6 Comments

I really wanted to donate to the film funding yesterday but found that I could not because I did not have a Paypal account. So, against my better judgement, I applied for an account with them. I was rejected because my perfectly normal British bank account was 'unacceptable'.

Why don't you start a proper fund-raising platform and cut out these money-grabbing middle men at Paypal?

I gave up trying to get past the irritation and wasted 2 hours of my time arguing with Paypal bots.

I still want to donate..... How?

Expand full comment

Did Paula get in touch with you? If not, let me know. I sent her your comment.

Expand full comment

"The clock is ticking, and the stage is set. Blocking the sun is the threat, when unattainable goals are not met."

Your information is immense and your eloquence and dedication to sharing it is honorable.

THANK YOU!

Expand full comment

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ― Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Believe = religion

Think = opinion

Know = science

What I know follows.

What do you know that’s different?

Published (SubStack, X, MSN, PAPundits, et. al.)

Peer reviewed (the world)

And undisputed (so far)

ISR at ToA = 1,368 W/m^2.

From the Sun’s perspective Earth is a flat, discular, pin head.

To average that discular energy over a spherical surface divide by 4.

(disc = π r^2, sphere = 4 π r^2)

1,368/4=342.

(Not even close to how the Earth heats & cools + this is Fourier’s model which even Pierrehumbert says is no good.)

Deduct 30% albedo.

(Clouds, ice, snow created by GHE/water vapor.)

342*(1.0-0.3)=240.

Deduct 80 due to atmospheric absorption.

(If this were so ToA would be warmer than surface.)

Net/net of 160 arrives at surface.

Per LoT 1 160 is ALL!! that can leave.

17 sensible + 80 latent + 63 (by remaining diff) LWIR = 160

Balance is closed, done, over, fini, “Ttthhhat’s ALL folks!!”

So where does this 396 second source of surface upwelling heat flow come from?

396 is the S-B BB calculation for any surface at 16 C, 289 K, that serves as the denominator of the emissivity ratio: 63/396=0.16.

It is a theoretical calculation.

It is not real.

It is a duplicate “extra.”

It violates LoT 1.

396 up – 2nd 63 LWIR (How convenient.) = 333 “back” from cold to hot w/o work violating LoT 2.

Not that it matters.

Erase the 396/333/63 GHE “extra” energy loop from the graphic and the balance holds true.

IR instruments do not measure power flux, they are calibrated to report a referenced temperature and infer power flux assuming the target is a BB. (Read the manual.)

16 C + BB = 396 & incorrect.

16 C + 0.16 = 63 & correct.

There is no GHE.

There is no GHG warming.

There is no CAGW,

The consensus is wrong – Aahhgain!!!

Disagree?

Bring science which is not appeals to authority, off topic esoteric Wiki handwavium and ad hominem gas lighting and insults.

Expand full comment

Blocking the sun is a threat? It ain’t a threat when they are actually doing it! In SW Missouri you can see it happening by 6 or 8 planes spewing massive chemtrails on 90% of the (used to be) clear blue sky days. I estimate that they are blocking 25-50% of the sun almost every day. Filthy criminals poisoning plant and animal life and creating drought conditions in the breadbasket of the country.

Expand full comment