New Climate Discovery

1) The Discovery





The crystal clear solar system wide climate discovery by Dr. Ned Nikolov and Dr. Karl Zeller is based on official NASA space probe data. They used advanced mathematical analysis techniques to study the climates of rocky surfaced planets and moons in our solar system. They found they could accurately predict their long term average surface temperatures by knowing just two strategic facts: their distance from the Sun and their atmospheric pressure. This formula has worked correctly for Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, and Pluto, and for Earth’s moon, Europa, Callisto, Titan, and Triton. Their predictions have been proven accurate to within one degree Celsius. Like the value of Pi, this mathematical relationship will never go away because it was created by Nature, not by man.



Nikolov and Zeller found that the specific gaseous composition of the atmospheres of planets and moons are irrelevant to determining their long-term average surface temperatures. For example, the atmosphere of Venus is composed of 96.5% carbon dioxide, while Earth’s atmosphere contains only .04% carbon dioxide, yet that information was not even needed to predict temperature. The logical conclusion is that atmospheric gases only contribute to warming by their physical mass, which increases atmospheric pressure.



Schools teach that the carbon dioxide rich atmosphere of Venus creates a powerful greenhouse effect that keeps surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead: about 462 degrees Celsius. The new evidence suggests that heat is actually produced by Venus’s proximity to the Sun and the weight of its atmosphere, which is over 90 times heavier than Earth’s. Venus’s tremendous atmospheric mass produces crushing atmospheric pressure, which generates intense heat.





Atmospheric gas compression heating due to gravity keeps the Earth warm, not the infrared radiative properties of the so-called "greenhouse gases." Nikolov and Zeller suggest that the "greenhouse gas effect" be replaced by the term "atmospheric thermal enhancement." Nikolov states that " pressure increases the internal energy of a large system such as a planet by virtue of its FORCE, and there is no need for constant pressure fluctuations to do this. The atmospheric adiabatic lapse rate is a proof! " He goes on to say that " the greenhouse climate theory assumes that 99.5% of the atmospheric mass and its associated surface pressure has ZERO effect on Earth's global surface temperature, and the entire atmospheric thermal effect is caused by just 0.5% of atmospheric gases. It's an UTTER NONSENSE !" Exactly how the force of gravity increases atmospheric temperatures is open for public debate because we really do not understand what gravity is. Our best provable evidence tells us that gravity driven atmospheric compression heating happens everywhere on Earth at all times. We do not notice atmospheric gas compression heating because it is a continuous phenomenon. Without it our oceans would freeze to the Equator.

2) The Secret





Dr. Nikolov points out that the greenhouse gas theory violates the Energy-Conservation Law in trying to explain the atmospheric thermal effect exclusively through radiation. Specifically, the total amount of short wave solar radiation absorbed by the Earth is about 240 watts per square meter. The measured long wave radiation coming down from our atmosphere is about 343 watts per square meter. This downward long wave radiation has been falsely assumed to be due to greenhouse gases absorbing long wave radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface as it heats up through short wave radiation bombardment from the Sun. We thus have 43% more energy coming down from the atmosphere than all the energy received from the Sun in total. The most likely cause of this excess energy is gas compression heating, not the greenhouse effect, which by definition can only help contain energy created by the Sun.



"Interpreting atmospheric IR (infrared) back radiation as an external heating energy flux to the surface is like viewing the observed apparent rotation of celestial bodies "around" Earth as a "proof" that Earth was at the center of the Universe, a mistake made for 1000 years!" — Dr. Ned Nikolov





3) The Fallacy





Former NOAA climate scientist, " there is no propensity for CO2 to store heat in a systematic way over time to produce a climate change effect." Former NOAA climate scientist, Dr. Rex J. Fleming , stated that A greenhouse has glass walls that blocks convective heat exchange with the surrounding environment, thus insulating the air inside. Earth's atmosphere has no walls, so convective cooling acts as a bucket brigade transferring heat from the surface of the Earth all the way up to the stratosphere. The commonly used greenhouse gas theory analogy to a parked car’s windshield is false.



Does the carbon dioxide created by a campfire insulate the fire, holding in the heat, or does it help facilitate convection cooling, dispersing hot gases into the atmosphere? You cannot construct a usable boat from a badminton net and you cannot construct a usable greenhouse out of gas. Global warming computer models ignore convection cooling as an overwhelming unstoppable natural force. No free flowing gas can stop the cooling process, and certainly not tiny trace gases like carbon dioxide (.04% of atmosphere) and methane (.00017% of atmosphere).



Why is the bottom of Death Valley always warmer than the top of Mount Everest? The answer is that air compression heating is weaker at higher altitudes where the air pressure is lower, and much more powerful at lower altitudes where the air pressure is greater. Higher pressure causes higher temperatures.



The greenhouse gas theory was first proposed in the 19th Century as a conjecture without observational evidence. It later became "settled science" through repetition by many generations of scientists quoting their mentors and peers. Only computer projection models formulated with erroneous assumptions and cult like zealotry keep the man-made climate change bandwagon going.





4) The Evidence





Earth’s climate history does not reveal any evidence of carbon dioxide increasing Earth’s temperatures as a “greenhouse gas.” The temperature increase Earth experienced after the end of the Little Ice Age (1300 to 1870) up to about 1940 was not caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions because industrial output during those years was too low to make any significant difference. Therefore, the heat waves and drought that caused the Dust Bowl of the 1930s had nothing to do with fossil fuels.



Industrial output and CO2 emissions increased dramatically during World War II and during the post-war economic boom, but the Earth's temperature dropped after 1940 until about 1975. By the early 1970s the weather had become so cold that there was fear of a coming ice age. If CO2 was the driving force behind temperature increases, the Earth would have experienced vigorous heating during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, not the remarkable cooling that actually occurred.



When the world dramatically increased biofuel farming during the Bush and Obama administrations, CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions rose as a result of deforestation, land use change, and increased fertilizer production, yet Earth's global temperature remained flat instead of rising. That fact goes counter to the basic premises of the man-made global warming hypothesis.









The Irish father and son scientist team of Dr. Michael Connolly and Dr. Ronan Connolly conducted an historic review of over twenty million weather balloon data flight recordings collected since the 1950s. Using advanced computer analysis techniques, they found that carbon dioxide in our atmosphere exists in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium. As Albert Einstein realized in 1918, a gas in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium emits infrared light energy at exactly the same rate it absorbs infrared light energy. This means that when we add carbon dioxide to our atmosphere we increase the rate of atmospheric infrared energy absorption, but at exactly the same time we increase the rate of atmospheric infrared energy emissions, so the net result is nothing,…zero effect. The infrared active gases in our atmosphere aid in the transfer of energy from hot areas to cold areas, but do not store energy, which means humans only increase localized surface temperatures through the urban heat island effect.





The Connolly team also found that scientists of the past had ignored the dramatic effects of through mass mechanical energy transmission , which they have named “pervection.” Pervection transfers energy mechanically through the atmosphere at a rate that is three orders of magnitude greater than the thermal energy transmission mechanisms used in IPCC computer models. Pervection is the mechanism that makes a The Connolly team also found that scientists of the past had ignored the dramatic effects of, which they have named “pervection.” Pervection transfers energy mechanically through the atmosphere at a rate that is three orders of magnitude greater than the thermal energy transmission mechanisms used in IPCC computer models. Pervection is the mechanism that makes a Newton’s Cradle toy work, and is a highly efficient avenue for transmitting atmospheric work energy instantaneously over long distances. Climate computer models that ignore the powerful influence of pervection are bound to be inaccurate. Armed with a treasure trove of new evidence, they came to the following conclusions.



“It does not matter whether we double, triple, or even quadruple the carbon dioxide concentration. Carbon dioxide has no impact on atmospheric temperatures.”



“We carried out new laboratory experiments, and analyzed the data from millions of weather balloons to calculate exactly how much global warming carbon dioxide was causing. When we did this, we discovered that the answer was zero .”



"It turns out that some of the assumptions used in man-made global warming theory had never actually been tested. When we tested them, we discovered that the y were invalid."



"The "unusual global warming" that has caused such concern is not unusual, after all. We found that the world naturally switches between periods of global warming and periods of global cooling, with each period lasting several decades."



The Kauppinen-Malmi finding was supported by Professor Masayuki Hyodo’s work at the Research Center for Inland Seas at Kobe University in Japan. Hyodo's team published a paper on June 28, 2019, in the online edition of Scientific Reports which detailed the impact of cosmic rays on Earth's climate. See Intensified East Asian winter monsoon during the last geomagnetic reversal transition A study by Dr. Jyrki Kauppinen and Dr. Pekka Malmi, from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Turku in Finland, found that the IPCC’s computer generated climate models fail to consider the very strong influence of solar mediated low cloud cover changes on global temperature. The authors state that the IPCC’s results cannot be considered valid experimental evidence. See No Experimental Evidence For The Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change The Kauppinen-Malmi finding was supported by Professor Masayuki Hyodo’s work at the Research Center for Inland Seas at Kobe University in Japan. Hyodo's team published a paper on June 28, 2019, in the online edition ofwhich detailed the impact of cosmic rays on Earth's climate. See



A Chinese archaeological based study has found that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have no effect on climate. Dr Wu Jing, from the Key Laboratory of Cenozoic Geology and Environment, discovered that China’s winters have been warming since 4,000 BC. Dr. Wu Jing stated that the “Driving forces include the sun, the atmosphere, and its interaction with the ocean.” Dr. Wu Jing's group of scientists concluded that “We have detected no evidence of human influence." Dr. Wu Jing is currently worried about global cooling, not global warming. She states that "A sharp drop of temperature will benefit nobody." See China scientists warn of global cooling trick up nature’s sleeve





5) The Past





This new evidence helps explain our planet’s history. During the Jurassic Period, about 200 million years ago, Earth was significantly warmer with tropical plants growing in polar regions. Dinosaurs ruled the land while pterodactyls roamed the skies. Pterodactyls were large winged reptiles that flew like birds despite their heavy bone structure. Flight would be impossible in today’s relatively thin atmosphere, but when pterodactyls existed our atmosphere must have been much denser; perhaps up to three times as dense. The greater the air density, the greater the aerodynamic lift, and the greater the atmospheric heat.



6) Correcting Misconceptions



Air pollution lowers temperatures instead of raising them because pollution blocks sunlight and reflects it back into Space. That is why volcanic eruptions cause global cooling. Politicians unscientifically brand carbon dioxide as a "pollutant," forgetting the obvious proven fact that carbon dioxide created and feeds all life on Earth — and most likely — all life that exists anywhere in the universe. Adding more carbon dioxide to our atmosphere makes plants grow faster and bigger, which produces more food and lumber. If we could triple atmospheric CO2 levels, which would be difficult to achieve, we would stimulate optimum plant growth and drought resistance. Plants would develop fewer stomatal pores to absorb CO2, which means fewer pores for moisture to escape from. This allows plants to manage their water supply more efficiently. NASA satellite observations have shown this is already happening around the world. If we wanted to make Earth warmer, we will have to either significantly increase total atmospheric pressure or permanently reduce global cloud cover, both daunting tasks beyond our capabilities.











7) Renewable Energy





Windmills and solar schemes have been financial and ecological disasters all over the world, causing far more harm than good, and without any benefit to our climate. Needlessly increasing the cost of electricity hurts the poor the most. Global biofuel farming has raised the cost of fertilizer, farmland, and food all over the world. It has increased topsoil erosion, deforestation, water pollution, phosphate resource depletion, and deaths due to malnutrition and related illness. By even the most conservative estimates, global biofuel farming has killed far more people over the last twenty years than all wars and acts of terrorism combined. Malnutrition is the primary worldwide cause of avoidable mental retardation in children, but environmentalists and politicians do not seem to care. Pesticides used on biofuel crops are a major cause of the worldwide kill-off of bees and other beneficial insects . See The Renewable Energy Disaster Windmills and solar schemes have been financial and ecological disasters all over the world, causing far more harm than good, and without any benefit to our climate. Needlessly increasing the cost of electricity hurts the poor the most. Global biofuel farming has raised the cost of fertilizer, farmland, and food all over the world. It has increased topsoil erosion, deforestation, water pollution, phosphate resource depletion, and deaths due to malnutrition and related illness. By even the most conservative estimates, global biofuel farming has killed far more people over the last twenty years than all wars and acts of terrorism combined. Malnutrition is the primary worldwide cause of avoidable mental retardation in children, but environmentalists and politicians do not seem to care. Pesticides used on biofuel crops are a major cause of the worldwide kill-off of bees and other beneficial insectsSeewebsite.





8) Hysteria





According to NASA, Earth’s average temperature has only increased by 0.8 degrees Celsius since 1880. How can that possibly be a "climate crisis"? If your refrigerator’s temperature varies by just .8 degrees Celsius, does that mean your refrigerator is broken? When did the Earth have a more pleasant climate than we have today? The honest answer is probably NEVER. The only time I could even consider being better was the Medieval Warm Period (about 800-1400 AD), when Europe prospered with mild temperatures and food was plentiful. Even frigid Greenland was green with vegetation. The Earth was many degrees warmer back then, but today we have become hysterical over a tiny .8 degree Celsius increase in temperature.



The obvious political, financial, and religious motives for spreading climate hysteria are the real drivers of our irrational anti-carbon policies, not science. have been popular since the dawn of man, and climate hysteria is an ancient phenomenon that has plagued our past. Five hundred years ago the weather was so extreme that Europeans burned alive thousands of people accused of being "weather witches." Through "weather cooking" they were believed to have caused terrifying storms that destroyed crops and killed farm animals. Only a few citizens objected to burning their neighbors and using torture to gain confessions. The dissenters believed that weather is controlled by Nature, not by man. If you express those exact sentiments today even United States senators and congressmen will brand you a "denier," a term historically used in different forms by virtually all intolerant religions around the world. See According to NASA, Earth’s average temperature has only increased by 0.8 degrees Celsius since 1880. How can that possibly be a "climate crisis"? If your refrigerator’s temperature varies by just .8 degrees Celsius, does that mean your refrigerator is broken? When did the Earth have a more pleasant climate than we have today? The honest answer is probably NEVER. The only time I could even consider being better was the Medieval Warm Period (about 800-1400 AD), when Europe prospered with mild temperatures and food was plentiful. Even frigid Greenland was green with vegetation. The Earth was many degrees warmer back then, but today we have become hysterical over a tiny .8 degree Celsius increase in temperature.The obvious political, financial, and religious motives for spreading climate hysteria are the real drivers of our irrational anti-carbon policies, not science. Apocalyptic doomsday religions have been popular since the dawn of man, and climate hysteria is an ancient phenomenon that has plagued our past. Five hundred years ago the weather was so extreme that Europeans burned alive thousands of people accused of being "weather witches." Through "weather cooking" they were believed to have caused terrifying storms that destroyed crops and killed farm animals. Only a few citizens objected to burning their neighbors and using torture to gain confessions. The dissenters believed that weather is controlled by Nature, not by man. If you express those exact sentiments today even United States senators and congressmen will brand you a "denier," a term historically used in different forms by virtually all intolerant religions around the world. See Dr. Baliunas on Weather Cooking (YouTube video).



Scientists — devout true believers — at NASA, NOAA, and the IPCC have been caught distorting data to increase our level of anxiety. You can argue with science, but you cannot argue with religious fervor. Thus, we see the Orwellian spectacle of Americans protesting “global warming” during record cold and snow, and after Niagara Falls froze two winters in a row. Humans are 18.5% carbon by weight, eat carbon based food, and live in homes made with carbon. A war against carbon is a war against the essential fuel of life our own families.





9) The Bottom Line





The Nikolov-Zeller formulas have been examined by scientists around the world, and no one has been able to find flaw in their mathematics, only displeasure in what their discovery means. It means this whole charade of dangerous man-made global warming has been much ado about nothing. It makes famous politicians, scientists, and celebrities look like charlatans and fools, and puts in jeopardy a trillion dollar renewable energy business, which has become a vampiric drain on humanity rather than a savior. Nikolov and Zeller have not been rewarded for making the greatest discovery in climatology of the twenty-first century. Instead, they have faced censorship, mud throwing, and deafening-silence from world leaders who should use this new information to develop productive energy policies that will dramatically elevate the human standard of living worldwide.

To fully understand the Nikolov-Zeller climate discovery, please follow these easy steps.