Carbon Dioxide Not to Blame In Ice Age Mystery

Reader Comments
Back to article

Obviously there is no way to measure the heat produced by our sun over the eons. It would seem to me that this would be one of the primary considerations for weather change.

J.P. Buie of OK 2:07PM May 18, 2010

Molecules of air and other matter are moving and bouncing around and hitting each other; this is heat energy according to the formula: ke=1/2 M times V(squared), where ke is kinetic energy, M is the mass the molecule and v is the velocity of the molecule squared. The earth and the outer space charge form a simple parallel plate capacitor that can store an electric charge which is an electrical difference of potential, i.e., the sunspot stream of positively charged ions and the relative negative charge of the earth. The formula C = 0.224 kA/d represents the amount of electric charge that this capacitor C can store before arcing over because the charge becomes so high that the dielectric k is to low k = 1 in this case to contain the high difference of potential (Voltage); A is the total area of the earths surface and d is the distance between the earth and the tremendous positive ion stream from the sunspot emission. WHEN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE ARCS THE FLOW OF ENERGY WILL BE FROM THE EARTH TO THE POSITIVE STREAM OF HYDROGEN IONS FROM THE SUN> The electron flow from the earth is negative to positive. The kinetic energy of a lot of matter on the earth will leave the earth in this electron flow arc, leaving behind less kinetic energy called Cold which is a way to cool the earth and perhaps produce the beginning of an ice-age.

Robert L. Matarainen of NY 6:24AM July 27, 2009

A variation of the Peltier effect could somehow be created by sunspot ion charges and the earth's polorization to create a massive charge flow from the earth to the ionization field above the earth; thereby removing heat from the earth quickly and fast enough to freeze everything enclosed in the area of the earth charge source flow. Enough of these heat loss flows could create an ice-age. The earth is so large that it would have to be something massive (Sun) to affect the earth's climate. One guess would be that while there is a long period of no sunspot activity, the internal balance inside the sun is building up pressures that will produce a sudden burst of ions toward the earth which could create this thermoelectric heat pump effect between the earth and the sunspot charges hitting the earth.

Robert L. Matarainen of NY 2:10PM July 04, 2009

In fact under certain situations, the "Black Body Radiator" gives off energy greater than the function of the fourth power but jumps to the fifth power radiator in the infra-red region of the electromagnetic spectrum. This fifth power radiator would lose energy so rapidly that a mammoth could be flash frozen, in an "instant". The CO2 story is good for pseudo scientific politicians.

Robert L. Matarainen of NY 8:59PM June 25, 2009

We all know that a single vulcan eruption put to atmosphere billions of kg of CO2. So we really don't know the periodical incresing rate of the eruptions. But it seem's rational the hypotesis of periodical rearrangement of all the planet surface along a thousands hundred of eras. I'ts logical to think that those rearrangements occurs at longer intervals along the eras. An increase of 1 mean millimeter (rounded 0.04 inc) of the thikness of solid surface all around the planet, means big change in mechanical and thermal characterics. That probably means a very slow cooling of all the planet and a stabilization of the forces that cross the external thin layer. For example:
it will be possible that 1 mean millimeter have corrispondence to a 0.001 °C of lowering of the mean temperature of ALL the planet along 100.000 years. Why not?
So why don't compare carbon dioxide coming from human activities versus an hypothetical increase of eruptions during the next planet rearrangement?
Many thanks for your attention

Roberto Rodolfi 1:38AM June 23, 2009

@Paul Chamberlin
Read the second sentence of the article - "CO2 ... isn’t to blame for a ... shift in the frequency of ice ages." It does not refute the CO2 - temperature link. Something else is triggering ice ages - probably Milankovich orbital cycles.
In vitro experiments since the 19th century have proved that CO2 IS a greenhouse gas - look at Venus, about 300 C hotter than it would otherwise be because of CO2.
CO2 levels are now 390ppm - a third higher than they have been for over 2.1 million years.
Present-day oil and coal were formed over millions of years of slow absorption of CO2 from the atmosphere, yet we have burnt and released perhaps half of this in the last 200 years. Surprised by the CO2 levels?
The vast majority of scientists who have studied this, are convinced that humans are now changing the climate (look up "scientific consensus on climate change" and IPCC). Only in America, with so many young-earth creationists and conspiracy nuts, do you find such skepticism of mainstream science.

F Darwin 12:05AM June 23, 2009

If temperatures don't go down with CO2 decreases, it seems logical that they wouldn't go up with CO2 increases. Therefore, CO2 is not related strongly to the concentration of CO2. Conclusion, don't go overboard with CO2 controls in an effort to stabilize world temperatures.

Paul Chamberlin of CO 4:12PM June 22, 2009