Closed System Effects on Global Warming


Asteroid Eros Reconstructed :Credit: NEAR Project, NLR, JHUAPL, Goddard SVS, NASA Explanation: Orbiting the Sun between Mars and Earth, asteroid 433 Eros was visited by the robot spacecraft NEAR-Shoemaker in 2000 February. 
The perfect  “closed system” in the universe might be an asteroid orbiting Mars as seen above. Practically no matter input.  Another is earth.
Interesting how Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) fanatics are being strangely silent lately. And this winter–in the writer’s home town of Asheville–has been one of the warmest in decades. [http://www.climatedepot.com/a/15197/Nice-Weather-in-US-Makes-Obama-a-Little-Nervous-It-gets-you-a-little-nervous-about-what-is-happening-to-global-temps--Climate-Depot-Answers-Global-Temps-are-dropping]

One certainty–earth is a ‘closed system’. There can be energy exchange, but there is no matter exchange. In other words, there can be no accumulation or elimination of a particular element or compound. It has, and will remain, the same for millenia. There are temperature variances for periods, but all matter remains equal in a ‘closed system’. Any carbon dioxide [CO2] generated will be converted to glucose.

AGW followers believe all the [CO2] from burning fossil fuels (e.g., oils, gas, etc…) artificially raises global temperatures.

There’s a huge quantity of [CO2] generated when oil is consumed, but all [CO2] gets consumed with the natural production of [glucose] by photosynthesis (addition of light). Breathing by animals reverses the process, and releases [CO2]. This process has remained static and ‘closed’ for eons on earth.

There can be surges of either [CO2], or [glucose], but they always have equaled out in 600 million years of history. Planetary Temperature and Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide (CO2) gives detailed [CO2] concentrations and temperatures over past few eons. Even as recently as the Jurassic Period (when dinosaurs roamed), [CO2] averaged 1800 ppm (>3x higher) than today’s paltry 390 ppm. Likely, no fossil fuel was burned at that time.

Earth might be a ‘closed system’ for matter, but it is not for energy. The major energy source for the earth is obviously    the sun. The sun is known to have over 30 cycles that have large effects on its climate. That’s besides all earth’s cycles (e.g.,orbit eccentricity, tilt, etc..). All these are the antithesis of anything anthropogenic (human caused) occurring. 

Recent warm temperatures in North America have been a direct result of The Arctic Oscillation and Arctic Weather Patterns  (AO), while at the same time giving frigid cold to locations in the eastern hemisphere. The resultant “AO” was produced by sun variations. No carbon or oxygen was changed in this ‘closed system’.

Just lately, we have been on the upside of an 11-year Schwabe Cycle (Solar cycle – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). After a major lull, there has been a major increase in sunspot activity. Just a week ago, a major solar storm hit earth. It involved coronal mass ejection, and ejecting a massive plasma cloud.

This plasma cloud hit earth at 4 million mph. This time, any technology disruptions were helped by a favorable northern orientation. Had that orientation been southern, technological disruption would have been quite severe. It should be remembered in 1989, when a similar solar outburst struck the power grid in Quebec, Canada, depriving 6 million of power.

Sunspots typically produce additional cosmic radiation, which produce clouds, which affect climate. Cosmic rays usually affect cloud formation through cloud condensation nuclei. Solar Geomagnetic Activity at all-time Low shows how solar activity has dramatically decreased in the last 165 years. Changes of 3–4% in cloudiness have been correlated to the 11-year solar (sunspot) cycles.

One cycle, the Grand Solar Minimum, is when total radiation from the Sun predicted to last a century precedes a new ice age. We are at the end of a interglacial period (warm), since the period between ice ages is generally 11,500 years. But it has nothing to do with anthropogenic changes.

The highly AGW-biased Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) acknowledges their report contains very little scientific understanding of solar variation, or what all the natural sun cycles can do depending on which cycle is dominant at the time. At least they are willing to admit different cycles, with different time periods, and different solar activities.

Dennis Avery (Scientist/Hudson Institute) notes: “Humans have known for 400 years—since Galileo—that sunspots correlate with climate changes on earth…” Significantly fewer sunspots have predicted the coldest periods of the Little Ice Age (1300), the Sporer Minimum (1460), the Maunder Minimum (1645), and the recent Dalton Minimum (early 1800s). All of which was due to the Sun—not [CO2] concentration.

What is it about AGW that makes it so exciting? Maybe it’s actually thinking that man controls his eventual outcome. Possibly someone forgot to tell God he made earth a ‘closed system’…




Get Alerts