To view this content, you must be a member of Electroverse's Patreon
Already a qualifying Patreon member? Refresh to access this content.
If models cannot reproduce where that heat has actually gone since 1950, their catastrophe outputs deserves far less attention than politicians, activists and media outlets give them.
ADAPT 2030 & Oppenheimer Ranch predicted the cycle 25 Grand Solar Minimum based on grower feedback & cyclic predictions as long ago as 2012, but were ignored. We’ve seen the steady factual reality that there hasn’t been any ‘global warming’ for over 20 years, and the persistent cold spells are hindering crop growth this year more than ever, but the “***” owned media downplay the clear implications of reduced crop production, which will (with the clear effects of reduced fertilizer availability) bring food shortages and potential famine as the cycle progresses.
Solar Cycle 25 is declining.
The extra atmospheric water vapour from the Hunga Tonga underwater volcano is also slowly declining.
They caused a massive global temperature spike in 2024.
Rainfall:
While is it is true that warmer air can hold more moisture, this fact must be seen in context. If the world is 1 degree warmer, the precipitation is governed by the same basic thermodynamics as when it is cooler.
Precipitation is what condenses and falls when the hot side is cooled to the cold side temperature. It is Delta T that predicts rainfall, not temperature. If the one degree warmer air holds 7% more vapour, so does the 1 degree warmer cold side final temperature – after it is global warming, right?
One particular storm night have a higher Delta T than another, but if the system is warmer by one degree, the increase in average rainfall can only be the difference between the initial and final temperature which will, on average, remain constant.
If you plot the absolute water containment potential between two temperatures, and perform that calculation for any rise in temperature, there is a slight increase in rainfall potential, but it is nothing like 7%. It is far less.
Essentially the catastrophists’ claim is a con. They are saying the air is warmer on the hot side, but remains the same on the cold side and the precipitable difference is 7%. Not so. The low side terminal temperature is also 7% wetter and rainfall potential is the capacity difference. This applies to every precipitation event, which, on a global average, cannot produce a disaster of any proportion. That’s physics.
Hello Cap. I believe that living on the west coast of Canada, I am several time zones away from you (about 8 or 9 hours behind you). Thus by the time my comment reaches your office, everyone probably has gone to bed and is waiting for the next day’s Electroverse posting. I notice that the comments have been much less in the past few weeks so I had hoped that my somewhat lengthy comment did not meet with any disapproval. There were 2 very complementary comments regarding my comment on Tuesday, yesterday. Would it meet with your approval to repost my comment in Friday’s Electroverse Edition, June 12, so that possibly my comment might be read by more of the Electroversians, your followers? We still have time to generate a big time discussion regarding the most likely approach of a repeat of the Maunder Minimum settling in by 2032, less than 6 years from now. 5 years of frantic preparing could mean the lives of countless humans who otherwise are doomed.
At the present time we seem to be being led by, and blindly following the United Nation’s grand scheme of creating a world government with the UN being that force.
Thank you in advance for any of your time in this instance. Cheers, Billy Best.
Thankyou Cap, this issue is being severe;y under-reported.