Fossilised Fools

I made the mistake of writing a comment on Jennifer Marohasy’s Facebook entry which linked to her blog entry on There Facts Climate Sceptics Don’t Understand. The mistake was that Professor Harry Clarke, (for a professor he is) reacted to it by commenting on, in a derisive way, my support for Abiotic oil theory, and that therefore I believe there is an infinite amount of oil as opposed to the mainstream peak oil theory based on fossil fuel theory; the only thing I might believe in is the infinite stupidity of some members of the human race. Actually, in one sense Clarke might be described as a fossilised fool, one whose beliefs are permanently embedded in his brain, much like extinct life-forms are often fossilised into permanent forms in lithified sediments. Fossilised minds, or religious minds, ones which only see what has been embedded into their brains, then react to contradiction and novelty by shooting the messenger. Whatever, shit happens.

Actually it’s good Clarke raised the issue because Abiotic oil theory does have a major problem – the source of energy to transform low energy thermodynamic states, methane and low Dalton number hydrocarbons, to high energy state hydrocarbons using only pressure (P) and temperature (T) in the near subsurface of the earth; put simply it can’t be done, but that does not mean abiotic oil theory is falsified, because there is too much empirical data of petroleum occurrences suggestive of an abiotic origin. The problem is the source of energy, because P & T are simply not enough.

That energy source seems very likely to be the earth’s electric field inside the earth. Remember that magma is essentially viscous electric plasma, and that implies electric charge separation inside the earth. How this happens no one knows at present, but it’s there. The point is that if there is electrical charge separation inside the earth, i.e. electrical double layers, then we have also a potentially large source of energy that could allow high-Dalton number hydrocarbons to form spontaneously in the asthenosphere and/or lower crust.

That is, the phase stability of a compound like hydrocarbons could be represented by at least 4 or more factors, P, T, Electric Field Strength and gas fugacity. Could it be that if we assume pressure and temperature conditions for the asthenosphere, but raise the electric field strength, that methane might spontaneously transform or metamorphose into benzene, higher dalton number hydrocarbons and ultimately kerogen? (Kerogen found in sediments has to be interpreted as erosional products of pre-existing deposits of kerogen, and the peak oilers need to be wary of circular reasoning in their preferred explanation for kerogen)? (Remember that all laboratory experiments are conducted inside the earth’s ambient electric field, and that by increasing it for a laboratory experiment demonstrate that methane could be transformed into higher Dalton-number hydrocarbons).

This possibility occurred to me from previous correspondence with the Russian scientists Konstantin Khazanovitch-Wulff who told me that kimberlites, due to geochemical factors, are actually shallow crustal phenomena and not, as I used to believe, deep crustal or upper mantle derivatives, (the De Beers theory). The rationale for this model is again founded in plasma physics theory, and those interested can read the papers published in the NCGT News or Journal online. (Of course you can also discover many excellent scientific papers falsifying plate tectonics, and hence fossil fuel theory since this theory requires plate-tectonics).

Shallow crustal electrical double layers might also explain the occurrence of crystalline carbon, or diamond, at those depths as well, fitting in with K-W’s theory of shallow origin for kimberlites.

And Professor Clarke, like the rest of his fellow travellers, believes the science is settled. Only a non-scientist could come up with that interpretation.

Posted in Plasma Universe, Science | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Fossil Religious Wars

Oh dear, it seems the high priests of the Darwinian Uniformist religion have received a bit of a setback from the discovery of some soft tissue on a triceratops fossil excavated from a fossil dig in the Hell Creek Formation in Montana, USA, according to CBS Los Angeles. The scientist, one Mark Armitage,  who discovered it was subsequently fired from his job, apparently because he interpreted this discovery to support his creationist views of a young earth, and that this was therefore blasphemy. 

Upon examination of the horn under a high-powered microscope back at CSUN, Dacus says Armitage was “fascinated” to find soft tissue on the sample – a discovery Bacus said stunned members of the school’s biology department and even some students “because it indicates that dinosaurs roamed the earth only thousands of years in the past rather than going extinct 60 million years ago.”


“Since some creationists, like [Armitage], believe that the triceratops bones are only 4,000 years old at most, [Armitage's] work vindicated his view that these dinosaurs roamed the planet relatively recently,”according to the complaint (PDF) filed July 22 in Los Angeles Superior Court.

An ad hoc explanation for this “anomaly’ can be found in the articles concluding remark,

The discovery is the latest in several recent – and controversial – soft tissue finds by archaeologists: researchers last November claimed the controversial discovery of purported 68-million-year-old soft tissue from the bones of a Tyrannosaurus rex can be explained by iron in the dinosaur’s body, which they say preserved the tissue before it could decay.

Of course this isn’t the first time that an extinct animal fossil yielded “soft”  tissue since Charles Darwin did so as he reported in his Journal of his voyage on the Beagle, when a fossil was discovered in a river bank deposit in South America with soft tissue still adhering to it. And then there are those anomalous pictographs of triceratops in Amerindian art, or on old South American artefacts, those carvings that cause so much angst in the ranks of the liberal creationists, aka the geological uniformitarians, or Lyellians, implying that our ancestors were living at the same time as the extinct triceratops or dinosaurs. Whatever. 

If we dismiss the creationist cosmology and in its stead consider, what the physicist Amit Goswami describes as, ‘monistic idealism’, or the idea that physical reality is being continuously formed by an underlying consciousness, in which life never started, or ends, but just is, then the presence of soft tissue on a triceratops fossil isn’t that much of a problem. But it does lead to the possibility that our understanding of the earth’s chronology and evolution might be incomplete, and at worst quite wrong. And if we think of physical reality as something like a hologram, as described by the late Michael talbot in his book ‘The Holographic Universe’ in which he reported the scientific ideas of the late David Bohm, and those of Karl Pribram and other extant scientists, then this discovery of soft tissue isn’t all that much of an issue either, apart from the implication that our geological model might be fundamentally wrong, and for that matter our materialist world-view, on which that geological model is based, equally flawed.

(The idea of physical materialism is a logical outcome of a culture dominated by a creationist religious belief system, in which an almighty deity or god created the physical universe. If you believe in the duality of a god and that god’s creation, physical material reality, then you have to conclude that reality is fundamentally described as physical materialism. Even the secular humanists, who surprisingly also firmly believe in a Big Bang theory, or creatio ex nihilo, are as religious as their fundamentalist biblical opponents, in which both only see what they believe in).

Mark Armitage’s dismissal is thus the unfortunate result of his daring to interpret the data at face value and thus incurring the wrath of the ruling priests of the existing religion of scientifically acceptable creationism, Darwinian evolution, by stating the blindingly obvious, that this particular triceratops was only recently fossilised. He thus had to pay the price for his blasphemy.

But just how iron in a fossilised dinosaur’s body can stop biological decay over millions of years, as implied by the quote above, has to be seen for what it is – a lame attempt to explain away empirical data that contradicts the dogma of progressive biological evolution from an earlier creative event, whether chronologically recent or distant.

However as this recent discovery is but the latest in the continuous argument between the literal and liberal creationist camps, it may well be, as the late Fred Hoyle remarked, that both arguments are probably wrong and that a third model, or idea, might be worthwhile considering. Whether this happens in my lifetime, however, lies in the laps of the gods, as they might say.

Posted in Science | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Intensive Variables and Temperature

Lots of hubbub over the latest NOAA claims that May and June 2014 were, as my good friend Warwick Hughes points out, the hottest evah !

NOAA’s database is compiled from land surface thermometers while other temperature estimates, the satellite ones, use emission spectra. NOAA’s main problem lies in the aggregating process of the surface temperature data, and that’s where the intensive/extensive variable issue comes in.

Extensive variables are countable integer objects like cannon balls, individual species like rabbits or humans, length, area and volume if one is considering 3-D objects.

Intensive variables are not and are actually a measurement or scaling of a ranking of some or other physical observation. Temperature is an intensive variable in that it measures the thermal state of an object numerically. What is totally unintuitive to most in the scientific area is that you can’t simply aggregate temperature measurements to come up with some global value, the global mean temperature. You see, intensive variables are measurements of some or other object that are applied or factored to an extensive measurement of the object. For example you would measure the volume of a cube of lead, and also measure it’s specific gravity. The volume is the extensive variable but the specific gravity is an intensive variable, and is used to generate the cube’s mass, itself an extensive variable, by multiplying the volume by the specific gravity.

I supervised some geophysics honours students some years back in the field, and I asked one what 3 degrees Celsius plus 3 degrees Celsius added to. Quick as a flash he came back with the correct answer, 3. Symbolically 3+3=3. Intuitive ? Not very, is it. But the implications are profound.

Profound because climate scientists aggregate their surface thermometer measurements by predefined areas of latitude and longitude, and obtain a block or cell average of temperature. Sure, they have calculated some or other value but it’s physically meaningless because it’s the average temperature of a virtual flat surface which has no thickness, and in the process of aggregating the data the sin of aggregating intensive variables in isolation has been done.

I’m not going into the nitty-gritty of the aggregating process but essentially what climate science does is observe the thermal state, temperature, of a thermometer in transient thermal equilibrium of an unspecified mass/volume of air and aggregates this and similar measurements in terms of an artificial 2D plane defined by latitude and longitude. This process does indeed produce a number but it’s physically meaningless. (The temperature measurements from the satellite data are another matter entirely, and don’t suffer from the intensive/extensive variable problem). What they are not measuring is the spot location of a thermal field, because this field is not a physical object with specific physical, here thermal, properties)

The upshot is that the NOAA ranking of the hottest months is actually numerical gobbledygook – they have no means of knowing, from their aggregated data, whether it got hot or cold or did not change, in a mean temperature sense, during the past. But you can conclude that from the satellite data from RSS and UAH, as Warwick, correctly, points out.

Posted in Climate, Science | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Internal or External Earth Processes ?

Friends of Science just sent an email noting a recent scientific paper describing a widespread heatwave in Europe during 1540 AD.  The abstract follows:

The heat waves of 2003 in Western Europe and 2010 in Russia, commonly labelled as rare climatic anomalies outside of previous experience, are often taken as harbingers of more frequent extremes in the global warming-influenced future. However, a recent reconstruction of spring–summer temperatures for WE resulted in the likelihood of significantly higher temperatures in 1540. In order to check the plausibility of this result we investigated the severity of the 1540 drought by putting forward the argument of the known soil desiccation-temperature feedback. Based on more than 300 first-hand documentary weather report sources originating from an area of 2 to 3 million km2, we show that Europe was affected by an unprecedented 11-month-long Megadrought. The estimated number of precipitation days and precipitation amount for Central and Western Europe in 1540 is significantly lower than the 100-year minima of the instrumental measurement period for spring, summer and autumn. This result is supported by independent documentary evidence about extremely low river flows and Europe-wide wild-, forest- and settlement fires. We found that an event of this severity cannot be simulated by state-of-the-art climate models. 

The last sentence seems revealing.

The main paradigm of the Earth’s energy balance is based solely on the assumption that ALL the energy reaching the Earth is solar radiation. This idea was the best science could come up with during the Newtonian era of a clockwork universe or solar system in which the planets were suspended in vacuo and irradiated by the warmth of the Sun. The energy powering formation of magma inside the earth is believed to be due to internal heat from radioactive elements present at the time of the Earth’s creation and which subsequently forms the energy driving the plate tectonics mechanism. The state-of-the-art climate models are based on this paradigm. The model is incomplete.

In addition to the known solar radiation exists an electrical circuit that includes all the bodies in the solar system, as well as this solar system being part of a larger galactic electrical circuit.

We also know that electric forces are 10^39 greater in magnitude than gravitational ones, and best explained by the following large number:


Climate models deal with the decimal part of the number, those 38 zeros before the 1, while the electrical forces that form the physics of the plasma universe model involve variations of the integer portion of the number, the one in front of the decimal point. Even if we deal with atmospheric electric currents in the pico-ampere range, then that large number becomes slightly smaller in that instead of 38 zeros in front of the decimal one, we now have only 29 zeros. Developing a mathematical model which deals with electrical forces (the integer portion) and gravitational forces (the decimal portion) would be somewhat problematical, especially if you reject outright that electricity has no role in the cosmos.

Quite simply it seems the energy-balance model of the earth-solar system is more than a little incomplete; little wonder the climate models can’t simulate such severe climate events, especially if they are driven externally from the earth itself.

I suppose it all depends on which force one is dealing with, the electrical or the gravitational.

More of this with future posts here.

Posted in Climate, Plasma Universe | 1 Comment

X-Class Solar Flares and Inclement Weather on Earth

Around the 10th of this month the Sun emitted a couple of solar flares and, predictably, some 4 days after the emission, inclement weather occurred where I live – with gale-force winds and rain.

This has started to became a bit of a pattern and I wonder whether I should assume a causal relationship between this unpredictable solar activity, and predictable earth-weather.

Incidentally how about interpreting rain as electric currents along which solar protons reach the negatively charged earth-surface? Rain droplets or spheres are easily explained by surface tension, but not so the thin strands of falling rain – those thin strands could well be miniature Birkeland currents comprised of the newly arrived solar protons into the earth-system.

Food for thinking.

Posted in Climate, Plasma Universe, Science, Weather | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Lousy Data or Scientific Incompetence?

The “pause” in global warming may be an artefact of scientists looking at the wrong data reports The Guardian. It further reports:

Climate scientists have been arguing for some time that the lack of warming of the sea surface is due to most of the extra heat being taken up by the deep ocean. A better measure, he said, was to look at the average rise in sea levels. The oceans store the vast majority of the climate’s heat energy. Increases in this stored energy translate into sea level rises.

Two facts emerge from this revelation from the European Space Agency, reported by The Guardian. The first is that they don’t understand the scientific method. By that I mean that the theory that an increase in human produced CO2 has to increase the surface temperature of the earth by some 1.5 to 5 degrees Celsius for a doubling of CO2, has been falsified by the data, and hence that theory has to be rejected. That the climate scientists refuse to throw out their falsified theory means simply that their theory is essentially a dogmatic, or religious, article of faith and certainly not scientific despite being described in ‘scientese’. Hence any contradictory data are arbitrarily dumped into the sin bin and ignored.

Secondly they seem quite unaware of the peculiar physical properties of water – that it takes roughly double the quantity of heat to raise the temperature of water one degree Celsius than either ice or water vapour, as detailed in a previous post here. There is indeed missing heat, but that missing heat has been converted into molecular order and electric charge separation, as shown by the laboratory work by the Pollack Group at Washington State University and not as stored heat deep in the Earth’s oceans as they, (fervently), believe. That’s why the specific heat of water is about double that of both ice and water vapour; 50% of the heat goes to raising the temperature, the other 50% to order and charge separation.

And the use of the phrase “climate observations” shows a deep ignorance of observational measurement theory – climate data are fluctuations of some or other physical process at 30 year sampling intervals, the second and third measurements being 30 and 60 years after the first measurement. A linear trend line requires a minimum of 3 data points, so that means at least 60 years of measurements at minimum; they don’t have sea surface temperature data to fulfil this requirement, let alone any satellite derived data. So in a sense their data is insufficient for them to form any climatically oriented conclusion or trend.

It’s quite amazing – their climate and economic sciences both seem not to be working at all – despite the accelerating volume of CO2 in the atmosphere, and the accelerating application of ‘quantitative easing’ by the world’s central banks, neither the climate or the world’s economies are performing as they ought to from theory.

Ya’d think they might start looking at the theories rather than the data, ya reckon??

Posted in Climate, Plasma Universe, Weather | 2 Comments

More Geological Heresy of the Climate Type

Oh dear,

Another recalcitrant geologist utters insensitive remarks concerning ‘Climate Change’ and reported by Pierre Gosselin on his “No Tricks Zone” blog (H/T to Case Smit).

The retired Swiss geologist Christian Schluchter was interviewed by the online Swiss “Der Bund” under the topic “Our Society is Fundamentally Dishonest” (Interview is in German and linked by Pierre).

It seems our good geologist had the misfortune of finding some chunks of wood at the edge of some Swiss glaciers during the 1990’s which raised serious doubts about the accepted palaeoclimate theories. The implication from the wood samples was that the Holocene was warmer than accepted and that Switzerland was essentially ice-free during the period.

Schluchter’s data are correct but the problem is chronology – and the concomitant implied large climate swings affecting Europe during that time. Expressed concisely, Schluchter’s interpretation of his data was that the climate system is extremely dynamic and does not function linearly; the problem is that you can’t forecast non-linear systems. And Schluchter stressed that glaciers seem to wax and wane rapidly, pointing to the even more rapid glacial retreat during the end of the LIA around 1850 AD. (The coronal mass ejection known as the Carrington Event occurred nine years later).

Quaternary studies seem to be the most disputatious academically and Schluchter’s data add more fuel to that academic firestorm, but the reason for so much argument in this area of science points to something that the late Fred Hoyle noticed, that the argument continues because the proponents are using the wrong ideas, or theories.

More on that in future posts here.

Posted in Climate, Geology, Philosophy, Science | Tagged ,