregularities help to confirm the existence of the cycle because, when several nodes match with a high statistical probability the evidence is very compelling. Furthermore, application of the 60 year cycle predicted the maximum (1998-2000) above the long term 900 year cyclical trend. The IPCC model did not predict such and, in fact, I believe it will soon be able to be disproved by its failure to do so because there will probably soon be statistically significant variance (from their trend) commencing in 2003.
2. WHY THE PLANETS CAUSE CYCLES: Why are temperatures on Earth apparently following cyclical patterns that correlate with certain orbital events of the moon and the planets, primarily Jupiter, Saturn and to a lesser extent Venus? Consider, firstly, the effect of gravitational energy which the Earth receives from the moon. It pulls ocean waters forming tides and ocean currents. Recent research into wave generators shows that these could easily supply all of Australia's power requirements three or four times over - and that's from just a minute proportion of the waves hitting our shores, let alone the world over. The total energy received from the sun's heat and light is almost insignificant compared with the energy coming from the force of the sun's gravity upon Earth. Whilst much of that gravitational energy is used to keep the Earth in orbit, the Earth also spins and massive currents swirl around in the core being heated by friction as well as nuclear reactions. But the latter are slowly reducing and so unlikely to cause increasing heat. It is the energy from gravitational forces that fluctuates. As you apply the brakes on a car rolling downhill, some of the potential energy which your car had at the top of the hill is converted to heat in the brake pads. In the same way, as the Earth gets closer to the sun it is akin to going downhill in your car: some of the potential energy (which the Earth had when it was further away) is converted to extra heat in the core of the Earth. However, the Earth's distance from the sun does not vary anywhere near as much relatively as its distance from Jupiter in particular. The latter distance varies from about four times the distance of the Earth from the sun to about 6.5 times that distance. So, even though Jupiter is further away and smaller than the sun, the amplitude of the variations magnifies the effect of changes in the gravitational energy it imparts upon the Earth, and it is these changes that cause temperature variations - because the amount of friction varies. Consider what happens when the Earth is furthest from Jupiter and begins to come closer. The potential energy trapped in the Earth's core must be conserved and so most of it must end up as heat. (Even though some potential energy will initially be converted to kinetic energy, that kinetic energy will also be converted to heat as the relative motion towards Jupiter slows down on approaching the closest point - just like a car rolling half way down a hill before the brakes are applied to bring it to a stop at the bottom.) The reverse happens when the Earth moves further from Jupiter and less heat than normal is generated. These fluctuations will affect the amount of heat which eventually reaches the surface. Now, when Saturn is pulling in exactly the opposite direction to Jupiter, its gravity will reduce the effect of that from Jupiter. Then, as they continue in their orbits, there will be less of a reduction until, about 15 years later, Saturn will start to pull together with Jupiter, producing the strongest combined effect another 15 years later. Then, about 30 years later, the Earth will again be aligned between Jupiter and Saturn. This complete cycle is currently happening about every 59.6 years causing our "60-year" cycles which are superimposed on the 900 to 1000 year long term cycle. Note that the gravitational energy from Jupiter is greater than the solar radiation energy (insolation).and nodes in the eccentricity of the orbit of Jupiter correctly indicated the Little Ice Age minimum temperatures in 1696 and can be used to predict the next maximum in 2224.
Heat is not "trapped" by some imaginary insulation blanket of carbon dioxide because it is obviously released in much cooler periods every night and even more so in winter months and in cold regions. Instead, far more heat is generated in the core of the Earth, some of it from the gravitational energy which comes primarily from the sun, but also to a lesser (but variable) extent from the nearby planets. Whilst some direct heat from the sun enters the Earth's crust, the heat from the core also helps to maintain the temperature of the crust and this does not vary by much even just 2 metres below the surface. There is an equilibrium as heat from the core eventually escapes through the crust and into the atmosphere. The more heat that is generated in the core, the higher will be that equilibrium temperature and this must have an effect on surface temperatures. If heat were not coming from the core, then deep mines would be very cold, like the upper atmosphere, but instead they get a little warmer the deeper they go. Insolation could never penetrate the crust and maintain liveable (and near constant) temperatures in mines 3,000 metres underground. In contrast, insolation causes additional temporary heating in a very variable way between day and night, summer and winter, in the lower levels of the atmosphere in which we live. The fact that these temperatures vary so much indicates that there is no cumulative effect due to some imaginary build up of “trapped” heat which somehow supposedly finds its way back to warm the Earth. A greenhouse is warm near its roof whereas the middle and upper troposphere is about -20 to -60 deg.C.
Note that changes in gravity also cause cyclical changes in the Earth's magnetic field because this field is generated in the Earth's core by rotating ions in a (varying) gravitational field. So this leads to variations in the magnetic energy which is transferred from the magnetic field to charged particles in the stratosphere, explaining the current cooling observed there. Thus such cooling does not prove that heat is being "trapped" in the lower troposphere. (For more detail see John Dodds' book.)
SUMMARY: There is nowhere near enough heat energy coming from solar insolation to maintain the observed temperatures not only on the Earth's surface but deep underground. We know from volcanoes that the core is very hot and is heated partly by nuclear reactions (which give out a fairly uniform, though slightly declining level of energy) and partly by friction which is caused by the gravitational force of the sun and planets. Some of this core heat conducts through to the crust where, even 3,000 metres underground, it produces liveable, fairly stable temperatures. The remaining heat escapes from the crust and warms the atmosphere so we see that, at equilibrium, the temperature of the crust must influence that of the lower atmosphere in which we live. However, the potential energy of the huge mass of the Earth's core must vary as its distance varies from the sun and planets. When potential energy is reducing extra friction produces more heat which effectively converts the difference in potential energy into a similar amount of additional heat because energy must be conserved. This is a huge amount of energy, thousands of times that received by insolation and some of it must eventually warm the crust and affect long-term world temperatures. However, the reverse must happen when potential energy is increasing and we can assume less than mean levels of friction contribute lower than average heat to the core, resulting in less heat reaching the surface of the crust and thus a cooling effect. As the potential energy of the core is a direct result of solar and planetary orbits, the resulting cycles in temperature are not only explained but also predictable. The old theory is debunked. The new theory will prevail - eventually - when people study it with open minds.