Polar 12 Months And 365 Days Graph Paper: Fill & Download for Free

Hola Miguel. Muchos gracias por la pregunta.President Donald Trump is a lot smarter than many journalists give him credit for. He is a very wealthy businessman who made it to the White House. How many of us can say that of ourselves? He’s been playing the media with the old concept of ‘It doesn’t matter what the say about you, as long as they talk about you, because not doing so makes them forget you’.Just like Henry Ford is reported to have said, putting that in my own words, ‘As long as I can get the right advice, I don’t need to know everything’. The advice Donald Trump gets is that the anthropogenic global warming concept is a conspiracy by the left of politics.Its supporters in the U.S., from Al Gore to Hilary Clinton were all from the left of the political divide. They think that they are smarter than everyone and are the only ones that can get it right and should rule the roost. The right of politics takes a more managerial approach by leaving most of the decision making to the relevant echelons of society. Too far to the left and too far to the right leads to totalitarianism. This is why most of us love democracy because the bi-polar effect helps prevent totalitarianism and the tragic loss of life that goes with it.As to the scientific evidence, look at the links that were provided to me not long ago by Kevin Loughrey and the further climate and astronomical info I have posted. Once you have gone through all that, please tell us what you think.Quite a number of distinguished physicists have asserted that CO2 has little effect in terms of causing warming.See: Global Warming Petition Project31,487 American scientists (including 9,029 with PhDs)have signed this petition which says:"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”Some say that the earth’s atmospheric temperature has been remarkably stable over the last 100 years. Others put forward evidence to suggest that there has been a deliberate manipulation of temperature data to exaggerate any warming that has occurred.”Various other supporting views can be found if you look for them. Here are some examples:Dr. Don Easterbrook's US Senate Committee Testimony regarding the fabrication of carbon-based climate change. (Published on Nov 13, 2015)“Show me the data”, by Dr Richard Keen on how ground based temperature measurement systems are unreliable and it is impossible to determine there has been any real rise in temperature at all. Climatologist Dr Richard Keen - Show Me The DataMonckton's Mathematical Proof - Climate Sensitivity is Low Monckton's Mathematical Proof - Climate Sensitivity is LowClimate Scientist Dr David Legates tells us why our CO2 emissions are not a big problem, and why more CO2 is much better for the environment. Climatologist David Legates - More CO2 is GoodFour Professors explain the Science of Climate Change to the Canadian Senate Enquiry.Canadian Senate Hearing on Climate Change, 15th December 2011; Full 2 hrs. Professor Ross McKitrick, Professor Timothy Patterson, Professor Jan Veizer, and Professor Ian Clark These four professors explain the science of climate change in words of one syllable to skeptical Senators.2-hour presentation.Climate Change in 12 Minutes - The Skeptic's CaseI hope you find these interesting and thought-provoking.And my own work:IntroductionFor more than a decade Al Gore and the IPCC have been painting a doomsday scenario based on our relatively small contribution to the natural cycle of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Photosynthesis has relied on CO2 since time immemorial to oxygenate the atmosphere and feed the evolution of life. The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory relies on CO2 emissions being cumulative and driving temperatures upwards; solar system cycles and the positive effect increasing CO2 on photosynthesis militate against that. Nobel Prize-winning chemist Svante Arrhenius concluded in his 1896 paper that for temperatures to increase arithmetically CO2 needs to increase geometrically. This has not happened and supports a conclusion that the AGW theory has no scientific basis and is a hoax.Some of us may realize that the weather and the seasons are not exactly the same from one year to the next and from one decade to the next. It is well-known too that climates can vary from one century to the next and from one millennium to the next.The relatively brief Holocene interglacial warm period we are living in now was preceded by many others. Since the start of the Quaternary glaciation 2.58 million years ago interglacials have happened about once every 41,000 years, but since 1.1 million years ago they have reduced to about once every 100,000 years, showing an ongoing global cooling trend.The Quaternary glaciation is known to have been preceded by the Karoo glaciation (360 – 260 million years ago) and geologists know too that there were many others before that. Such cycles are caused by tectonic processes that are driven by the solar system, primarily under the gravitational influences of the sun and the moon that strongly contribute to continental drift and plate tectonics, but also by the four most massive planets of the solar system which continuously alter the speed of Earth’s rotation. This makes inertia the currency of continental drift over millions of years and of oceanic oscillations at sub-centennial scales as the co-drivers of the westward motion of continents.Periods of glaciation appear to be increasing in length, which may be seen as an ongoing global cooling effect due to the lunar recession of what is thought to be at a rate of 3.8mm per year, and Earth’s recession from the sun that has largely made up for the sun’s increasing luminosity. This further enhanced by the continued widening of the Atlantic Ocean allowing more heat from seafloor spreading to be dissipated over a larger area, especially during the SH winter season.Global cooling vs Global warmingThe breakup of the former supercontinent Pangaea on which the dinosaurs once roamed was caused by tectonic processes. Sub-marine volcanic activity sending more water vapour and CO2 into the troposphere had caused considerable global warming of the surface. The reason for the sub-marine volcanic activity was seafloor spreading along the mid-Atlantic Rise heating the emerging Atlantic Ocean. This lasted until about 50 million years ago, when North America had completed its separation from Eurasia and allowed volcanically heated water to escape through the Arctic Ocean into the then very much larger Pacific Ocean and dissipate the volcanic heat there, especially during the winter of the southern hemisphere. This was followed by the global cooling trend toward the present Quaternary glaciation with much lower sea levels and ice caps on both poles.Warming toward the present Holocene interglacial period began about 18,000 years ago but for at least the last 6000 years this has been terminating with an ongoing global cooling trend, showing that the progression is very slow in human terms.If we can call all of that ‘natural climate variability’, then where does that leave ‘climate change’ and the ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’ (AGW) theory? Does planet Earth really need us to warm the surface with our carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that are only a very small fraction of the trillions of tonnes of water and CO2 circulating between the tropics and the poles annually?The climate change hoaxThe graph shown here is the so-called ‘hockey stick graph’ by Mann et al. 1999. It has been called that because after misleadingly taking a selective cut of attenuated, averaged, and smoothed proxy data without including the start of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), and then combining that first with instrumental and before adding data from satellite systems that must be wrongly calibrated before being given lots of vertical exaggeration.The graph further misleads by highlighting the averages of the proxies and their mean with black and blue, while fading the much greater natural variations into the background but not doing so with the instrumental data. The more recently obtained data from instruments in orbit appears to be either wrongly calibrated or to have been subjected to incorrect data processing to create the alarmist impression. The image of the hockey stick graph was sourced from Iconic graph at center of climate debate | Penn State University.This graph was relied on by former U.S. Vice President A.A. Gore Jr in his talk in support of his own investments in renewable energies he called ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. Discerning scientists with a reasonable understanding of our planet and its atmospheric processes may prefer to call it the opposite.The aim was to eliminate the main and much cheaper rival in the energy generation market – coal-fired power stations - and to ruthlessly kill off the entire coal industry, just because coal is black and it has fuelled the industrial revolution we have derived enormous benefit from since the mid-18th century.We breathe in CO2 and we breathe it out at a slightly higher concentration all the time as part of respiration we need to live. We share that process with all other complex organisms. Mining coal and using that as a very useful and cheap energy source that has the advantages of:• Providing extra CO2 to the lower troposphere for use by photosynthesis that absorbs solar energy and has a global cooling effect.• Preventing otherwise unstoppable coal seam fires that burn for thousands of years and can start wildfires that can kill people, livestock, and destroy property.Gore, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its cohorts are still making statements of doom and gloom about global warming, especially leading up to what are supposed to be democratic elections. They do so with that are intended to shut down the coal industry completely, so we have to pay higher prices for our energy consumption and ultimately become entirely dependent on renewables.If this is not anticompetitive behaviour and illegal then what is? The hoax continues despite knowing that since the turn of the millennium the mean global temperatures have stopped rising, but calling that a ‘hiatus’ in AR5 seems to make it ok again.Clearly, they just don’t know or don’t want to know the real cause of the variation in the global mean temperatures because since 1988 they have been looking away from these with clear intent to blame humanity. The ultimate intention appears to be able to claim credit for the reduction of atmospheric CO2 when this happens naturally due to global cooling. Already, as will be shown later, we are seeing CO2 data manipulation by NOAA at its Earth System Research Laboratory (ERSL) in Hawaii, and tempering with satellite temperature measurements by NOAA.The reality is that the brief warming phase since the early-20th century is now over, with a bumpy ride to follow similar to what happened after the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) until the end of the LIA and the start of the industrial era in the mid-18th century. The start of MWP was not shown in the hockey stick graph because that would have made it useless for the intended deception.But, where is the minimum of 1750’s denoting the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA) that is supposed to have been reversed by the global warming of the industrial era? All of a sudden it has moved about 150 years to the start of the 20th century. This once again shows that the proxy data in the hockey stick graph has been manipulated with intent to deceive.The coldest year of the 20th century was 1909 and coincided with the opposition of Uranus and Neptune. The subsequent warming was toward Uranus lapped Neptune 84 years later in 1993. It was followed by other astronomical events until the start of the new millennium.Come on, let’s get real. The temperature increases in hockey stick graphs are absolutely and unequivocally fake and impossible! Earth’s climate system is not like the stock market; it has far too much inertia for humanity to be able to overcome with its relatively minor CO2 emissions to the trillions of tonnes cycling between the tropics and the poles and mostly used by photosynthesis or precipitated to enter either the ocean or soils.Historically speaking…The IPCC and its cohorts know that global warming since the LIA has brought unprecedented improvements in prosperity, health, and longevity for the largest number of human beings ever. And, they know too that global cooling causes widespread famine, disease, and death to millions.For example:About 2 millennia ago the prosperity of the Roman Warm Period (RWP) was followed by the Dark Ages Cold Period (DACP) with glacial advances that had caused the Roman Empire to retreat from Western Europe. Advancing glaciers decimated Viking societies and had made some of them go on rampages further south while others peacefully searched for greener pastures to survive.About 1 millennium ago the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) that had started about 250 years before the start of the hockey stick graph again increasing prosperity. It was followed by the cooling trend we call the Little Ice Age (LIA). Allied glacial advances caused famine and food shortages that led to the spread of the bubonic plague/the ‘Black Death’, killing many millions of people from Europe to China.Does the global-warming fraternity have a death wish or are they just genocidal? If our greenhouse gas emissions had any effect besides helping near surface photosynthesis, would we not want these to increase and save our current prosperity from the ravages of the next ice age?CO2 increases at Mauna LoaThis plot (own work) summarises how the atmospheric CO2 concentrations at Mauna Loa have increased from 1959 – 2014 as a function of monthly increases. The original data set was obtained from the NOAA-ESRL website. It shows that in December when the CO2 emissions in the northern hemisphere (where 90% of the world population lives) are the highest, the increases are the least. This makes a mockery of the anthropogenic global warming theory because the December increases are the lowest of the year. The plot shows that the increases happen as a function of the seasonal changes in sun elevations in Hawaii with a peak in April. Cloud cover building up as the sun moves south again makes the July values lower. This implicates the sun and the solar system in the maintenance of atmospheric CO2. How on Earth can we better that?Well, that is not so hard if you start manipulating the data. Here is a plot (own work) of the differences in CO2 increases at Mauna Loa, Hawaii from 1974 -2014 as published by the NOAA ERSL in 2014 compared with supposedly the same data in January 2019. Even though we may expect the data to remain the same, this is not what has been happening. This plot shows differences over 4 years and how much the data has been manipulated to conform to a hidden agenda of matching preconceived ideas and expectations, making it ‘junk science’.Does the solar system affect the global economy?The figure below (left) was sourced from the U.S. Naval Authority (U.S.N.A.) showing (after usual corrections) how the speed of Earth’s rotation has varied in milliseconds from 1973 -2017. What is Earth Orientation?On the right is the Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index (GLOTI) by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies from 1880 – 2018 as shown in Wikipedia Global temperature anomaly (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg)The plots show that the decline in the speed of Earth’s rotation has an inverse relationship with the late 20th-century warming. The low of the U.S.N.A. plot on the left at 2003 coincides with the time of Saturn’s closest approach to the sun (perihelion) and when the global mean temperatures peaked, as they did in 1915, 1944, and just after 1975 under the same influence.The U.S.N.A. graph also shows that the decline in the speed of Earth’s rotation was interrupted by a period of acceleration just before the middle of the plot (1995) that matches Uranus lapping Neptune on the same side of the sun in 1993, when, as shown in the GLOTI the mean global temperatures were still rising. When Uranus and Neptune were in opposition in 1909 (on exactly opposite sides of the sun) this coincided with the lowest temperatures of the 20th century. (Apologies for the poor quality of the numbers in the U.S.N.A. plot)What has been shown supports a conclusion that the overall rise in the global mean temperatures during the 20th century was caused by the waxing effects of the Uranus-Neptune lap cycle, and that we must now be on the waning side of that with global cooling effects.However, Saturn being much more massive and much closer was capable of extending that with the effect of its perihelion, reinforced by three times more massive and much closer Jupiter causing warming with its perihelia in 1999 and in 2011, as well as lapping Saturn in June 2000.It follows that the late 20th century was an unusual time of culmination of astronomical events that may have led to miscalibrations of instrumentation and data processing, that is continuing to incorrectly show ongoing global warming and new records are being set that are not happening in the real world.The next time Jupiter is to lap Saturn will be in November 2020, just over 2 years before its perihelion in January 2023. These circumstances too are likely to have noticeable warming effects, like similar circumstances did around 1901, 1940, and 2000. After that, the global mean temperatures may be expected to start to decline until about 2070.Going back in time, the great depression was triggered by the stock market crash of 1929, which was immediately before Jupiter had lapped Saturn in opposition in 1930 and it was the year that Earth missed out on lapping Jupiter to give the lowest Antarctic temperatures on record. The Black Monday stock market crash of 1987 happened when Jupiter was at perihelion and, as the U.S.N.A. plot shows, Earth’s rotation had slowed significantly.Could the temperature drop, allied to the increase in Earth’s rotation in 2007 have triggered the global financial crisis? Clearly, these are issues that need close examination. The correlation between these and numerous other coincidences with what happens in the solar system suggest that there is a link between the solar system and the global economy, vis-à-vis the stock market.The IPCC charter that was given to it by the WMO in 1988 states:‘The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.’This shows that the IPCC, as the name Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggests, is a geopolitical setup with preconceived non-scientific ideas making the assumption of ‘human-induced climate change’. At the same time, they refuse to look at obvious natural causes, such as solar system influences on Earth’s climate. In other words, it may be seen as a kind of an ideology that attempts to violate the separation of religion and politics on a global scale. Could it be the thin end of the wedge toward totalitarianism?The WMO obsession has turned natural climate variability into a global ‘Chicken Licken’ hoax and an international financial and political fraud. They stifle genuine research and the allocation of money for more worthy and needier causes while unduly raising anxiety and a feeling of vulnerability around the world, perhaps even fuelling extremism.The relationship between Earth’s rotation, the global mean temperatures, astronomical events, and the stock market seems obvious. But, the charter given to the IPCC in 1988 anomalously excludes the solar system as a source of temperature variations; only human beings are to be blamed. (Sounds familiar?) The data relied on for the AGW theory and ‘climate change’ hysteria appears to be validated by belief instead of thorough objectively scrutiny.The water and CO2 cycleEffective marketing by vested interests has led to lots of people expressing their views on climate change in blogs over the internet and on electronic media, often quoting others, who are quoting others, etc. without sufficient knowledge and understanding of what is really going on. Those who dare to contradict them are called deniers and flat Earthers, which only goes to prove the disconnect between the computer savvy and less gullible people relying on common sense and experience to require a proper scientific basis for what has been proclaimed. It may be said that others are just stirring the pot without knowing the ingredients.Melting of snow and ice takes 80 times more energy than it takes to raise the temperature of the same quantity of water by 1 degree Celsius and another 540 times more energy to evaporate that.In other words, it takes 720 times more energy to melt and evaporate (sublimate) snow and ice. Where can our relatively minor additions to the 0.04% CO2 get all that energy from to outperform the trillions of tonnes of water and CO2 that are released from the ocean into the atmosphere annually?How can they outdo the insolation in the tropics with sun almost directly overhead all year round, combining with the centrifugal force of Earth’s rotation at around 1,600 km per hour and raising the troposphere to more than twice its polar height? How can our CO2 emissions supply enough energy to melt snow and ice and evaporate that with air at the poles that before winter’s end is depleted in CO2?More than 4.5 billion years ago Earth started out with a very thin and very hot volcanically active surface. There were huge lunar and solar tides and all of Earth’s water and all of its CO2 were in the atmosphere, together with many toxic substances. So, why does the ocean now contain almost all of the readily available water and carbon, and why is there so little CO2 left in the atmosphere to the point of being a very minor trace gas (0.04%) that is not enough for photosynthesis to reach its full potential as it did during the Jurassic when large dinosaurs roamed Pangaea.The simple answer is that water is the universal solvent. It can form weak bonds with molecules like CO2 to form carbonic acid (H2CO3) that makes rainwater is slightly acid. The mild acidity helps erode rocks and land surfaces while creating sediments for soils to form that is needed for photosynthesis on land. As the H2CO3 molecule is much heavier than air consisting of 78% N2 and 21% O2, the extra mass helps precipitation.The formation of H2CO3 happens inversely proportional to temperature and causes the water and CO2 cycle between the tropics and the poles. Global cooling for more than 4.5 billion years has relied on this simple chemistry for water to remove all but a tiny fraction of CO2 from the atmosphere.Thus it can be shown that this simple reaction has facilitated the evolution of life on land toward greater complexity of respiring organisms like us. This makes it not unreasonable to suspect that life would have had its earliest beginnings in a very turbulent, electrically charged atmosphere of mostly water vapour and CO2 before global cooling permitted its continuation and its evolution in the ocean to eventually end up on land and continue that for the last 600 million years or so. The Miller-Urey experiment in 1952 as discovered in 2007 supports that idea.Water vapour is to CO2 like us stepping into the gondola of a hot air balloon; being lighter than air rises up into the troposphere until cooled enough to condense and form clouds; CO2 is heavier than air and sinks to the surface, where it is stirred up by air circulation. When they form H2CO3 up in the coolest parts of the troposphere they are much heavier than air and sink as far as they can.Enough surface heat in the form of longwave infrared (LIR) radiation can cause them to separate; if not they reach the surface and may still separate, or enter soils. So, too much surface heat sends water vapour back up again for a repeat performance of all of its wonderful atmospheric duties, making it the workhorse of the atmosphere that should never be underestimated in favour of ideology.In the tropics, evaporation and CO2 emissions are driven by the heat from the sun being almost directly overhead all year round and by high energy blue light penetrating to the greatest depths to combine with the centrifugal force of the roughly 1600 km/h speed of Earth’s rotation to send the troposphere up as high as 18 km, or almost three times its polar height.Raising water and CO2 molecules to that height gives them much greater angular momentum to start their rollercoaster ride toward the poles. Cooling as the latitudes increase and the vorticity of high and low-pressure cells acting like blenders causes the troposphere to lose most of its water and CO2 before reaching the poles. What remains encounters optimal blending conditions by the polar vortices that combine with the freezing conditions in winter to ensure their ultimate fate of precipitation.Obviously, anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions cannot be cumulative, because what is not used by photosynthesis ends up either in the ocean, in the ground, or as snow and ice at the highest latitudes in autumn and winter. Meltwater in spring and summer returns that to the ocean for release hundreds of years later in the tropics as described above.It follows that without CO2 water would have greater difficulty precipitating and would end up at the poles, as happens during ice ages when large parts of continents turn into dustbowls.Foul play or scientific error?To gain a better understanding of what has been happening with Earth’s climate, the data used to construct NASA’s GLOTI anomalies from 1880 – 2016 were plotted (own work) in their latitudinal zones of the northern and southern hemispheres as follows: 90oN – 64oN; 64oN – 44oN; 44oN – 24oN; 24oN – Equator; Equator – 24oS; 24oS – 44oS; 44oS – 64oS; 64oS – 90oS. To be able to compare their variations and amplitudes the values for each of these zones were incremented in steps of + 0.5 north of the equator and -0.5 south of the equator. Plotting them this way was to ensure that all plots have the same vertical scale and show the true magnitudes of zonal differences. The hemispherically equivalent zones were plotted in the same colour. The Arctic anomalies (64oN-90oN) and the Antarctic anomalies (64oS-90oS) in blue were given markers to help identify the years.The Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index (GLOTI) with its 5-year running mean was plotted about the zero line without the 0.5 increments in the colours used by NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). Because the pre-1900 Antarctic values are not based on instrumental observations they were left off.Evident is that the variations in the temperature anomalies of the Arctic and of the Antarctic are much greater than at lower latitudes where most of humanity and most other lifeforms live. They dwarf the variation in the annual GLOTI anomalies. They show that temperature variations are clearly cyclic with periodicities of about 6-7 years and a longer one that matches the 84-year orbital period of Uranus, thus implicating the solar system in the control of Earth’s temperatures.This is not surprising when realizing that due to the 7.155o inclination of Earth’s orbit with the sun’s equatorial plane Earth moves every year (each orbit) from 13 solar diameters above the sun to 13 solar diameters below the sun. Small changes caused by the gravity fluxes of the other planets and by the sun’s barycentric motion thus reflect in changes in the illumination of the poles.What is hardest to do for the four most massive planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) with their combined mass of 444 E-mass is to change the shape of Earth’s orbits, which we know gives a 400,000-year eccentricity cycle. But, with all orbits inclined to the sun’s equatorial plane, varying the plane Earth’s orbits up and down is as easy as opening and closing the hinging lid of a rubbish bin, because it does not alter Earth’s distances from the sun.This observation supports a view that variations in Earth’s climate are not caused by humanity but by small changes in the illumination of the poles.The Global Warming TrickAnomalously, as can be seen in the zonal temperature plots, the Arctic temperatures down to 24o S and the Gistemp anomalies share an unabating pre-1970s trend of rising temperatures to a value of 0.015 oC per year (1.5 oC per century) that is almost uniform across the latitudes. This trend is very different in character from what was happening since the end of the LIA and the start of the industrial era during the mid-18th century and since the 1880s.Only the brown trace for the southern ocean for 44o S- 64o S appears to be bucking the trend with a slight decrease in temperatures because it is determined by the ARGO floats doing the in situ monitoring, not by satellites. The plots suggest that the changeover to monitoring by satellites may be the cause of the ‘global warming’ scare.The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme in 1988 giving it a charter that always intended to blame humanity by excluding consideration of solar system influences a probable cause of variations in Earth’s climate. This may be seen as a breach of fiduciary duty that requires the IPCC to be abolished. It is not a scientific organization but a totalitarian geopolitical regime of bureaucrats who are in it for themselves, not for the good of humanity.Skimming of the rounding of numbers has been used in the past by bank employees to give themselves a bonus. For example, talking dollars and cents we can see that the average amount rounded over a million transactions is 0.0045 cents. You wouldn’t miss it from your account, but collectively it is worth $450. If that is a weekly number it is a nice bonus to have, that works out just over $23,400 per year.A growth factor of 1.5 oC per century can be divided by 100 to give 0.015 oC per year. That is easily hidden in the processing. Divide that again by 365 gives 0.000027 per day. That is even more easily hidden in processing software as a rounding error. So, without knowing it, everyone relying on the same software would have the same built-in error, while concealing the reality that we are heading toward a new LIA in the 27th century and toward a new hexamillennial minimum in 3000 years from now. From there, the obliquity cycle will push the world further into the next ice age.