Chemtrails as an excuse to justify drug abuse [Archive] - Page 3

whitemajikman

07-31-2005, 05:33 PM

Curious. I searched thoroughly at Chemtrail Central for people threatening what Phelps says is occuring, and see nothing. Et in Arcadia Ego, I would contact the owner of the site, and let him know that a Jim Phelps aka Insurrectionchemistry at Arianna's is defaming character, and making false accusations of terrorist threats. If I can't find anyhing (I am a systems analyst for Unix, Linux, and OSX), then how would the FBI or HS find it.? As far as I can tell, talking about the government and drugs is protected by the First amendment, irregardless of what your opinion on them is. In fact, someone emailed me that Phelps threatened President Bush's life, and I have that also.

You Are Late In The Game Arcturus.......

My Simple Advice To You Is As Follows.........

Do Not Trust The Likes Of Jay Reynold's or ET.......Or AnyBody At C.T.C.......

That Site Was First Created With The Intention of Bringing The Chemtrail Phenomena To The Masses......

Which Was A Noble Cause...At The Time.

But What Happened Next Was Not ......

PROFIT BECAME MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE TRUTH.

C.T.C Is Now A SITE THAT PROMOTES PROFIT ABOVE TRUTH .

NOW LETS TALK TRUTH.

JAY REYNOLD's IS A LIAR.

SO IS ET......

I AM ONE OF THE MOST HATED OF THE CHEMTRAIL RESEARCHERS,BECAUSE I HAVE NO PROBLEM PLAYING THE DEBUNKER GAME AGAINST DEBUNKERS......OR AGAINST CHEMMIES IF THE NEED ARISES.

I USED TO CALL JIM INSANE.......

BUT THAT WAS BEFORE I TALKED ABOUT U.V. RADIATION ,DMS AND SULPHER CYCLES WHITH MANY MILITARY PILOT'S BASED OUT OF WAINWRIGHT, ALBERTA AND COLD LAKE ALBERTA........BOTH MILITARY BASES WHERE NOAA,WMO AND THE U.N. HAVE COLLABORATED TO USE CHEMTRAIL TECHNOLOGY UNDER THE GUISE OF WEATHER MODIFICATION EXPERIMENTATION.

I ALSO HAVE CHECKED INTO JIM'S RESUM'E.........WHICH IS IMPRESSIVE AND VALID.

ALSO ARCTURUS YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE SAME IF YOU SO CHOOSE........BEING A SYSTEMS ANALYST AND ALL........IT SHOULD BE VERY EASY .

IT WAS FOR ME.

AND NO I AM NOT A SYSTEMS ANALYST.

YOU SEE ARCTURUS JAY REYNOLD'S ENTIRE REPUTATION IS RIDING ON THE FACT THAT CHEMTRAILS ARE A MYTH AND A HOAX..........

SO DON'T PUT ALL YOUR EGGS IN JAY REYNOLD'S BASKET.

THE BEST ADVICE I HAVE FOR YOU....IS TO RESEARCH MOST OF THE SCIENCE OFF-LINE AND THATS BECAUSE ONLY ABOUT 3% OF THE VAST DATA IS AVAILABLE ONLINE.

OUR PLANET IS DYING.......

OR FOR JAY REYNOLD'S BENEFIT....IN TRANSITION ...........

WMM

Insurrectionchemistry

07-31-2005, 06:27 PM

This Arcturus character is a bigger liar than Reynolds. Arcturus the global dim star.

This one appears ultra militant and extreme. Must be another one of ET's druggy advocates that seem to infest CTC. Seems to be a real crooked bunch over there.

I have said all the Bush Dynasty needs to be put in jail. But never any words other than that involving due legal process. I tell the FBI the same thing.

I have said the claims on chemtrails causing droughts are false and cause additional risk to commercial aircraft.

Now somehow you seem to alter all those statements.

Alterations and fabrications that make them look like threats and intimidation for exposing CTC and others. Lets call the FBI guys and see who they come after.

Lies to federal officers are an instant crime, and they will put you in jail for that sort of thing. That goes doubly, when your whole intention is malicious and there is lots of that showing here.

Insurrectionchemistry

07-31-2005, 06:51 PM

WMM,

Yes indeed, WMM, you were at one time the record holder on being most vicious on Arianna's global warming and climate change discussions started by Halva. You were a most nasty pain and I hope you go in the other direction now with that same zeal.

Hey, why don't you connect up with Dave_S some and see if you can get him to visit the right places, so his quest can become a reality. Dave_S -- follow up. A visit to Canada is nice this time of the year.

You two need to learn to work together. And do it over emails---so Reynolds and malicious company can't interfere.

jayreynolds

07-31-2005, 07:38 PM

Hey, why don't you connect up with Dave_S some and see if you can get him to visit the right places, so his quest can become a reality. Dave_S -- follow up. A visit to Canada is nice this time of the year.
So, Jimbo is playing matchmaker helping whiteyboy and "deep shield davie" hook up..
Interesting.

Insurrectionchemistry

07-31-2005, 07:53 PM

Nothing wrong with DGS learning some of the deeper background on what all DS knew, and what played a role in perhaps depression.

DGS sounds responsible, and has the needs to know. He has your number, and that is a mark of higher intelligence here.

Nothing wrong with a little real gum-shoe research on chemtrails and climate change. It just won't hook up you, ET, or the other snake bellies.

Besides it is more direct and cost effective than doing all that useless chasing planes for samples and spectral data things of the toxic clouds over the US.

whitemajikman

07-31-2005, 07:54 PM

So, Jimbo is playing matchmaker helping whiteyboy and "deep shield davie" hook up..
Interesting.

Not really Jay....

It's the natural order of things.....

WMM

jayreynolds

07-31-2005, 08:17 PM

I guess you all found out that I did follow up on the threats to planes details, and now that follow up has complaints to FBI's ears about CTC supporting chemtrails causing droughts. CTC and a number of people over there are not being responsible, more like reckless.
Jimbo, what are you going to do about 'footsoldier?
She has admitted to being the sole author of one part of "Chemtrails Over America", and editing the whole document for accuracy.
http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm#coa

Now, just forget that the group of authors claims to include CIA and NSA people(is one of them 'footsoldier?) I would suppose she knows which ones were, or if they were just making things up like Jimbo.

Oh, what the heck, let's examine the claims she made about her fellow 'researchers':
"Researchers assigned to this project have diverse backgrounds and are trained in and associated with a variety of disciplines including electronics, communications and environmental engineering, general medicine, biomedical research, chemistry, government/political, NSA/CIA, and military theory and technology.

Anyways, 'footsoldier's' "Chemtrails Over America" includes the following statements:
"It is believed that a barium salt mixture, other chemicals, polymer fibers, and application of RF and other types of energy weapons in the atmosphere are the physical irritants that are either directly or indirectly, to some degree, responsible for the following:

1) Nose and lung bleeds (the latter including several reports from nursing homes of elderly dying from lung bleed outs, we believe being directly attributable to atmospheric aerosols);

2) Asthma and allergies;

3) Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) (fungus on the lungs in both infants and adults);

4) Flu, Bronchitis and Pneumonia (in epidemic proportions, with doctors commenting to their patients on the many weeks it sometimes takes to improve and the lack of effective antibiotics to treat, including reports of pets having the flu, whole families being decimated), meningitis (inflammation/infection of the brain);

5) Upper respiratory symptoms (wheezing, dry cough), including Pulmonary Distress Syndrome (PDS) (in newborns, infants and adults alike), Sudden Infant Death (SIDS), and increased nationwide reports of the sudden death of athletes (reported in the news media as having possibly been attributable directly to air particulates/pollution);

6) Fever and/or night sweats;

7) Deaths from black mold; black or red mold on food crops (farmers reporting pH changes of soil and water), in buildings and ventilation systems (including school buildings);

8) Arthritis-like symptoms and muscular pain (young and old alike, sometimes crippling, and in pets);

9) Gastrointestinal distress (young and old alike, and in pets);

10) Bladder and yeast infections (includes bed wetting, not just in infants but adults);

11) Extreme fatigue (young and old alike);

12) Sudden loss of hearing/deafness; ringing of the ears, dizziness (increasingly reported immediately preceding or after a storm or weather system);

13) Blurry vision / nervous tics after exposure to the air outdoors;

14) Dry/cracking skin and lips, rashes, sores and fungal infections, aging of the skin;

15) In women: heavy, prolonged menstrual bleeding;

16) Mental confusion/slow thinking and/or the feeling of mentally “being in a fog” (young and old alike, increasingly reported after actually being in heavy mists and fog banks); and

17) Autoimmune disorders (LUPUS, thyroid, Crohn's and Addison's Disease, Fibromyalgia/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Lyme disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis).

Chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere are producing atmospheric and ground conditions detrimental to human and animal health but favorable to the growth of harmful molds / fungus. These conditions are not conducive to good health. The soluble salts of barium, an earth metal, are toxic in mammalian systems."

"It is believed that barium salt, polymer fibers, and other chemicals in the atmosphere are the chemicals and physical irritants that are either directly or indirectly responsible, for the recent nationwide epidemic increase in cases of nose bleed, asthma, allergies, and upper respiratory symptoms including pneumonia. Chemicals illegally sprayed into the atmosphere are producing atmospheric and ground conditions detrimental to human and animal health but favorable to the growth of harmful molds and fungus. These conditions are not conducive to good health. The soluble salts of barium, an alkaline earth metal, are toxic in mammalian systems."

NOW, JIMBO. 'FOOTSOLDIER' IS TELLING PEOPLE THEY ARE BEING SPRAYED WITH POISON, AND ARE DYING BECAUSE OF IT.

WHAT THE HELL DID SHE INTEND PEOPLE TO DO WHEN SHE TOLD THEM THEY AND THEIR LOVED ONES WERE DYING BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING SPRAYED BY POISON?????

DO YOU CALL 'FOOTSOLDIER"S ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE???

ISN'T SUCH A LIE EQUAL OR WORSE THAN THAT YOU CLAIM IS BEING DONE AT CTC??????

SO, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT HER, JIMBO???

DOES THE GOOSE GET THE SAME AS THE GANDER, OR WILL YOU HOLD YOUR NOSE AS ONE LIES, WHILE BAWLING ABOUT THE OTHER????

Et in Arcadia ego

07-31-2005, 08:19 PM

Besides it is more direct and cost effective than doing all that useless chasing planes for samples and spectral data things of the toxic clouds over the US.

Jimbo says that hiking up to Canada & harrassing some pilots that'll say anything the 'crazies'
want to hear is more 'direct' than getting actual atmospheric samples or spectrograms..

Please regard my forum signature:

jayreynolds

07-31-2005, 08:39 PM

WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER, JIMBO???
Jimbo, what are you going to do about 'footsoldier?
She has admitted to being the sole author of one part of "Chemtrails Over America", and editing the whole document for accuracy.
http://home1.gte.net/quakker/documents/chemtrails_over_america.htm#coa

Now, just forget that the group of authors claims to include CIA and NSA people(is one of them 'footsoldier?) I would suppose she knows which ones were, or if they were just making things up like Jimbo.

Oh, what the heck, let's examine the claims she made about her fellow 'researchers':
"Researchers assigned to this project have diverse backgrounds and are trained in and associated with a variety of disciplines including electronics, communications and environmental engineering, general medicine, biomedical research, chemistry, government/political, NSA/CIA, and military theory and technology.

Anyways, 'footsoldier's' "Chemtrails Over America" includes the following statements:
"It is believed that a barium salt mixture, other chemicals, polymer fibers, and application of RF and other types of energy weapons in the atmosphere are the physical irritants that are either directly or indirectly, to some degree, responsible for the following:

1) Nose and lung bleeds (the latter including several reports from nursing homes of elderly dying from lung bleed outs, we believe being directly attributable to atmospheric aerosols);

2) Asthma and allergies;

3) Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) (fungus on the lungs in both infants and adults);

4) Flu, Bronchitis and Pneumonia (in epidemic proportions, with doctors commenting to their patients on the many weeks it sometimes takes to improve and the lack of effective antibiotics to treat, including reports of pets having the flu, whole families being decimated), meningitis (inflammation/infection of the brain);

5) Upper respiratory symptoms (wheezing, dry cough), including Pulmonary Distress Syndrome (PDS) (in newborns, infants and adults alike), Sudden Infant Death (SIDS), and increased nationwide reports of the sudden death of athletes (reported in the news media as having possibly been attributable directly to air particulates/pollution);

6) Fever and/or night sweats;

7) Deaths from black mold; black or red mold on food crops (farmers reporting pH changes of soil and water), in buildings and ventilation systems (including school buildings);

8) Arthritis-like symptoms and muscular pain (young and old alike, sometimes crippling, and in pets);

9) Gastrointestinal distress (young and old alike, and in pets);

10) Bladder and yeast infections (includes bed wetting, not just in infants but adults);

11) Extreme fatigue (young and old alike);

12) Sudden loss of hearing/deafness; ringing of the ears, dizziness (increasingly reported immediately preceding or after a storm or weather system);

13) Blurry vision / nervous tics after exposure to the air outdoors;

14) Dry/cracking skin and lips, rashes, sores and fungal infections, aging of the skin;

15) In women: heavy, prolonged menstrual bleeding;

16) Mental confusion/slow thinking and/or the feeling of mentally “being in a fog” (young and old alike, increasingly reported after actually being in heavy mists and fog banks); and

17) Autoimmune disorders (LUPUS, thyroid, Crohn's and Addison's Disease, Fibromyalgia/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Lyme disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis).

Chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere are producing atmospheric and ground conditions detrimental to human and animal health but favorable to the growth of harmful molds / fungus. These conditions are not conducive to good health. The soluble salts of barium, an earth metal, are toxic in mammalian systems."

"It is believed that barium salt, polymer fibers, and other chemicals in the atmosphere are the chemicals and physical irritants that are either directly or indirectly responsible, for the recent nationwide epidemic increase in cases of nose bleed, asthma, allergies, and upper respiratory symptoms including pneumonia. Chemicals illegally sprayed into the atmosphere are producing atmospheric and ground conditions detrimental to human and animal health but favorable to the growth of harmful molds and fungus. These conditions are not conducive to good health. The soluble salts of barium, an alkaline earth metal, are toxic in mammalian systems."

NOW, JIMBO. 'FOOTSOLDIER' IS TELLING PEOPLE THEY ARE BEING SPRAYED WITH POISON, AND ARE DYING BECAUSE OF IT.

WHAT THE HELL DID SHE INTEND PEOPLE TO DO WHEN SHE TOLD THEM THEY AND THEIR LOVED ONES WERE DYING BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING SPRAYED BY POISON?????

DO YOU CALL 'FOOTSOLDIER"S ACTIONS RESPONSIBLE???

ISN'T SUCH A LIE EQUAL OR WORSE THAN THAT YOU CLAIM IS BEING DONE AT CTC??????

SO, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT HER, JIMBO???

DOES THE GOOSE GET THE SAME AS THE GANDER, OR WILL YOU HOLD YOUR NOSE AS ONE LIES, WHILE BAWLING ABOUT THE OTHER????

Insurrectionchemistry

07-31-2005, 09:58 PM

Time to do some real science on DMS and DMSO. This to superceed and correct all the wild commentary from BC.

Report:
http://www.copernicus.org/EGU/acp/acpd/3/3869/acpd-3-3869_p.pdf

alternate:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:FZmkOJHaJ14J:www.copernicus.org/EGU/acp/acpd/3/3869/acpd-3-3869_p.pdf+DMSO+production+ocean&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

In this report, which was done down in Greece, one sees the mixing ratio for DMS and DMSO is around 1.66 or so. DMSO is the most highly produced derivative from DMS. It is a hygroscopic compound and rapidly associates with water. Since it is hygroscopic it makes for larger water particles than other materials. DMSO will track the DMS emission levels rapidly and follow one production method at night and another in the daytime.

Do take note of the extremely low production of sulfates compared to DMSO.

Take note of the night-day response acts like opening and closing a blind of clouds.

=============

http://www.csa.com/hottopics/dimethyl/overview.php

The Gaia Hypothesis suggests that the Earth (biosphere and more) functions as an organism to maintain homeostasis, to keep the planet fit for life.22 NASA used the fact that organisms actively change the atmosphere' s chemistry through their living processes to search for extraterrestrial life. DMS is part of the Earth's ocean-atmosphere feedback loop, a climate stabilizing mechanism, moderating temperatures on Earth. Sciare et al. found a direct link between sea surface temperature and atmospheric DMS over a large area in the southern Indian Ocean. They estimate that an increase in temperature would increase the atmosphere's DMS concentration and have a negative feedback on the original warming.23

The photic zone is a complex habitat where phytoplankton, although tiny in size, through their number and volume are critical to Earth's natural cycles. Phytoplankton activities have global consequences on atmospheric chemistry through their production of oxygen, are the base of most ocean food chains, interact in the global carbon cycle by using the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, and are a carbon sink through their sedimentation of carbonates to the sea floor. Microalgae also play an important role in mediating global climate through variations in DMS production and its influence on cloud formation.

===

The DMS concentration results from the combined effects of DMSP production and removal processes. DMSP is release by damaged phytoplankton cells due to physical stress (e.g. turbulence, zooplankton grazing or viral lysis) and subsequently transformed by phytoplankton and bacterial enzymes to DMS. Many bacteria have DMSP-lyase and are thought to play a significant part in converting the algal DMSP to DMS, while other types of bacteria consume the DMSP.9 Photochemical reactions and ultraviolet radiation can degrade DMS to further break down products, removing DMS. The rate of DMS flux to the atmosphere is primarily dependent on its concentration in sea water.

halva

08-01-2005, 12:53 AM

Halva,

WMM's turn around was governed by the simple fact that he went down to an airport in his region and asked some people the right questions, and they gave him some highly pertinent details. That is what caused WMM to turn on Reynolds. He went and asked and found. What he found proved for him that Reynolds was a liar.

This is the part of the story that everyone knows. What I was telling you about was another possible part of the story that I know but you do not.

Now if WMM can manage that logical of a discovery, it would seem that others could too.

That depends. It is not going to happen at this forum, not only because of the existing debunkers but because other reserve troublemakers are now streaming in, (as periodically happens when one has to do with Raynolds and company.) People who are interested not in doing or learning something useful to society and the environment but simply in gunning for you, as if that is the most important thing that needs to be done.

It would also seem that I can find a whole chain of Pacific Islands UVb data online, that should not be a problem either. I can tell ya you won't find a thing sitting in airport passenger terminals or with field glasses watching take off. Talking to the mil pilots is a different story.

I think the proper decorum requests for this forum were made clear to BC at the beginning. Those were not to plaster the list with an excessive number of questions. Not to plaster the list with tooo many cut and pastes that lead off into wrong areas of thinking. And if she could not refrain from doing that this thread should become BC Free.

You must have known when you decided to come back here that we cannot get rid of anyone from here unless that person wants to be got rid of, has got bored or whatever. Even you were suspended only temporarily.

BC just didn't pay any attention to that, even to the point of going "Ohh" and "Ahh" and other stuff to agg things on. It is come to the point of being just too much again and destructive of being able to get to the details of the mechanisms for the DMS effects, global warming dependence, and the associated factors.

I am offended of this level of arrogance and ignorance which suggest that this problem should be as simple as looking it up on some NOAA web page. Do we really want to take BC's tack that the Govt reports all. If they did, they'd have to fix it and pay for it. If they did, there would not be all these people asking questions on what is going on with all the hidden projects.

I think since you picked BC up here on Arianna's little house of discussions, that BC needs to be your baby and you can translate things for her over on your thread. So, lets take her up on that offer to be out of here and she can go play with you and you two can copy and paste and translate for her all you want. If there is something you think she needs to know, then you be the relay.

You are wanting to be the absolute ruler, and the only effect will be that the debunkers will stymie you again. It is a pity that you don't have enough self-knowledge to see that you have to get right out of the political arena and content yourself with being a 'resource person'. This is the role that Footsoldier plays and it is to her credit and honour. You would be less ineffective if you could follow her example.

I am not going to go away and play with BC, who in any case is not interested in playing with me.

I modify the proposal I made: it is not that WMM, BC and you should join FS, David S. and others at our closed forum, it is that WMM and BC should do so and that if we want to ask you something we will discuss it among ourselves and then send you a private e-mail. We will then post your answer at the forum.

That seems to be the least unviable arrangement. You are not going to be able to carry on any constructive debate here with anybody.

She didn't go by the simple requsts, so time for the next step.

This area should be BC free. Reason being, she is just as destructive, if not more-so than Reynolds and ET. BC is not an asset to chemtrials and GW discovery.

When it comes to this kind of statement of BC by Halva: "BC would be shamed into further self-improvement." It is past time for her to be gone.

Of course these extreme statements about BC have made it less likely that she will be co-operative and/or interested in my proposal we should have you as a 'resource person'.

The debunkers will now step up their campaign of harassment of you.

Think about the solution I have proposed, and whether there are any credible alternatives.

halva

08-01-2005, 01:10 AM

Wayne,

Refresh my memomry and send me a link (address) to the closed board.

Too many links in my favorites folders ;)

OK.

BC and WMM I suggest that you e-mail me also, and/or make some response here. We can still keep up a presence here at Arianna's, just not allow our agenda to be set by the disruptors.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-01-2005, 05:55 AM

Halva,

We have been through your ideas on this private list of yours that has free speech restrictions on not talking about the old world associations to matters like DMS. I said not interested in observing your limitations. I don't think anything has changed in that regard.

I also tell everyone, NO private Emails on this chemtrails and global warming topics. I've also told you this several times before. Reason, everyone learns the same----there won't be any favorites. You also won't be able to play any political games then either. I don't think anything has changed in that regard.

Some info on DMS / DMSO appeared just before this, so how about doing that trick of yours on reading only the non-debunk listings? Still looking to see if you can grasp the issues on ocean's dominant large particle cloud seeding mechanism that is affected by UVb. Until you can learn to deal with the science and the mechanisms on global warming, you're just hand waving. Not much changed there either.

My observed opinion on BC, is that she consistently appears to sabotage all the science discussions, which appears to do lots to help the Reynolds clan and slow down progress. So, since you picked her out, you deal with her ramblings. This zone needs to be BC free. We don't need another controlling version of Reynolds around generating misinformation and wasting my time in dealing with the damage she causes. She is more disruptive than Reynolds and you endose that. Not much changed there either.

So, guess what. I am going to facilitate in this zone. The DMS and DMSO science is out there and it was rather easy, without your sabotage person involved. There is a very logical and simple process for the natural order for those that care to look.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-01-2005, 06:31 AM

WMM and DGS, I would recommend you two communicate directly on Email. You two seem fairly bright, and that way things won't get too screwed up in pass throughs, middlemen, or politicizations.

DvdGStwrt

08-01-2005, 01:13 PM

Email as you wish.

Tomorrow I go in for surgery (nothing major torn meniscus with a cyst) I will be unable to check emails for a couple three days perhaps longer - depending on if I can crutch my way to my desk ;) but I will answer all soonest.

Cheers

David

foot_soldier

08-01-2005, 08:12 PM

Jay Reynolds is once again attributing to me things I have never said.

In other words he is knowingly engaging in libel.

For the record.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 05:19 AM

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/science/9808/05/plankton.yoto/

Scientists map evolution of phytoplankton

NASA's SeaWiFS Project studies the world phytoplankton distribution through satellite imagery

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 05:25 AM

http://eobglossary.gsfc.nasa.gov/Study/Polynyas/

SeaWiFS image of the Southern Hemisphere, September 1997 to August 1998. Red and yellow pixels show where there are high concentrations of phytoplankton, while dark blues and purple show very low concentrations of the microscopic plants. (Image courtesy of the SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center and ORBIMAGE. A new browser window will open.)

Phytoplankton taxa in the Ross Sea (Image courtesy of Arrigo et al.: Phytoplankton Community Structure and the Drawdown of Nutrients and CO2 in the Southern Ocean, 1999)

=======

P. antarctica and diatoms differ geochemically, too, in that diatoms don't take up carbon dioxide as efficiently as P. antarctica. In fact, the ratio of carbon uptake to phosphorus uptake for P. antarctica is nearly twice as high as that for diatoms. "Should the phytoplankton community shift from P. antarctica to diatom dominance in response to enhanced upper ocean stratification, the capacity of the biological community to draw down atmospheric carbon dioxide could diminish dramatically," Arrigo said in a recent article in the journal Science.

jayreynolds

08-02-2005, 06:21 AM

Jay Reynolds is once again attributing to me things I have never said. In other words he is knowingly engaging in libel.
For the record.

This is a direct quote from 'foot_soldier':

For the sixth time -- I copy-edited the first draft of the report and submitted one paragraph of my own regarding the ozone layer, which is, and always has been, my primary area of interest.

"The copy editor is expected to ensure the text flows well, that it makes sense and is fair and accurate, and that it will cause no legal problems for the publisher.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyediting

Jimbo is excoriating and even reporting to the FBI allegations at CTC that droughts are being caused by "chemtrails".

'foot_soldier' signed off as copy-editor on a bogus report('Chemtrails Over America") that claims people are being killed by planes spraying toxic chemicals.

The document "Chemtrails Over America" states:
"It is believed that a barium salt mixture, other chemicals, polymer fibers, and application of RF and other types of energy weapons in the atmosphere are the physical irritants that are either directly or indirectly, to some degree, responsible for the following:
-Sudden Infant Death (SIDS)
-increased nationwide reports of the sudden death of athletes
-Deaths from black mold
-elderly dying from lung bleed outs, we believe being directly attributable to atmospheric aerosols

There is no question that the document "Chemtrails Over America", which 'foot_soldier' has admitted acting as "copy-editor" for is FAR MORE PROVOCATIVE than merely blaming drought, since it is claiming that illegal acts are resulting in death.

Jimbo, do your duty and disassociate yourself from this person who has admitted to acting in concert with a criminal syndicate to make statements provocing others to make terrorist threats to shoot down airplanes.

'foot_soldier', you should be ashamed of what you took part in, and you should expose the others responsible for their parts in the hoax.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 06:44 AM

http://www.csa.com/hottopics/dimethyl/overview.php

DMSP degradation products (i.e. DMS and acrylate) may also act as deterrents to grazing by herbivores. These compounds are released from phytoplankton when they are damaged by grazing zooplankton (e.g. ciliates, tintinnids, copepods, fish and invertebrate larvae).10 Certain species of phytoplankton contain DMSP-lyase that quickly converts the benign DMSP to the unpalatable DMS and acrylate when the cell is injured. These sulfurous compounds that have been proposed to act as chemical defenses against consumption by zooplankton. In feeding experiments, Wolfe et al. found that zooplankton grazers, including protozoan herbivores, prefer to consume algae without DMSP-lyase.11

Some species of the larger ocean plants, the seaweeds, also contain DMSP, and ecologists are determining whether the compound or its breakdown products are a deterrent to herbivore consumption as well. Van Alstyne et al. surveyed Pacific seaweeds growing along the shores of Oregon and Washington, and detected DMSP in numerous green algal species and in one red alga.12 DMSP-lyase activity was found in Ulva fenestra and Polysiphonia hendryi, so these species have the enzyme to convert DMSP to DMS and depending upon the pH, either acrylate or acrylic acid. In laboratory feeding preference trials, sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus) were attracted to diets containing DMSP and avoided diets containing acrylic acid, except at the lowest test concentration. Acrylic acid appears to be a successful deterrent against the two sea urchin species tested, but it did not discourage the herbivorous crustacean Idotea from feeding.13

jayreynolds

08-02-2005, 06:47 AM

http://eobglossary.gsfc.nasa.gov/Study/Polynyas/

SeaWiFS image of the Southern Hemisphere, September 1997 to August 1998. Red and yellow pixels show where there are high concentrations of phytoplankton, while dark blues and purple show very low concentrations of the microscopic plants. (Image courtesy of the SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center and ORBIMAGE. A new browser window will open.)

Look, folks, Jimbo's ploy here is to "cherry-pick" data from a strong "el-nino". Phytoplankton recovered swiftly, however, when "la nina" conditions returned, as can be seen in this animation:
http://www.po.gso.uri.edu/%7Emaureen/sm_seawifs.html

The bottom line is that jimbo will never find aREAL oceanographer who buys into his claims about "chemtrails", in fact, I predict that he won't even try to convince one, and will stay as far away from them as possible. In effect, he will continue trying to lead the blind because those who can already see will not follow him over the cliff.
Jay

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 07:01 AM

There goes Reynolds attacking F_S again. Change of tac, when he seems to get cornered.
Reynolds always attempting to provoke division.

So, lets talk about F_S in real terms.

When the hints on UVb's relationship was dropped here as being related to global warming, F_S was the first to start looking and started posting the satellite predictions on UVb. The satellite modeling data is where the real meat of this global systems anaysis lies, as it is impossible to get answers with grab sample methods. All the advanced modeling is with satellite mapping and sensing.

I don't know who wrote the piece suggesting that chemtrails cause a list of toxic metals linked rise in illnesses, but those type problems do accompany the loss of DMS / DMSO / MSM in the atmosphere and food chain. Sulfur is a primary metals detoxifiation process using glutathione.

There will be some level of metals experimentation that will continue, but not involving commercial passenger planes.

F_S is the model of what CTC and the other drug minded nit-wits that seem to populate CTC should be.

F_S is probably the highest functioning person in the entire chemtrails / global warming public movement that I have seen to date.

F_S listens, reads, considers and she does the science. No matter how complicated.

I don't see this in many others.

I have zero doubt that F_S can and will zero in on the real problems and act accordingly.

F_S also has Jay Reynold's number, which is a sign of highest character.

On the other hand, I have every doubt that GOP minded Jay Reynolds, BC's conundrums, and drug policy CTC / ET will or can do the right things.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 08:03 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20050801/ts_csm/astorms;_ylt=AqlPifsWfHg.DMYDxSXfbfes0NUE;_ylu=X3o DMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-

As Planet Warms,
Storms Grow Stronger
By Peter N. Spotts
The Christian Science Monitor
7-31-5

For years, hurricanes and typhoons have served as poster children for the
hazards of global warming.

When simulated tropical storms churn inside the silicon universe of
researchers' computers, such cyclones grow in power, and sometimes in number as well,
as tropical temperatures increase. But when researchers have looked for global
warming's fingerprints on real tropical cyclones, the evidence often has been
inconclusive.

Now, one of the top researchers in the field reports that worldwide, these
storms are nearly twice as powerful today as they were 30 years ago. Global
warming has intensified the trend, exerting an influence stronger than he would
have believed even a few months ago, he says.

"I'd been thinking of a very modest response" of tropical cyclones to climate
change, "and what we're seeing is not so modest," says Kerry Emanuel, a
professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in
Cambridge, Mass.

The upshot: The 21st century could be a rough one for people who settle in
hurricane or typhoon-prone areas.

As a result, more communities should be drawing on the experience of states
such as Florida in devising building and zoning codes that can reduce damage
and fatalities, analysts say. For people who insist on building on vulnerable
barrier islands or along fragile coasts, insurance companies should be given a
freer hand in deciding who they will cover and what they will charge for
hurricane insurance, researchers and policy analysts say.

Strong start to hurricane season

Dr. Emanuel's results are appearing at a time when residents along the US
Gulf Coast and throughout the Caribbean are still recovering from what
forecasters are calling the most active start to the hurricane season on record. Since
June 1, six storms grew strong enough to merit names - from Arlene to Cindy to
Franklin. Three became hurricanes. Two reached a potent category four out of
five. According to forecasters at the National Hurricane Center in Miami,
hurricane Dennis, which reached category four on July 7, ranks as the earliest
Caribbean storm on record to reach that strength.

Some researchers argue that in practical terms, the allure to live near the
sea will do far more to boost society's risk from such storms over the next
several decades than any effect global warming could have on the storms
themselves.

Until he concluded this study, Emanuel says he was among that group. Now, he
says, global warming's impact on the storms may play a bigger a role than
previously believed in putting societies at risk, particularly in less-developed
countries. Dr. Emanuel's research, published Sunday on the journal Nature's
website, adds a fresh perspective to the discussion about the effects of global
warming on tropical cyclones, says Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the
National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.

Early on, concerns about the future of these storms arose based on computer
forecasts and basic theory. "Given the information we had at the time, the
results were overhyped a bit," Dr. Trenberth acknowledges. He notes that the study
doesn't have much comment on the effects of storm surges and torrential
rainfall that accompany land-falling hurricanes - factors far more destructive than
winds.

Still, Emanuel's approach "adds a new element," says Trenberth. It shows a
strong real-world correlation between the oceans' current warming trend - which
scientists have linked to the heating- trapping effect of industrial carbon
dioxide and other "greenhouse gases" - and the increasing power of tropical
cyclones.

Global warming vs. natural cycle

Other researchers have noted that this is more likely a natural period of
intense activity for Atlantic hurricanes. For example, William Gray, a specialist
in tropical meteorology at Colorado State University who pioneered seasonal
hurricane forecasts, notes that the region goes through swings in activity that
can span decades. He and his colleagues have noted that the US and its
southern neighbors have faced above-average hurricane seasons for the past decade
and is likely to do so for some time to come.

Emanuel acknowledges that such cycles are important. Depending on the region
under scrutiny, the impact of natural cycles such as El Niño, or the
multidecade cycles Dr. Gray observes, can swamp any global-warming signal the storms
may carry. But viewed worldwide, the signal starts to appear.

His latest finding, he says, grew out of attempts to answer a broader
question: Do hurricanes help drive large-scale ocean currents? These currents carry
tropical waters toward the poles, bringing warmth to middle and high latitudes.

Measuring a typhoon's punch

Initial calculations suggested that hurricane activity could account for up
to half or more of the driving force behind these currents. If so, a
significant long-term rise in tropical cyclones could push warmer water toward higher
latitudes. This could lead to warmer average temperatures at middle and high
latitudes than climate models currently project.

To answer the question, however, Emanuel needed to gauge a hurricane's or
typhoon's punch. So he built a measure based on sustained wind speeds over the
life of each storm and on each storm's duration. Combined, they reflect a
storm's total power output. Since the mid-70s, storm power fluctuated with
well-known natural cycles. But through this natural "noise," global warming's signal
emerged as an increase in strength that tracked rising temperatures in the
tropical oceans' surface waters.

The work certainly will not be the last word on the subject. Some researchers
are already raising questions about Emanuel's approach.

In one sense, however, there is broad agreement, notes Roger Pielky Jr.,
director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the
University of Colorado at Boulder. Whether scientists attribute the increased tropical
cyclone intensity to global warming or natural cycles, the trend is likely to
hold for at least a decade.

Looking at the costs to society from these storms, for every dollar in damage
from tropical cyclones the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
anticipates by 2050, the IPCC's demographic numbers suggest that societal changes will
add another $22 to $60 in impact. "If you're a planner, you're saying: We'd
better get ready," Dr. Pielke observes.

Et in Arcadia ego

08-02-2005, 09:08 AM

http://www.apfn.net/MESSAGEBOARD/04-27-05/discussion.cgi.19.html

National Security Whistleblowers Coalition

1. Anderson, Mick, Former Senior Advisor for Policy, DOJ,
2. Bittler, Thomas, Training Coordinator, TSA-DHS,
3. Carman, John, Former Senior Inspector, U.S. Customs,
4. Carson, Joe, Nuclear Safety Engineer, DOE
5. Chambers, Theresa, Former National Park Service Police Chief,
6. Costello, Edward J. Jr., Former Special Agent, Counterintelligence, FBI,
7. Cole, John M., Former Veteran Intelligence Operations Specialist, FBI,
8. Coleman, Marsha Adebeyo, Senior Policy Analyst, EPA,
9. Conrad, David �Mark�, Retired Agent in Charge, Internal Affairs, U.S. Customs,
10. Cruse, Larry, Army Intelligence Analyst, DOD,
11. Czarkowski, Carol, Navy-DOD,
12. Dew, Rosemary, Veteran Supervisory Special Agent, Counterterrorism, FBI
13. Dzakovic, Bogdan, Former Red Team Leader, FAA,
14. Edmonds, Sibel, Former Language Specialist, FBI
15. Ellsberg, Dan, Former Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (ISA), DOD,
16. Elson, Steve, Veteran Agent, FAA,
17. Fogg, Matthew F., Chief Deputy US Marshal, (INA),
18. Foley, Theresa, Special Agent, FBI,
19. Forbes, David, Aviation, Logistics and Govt. Security Analysts, Boyd Forbes, Inc.,
20. German, Mike, Former Special Agent, Counterterrorism, FBI,
21. Goodman, Melvin A., Former Senior Analyst/ Division Manager, CIA; Senior Fellow at the Center for International Policy,
22. Graf, Mark, Former Security Supervisor & Derivative Classifier, DOE,
23. Graham, Gilbert, Veteran Special Agent, Counterintelligence, FBI
24. Jenkins, Steve, Intelligence Analyst, NGIC, US Army
25. Johnson, Manny, Former Supervisory Special Agent, Counterterrorism, FBI
26. Kleiman, Diane, Former Special Agent, US Customs,
27. Kwiatkowski, Karen U., Lt. Col. USAF (ret.), Veteran Policy Analyst-DOD,
28. Larkin, Lynne A., Former Operations Officer, CIA,
29. Lewis, Linda, Current Emergency Program Specialist (WMD), FSIS- USDA
30. Lau, Lok, Former Special Agent, Counterintelligence, FBI
31. MacMichael, David, Former Senior Estimates Officer, CIA,
32. McGovern, Raymond L., Former Analyst, CIA,
33. Nunn, Sandy, Former Special Agent, US Customs,
34. Pahle, Theodore J., Senior Intelligence Officer (Ret), DIA,
35. Radack Jesselyn, Former Counsel, DOJ,
36. Rowley, Coleen, Retired Special Agent and Former Division Counsel, FBI,
37. Sarshar, Behrooz, Retired Language Specialist, FBI,
38. Spaulding, Kerry, Veteran Agent, FAA
39. Sullivan, Brian F., Special Agent, Risk Program Management Specialist, FAA,
40. Tice, Russ, Senior Intelligence Analyst & Action Officer, NSA,
41. Tortorich, Larry J., Retired Naval Officer, US Navy & Dept. of Homeland Security/TSA,
42. Turner, Jane, Veteran Special Agent, FBI,
43. Vincent, John, Veteran Special agent, Counterterrorism, FBI
44. Walp, Glenn, PhD, Former Office Leader of the Office of Security Inquiries, Los Alamos National Lab, DOE,
45. Wehrly, Dot, Veteran Special Agent (Current), FBI,
46. Whitehurst, Dr. Fred, (Retired) Supervisory Special Agent/Laboratory Forensic Examiner, FBI,
47. Woo, Robert, Former Special Agent, Counterintelligence, FBI,
48. Wright, Ann, Col. US Army (ret.); and Former Foreign Service officer
49. Wright, Robert, Veteran Special agent, Counterterrorism, FBI
50. Zipoli, Matthew J., Former Special Response Team (SRT) Officer, DOE,
__________________________________________________ ________

I'm just wondering why the all important name of Jimbo Phelps isn't on this list of government whistleblowers..I mean, Jimbo is a DOE whistelblower of the highest order, correct? Why has he not joined ranks with his peers?

It's lonely at the top, I guess.

Hey Jimbo, favor peanut butter & bannana sandwiches any?

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 02:43 PM

http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=2031

We exposed natural Antarctic microbial communities to ambient sunlight in incubation tanks at Davis station. Responses of the individual species of microbes to UV exposure varied from increased growth to mortality. However, near-surface UVB irradiances caused an overall decline in phytoplankton concentration and biomass. This UVB-induced phytoplankton mortality promoted bacterial activity and these bacteria, possibly together with the material from dead phytoplankton, fuelled growth of protozoa that were UV-tolerant. This study showed that exposure to UVB can caused a complex mosaic of changes in the microbial community. Different species of microbes exhibit differing sensitivity to UVB exposure. The extent of these changes was determined by the direct effect of UVB on the microbial species, and the indirect effect of UVB-induced changes on the microbial community. We concluded that exposure to UVB radiation can change the abundance, size, structure, palatability and nutritional quality of food within the food web. Results indicate that UVB radiation can change the structure and function of the microbial community, reducing the uptake of CO2 by phytoplankton and increasing the CO2 respired by microbes (see figure 1). Thus, ozone depletion is likely to reduce the capacity of Antarctic waters to act as a sink for atmospheric CO2, and exacerbate global climate change due to 'greenhouse' warming.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 03:28 PM

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050801.wocean0801/BNStory/International/

Mysterious Changes
Hit Pacific Coast
'The Bottom Has Fallen
Out Of The Coastal Food Chain'
The Globe and Mail
8-2-5

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Marine biologists are seeing mysterious and disturbing things along the Pacific Coast this year: higher water temperatures, plummeting catches of fish, lots of dead birds on the beaches, and perhaps most worrisome, very little plankton -- the tiny organisms that are a vital link in the ocean food chain.

Is this just one freak year? Or is this global warming?

Very few scientists are willing to blame global warming, the theory that carbon dioxide and other manmade emissions are trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere and causing a worldwide rise in temperatures. Yet few are willing to rule it out.

"There are strange things happening, but we don't really understand how all the pieces fit together," said Jane Lubchenco, a zoologist and climate change expert at Oregon State University. "It's hard to say whether any single event is just an anomaly or a real indication of something serious happening."

Scientists say things could very well swing back to normal next year. But if the phenomenon proves to be long-lasting, the consequences could be serious for birds, fish and other wildlife.

This much is known: From California to British Columbia, unusual weather patterns have disrupted the marine ecosystem.

Normally, in the spring and summer, winds blow south along the Pacific Coast and push warmer surface waters away from shore. That allows colder, nutrient-rich water to well up from the bottom of the sea and feed microscopic plants called phytoplankton.

Phytoplankton are then eaten by zooplankton, tiny marine animals that include shrimp-like crustaceans called krill. Zooplankton, in turn, are eaten by seabirds and by fish and marine mammals ranging from sardines to whales.

But this year, the winds have been unusually weak, failing to generate much upwelling and reducing the amount of phytoplankton.

Off Oregon, for example, the waters near the shore are 5 to 7 degrees warmer than normal and have yielded about one-fourth the usual amount of phytoplankton, said Bill Peterson, an oceanographer with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Newport, Ore.

"The bottom has fallen out of the coastal food chain, and there's just not enough food out there," said Julia Parrish, a seabird ecologist at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Seabirds are clearly distressed. On the Farallon Islands west of San Francisco, researchers this spring noted a steep decrease in nesting cormorants and a 90 per cent drop in Cassin's auklets -- the worst in more than 35 years of monitoring.

On Washington state's Tatoosh Island, common murres -- a species so sensitive to disruptions that scientists consider it a harbinger of ecological change -- started breeding nearly a month late. It was the longest delay in 15 years of monitoring.

Researchers have also reported a sharp increase in dead birds washing up in California, Oregon and Washington.

Along Monterey Bay in Central California, there are four times the usual number of dead seabirds, said Hannah Nevins, a scientist at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories.

"Basically, they're not finding enough food, and they use up the energy that's stored in their muscles, liver and body fat," Dr. Nevins said.

Fish appear to be feeling the effects, too. NOAA found a 20 per cent to 30 per cent drop in juvenile salmon off the coasts of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia in June and July, compared with the average over the previous six years.

And researchers counted the lowest number of juvenile rockfish in more than 20 years of monitoring in Central and Northern California. Fewer than 100 were caught between San Luis Obispo and Fort Bragg this year, compared with several thousand last year.

Scientists have seen some of these strange happenings before during El Nino years, when higher water surface temperatures in the equatorial Pacific alter weather patterns worldwide. But the West Coast has not had El Nino conditions this year.

As for the possibility that this is being caused by global warming, scientists are not so sure, since climate change is believed to be a gradual process, and what is happening this year is relatively sudden.

But "if we did see this next year, the notion that global warming plays a role in this carries more weight," said Nathan Mantua, a climate expert at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-02-2005, 04:41 PM

GSH is a sulfur dependent enzyme

Title
Role of glutathione and hepatic glutathione S-transferase in the biliary
excretion of methyl mercury, cadmium and zinc: a study with enzyme
inducers and glutathione depletors.

Author
Gregus Z; Varga F

Source
Acta Pharmacol Toxicol (Copenh), 56(5):398-403 1985 May

Abstract
The effect of hepatic glutathione (GSH) depletion and enzyme induction on
hepatic glutathione S-transferase (GST) activity, biliary excretion of GSH,
methyl mercury, cadmium and zinc was studied in rats. The GSH depletors,
methyl iodide and diethyl maleate, did not influence hepatic GST activity but,
depending on the substrate used, benzo(a)pyrene, phenobarbital, pregnenolone-16
alpha-carbonitrile (PCN) and trans-stilbene oxide (TSO) increased it by 16-33, 44-89,
53-97 and 208-279%, respectively. GSH depletors decreased (-88%),
benzo(a)pyrene and TSO did not affect, phenobarbital and PCN increased
(+113 and +149%) the transport of GSH into bile. The biliary excretion of methyl mercury,
cadmium and zinc was reduced by GSH depletors (-97, -74 and -93%), and enhanced by
phenobarbital (+139, +280 and +220%) and PCN (+150, +121 and +160%). Treatment
with benzo(a)pyrene and TSO did not affect the excretion of methyl mercury and
zinc into bile, but decreased that of cadmium. These results do not provide
evidence for the role of hepatic GST but strongly support the importance of
biliary GSH excretion in the hepatobiliary transport of methyl mercury, cadmium
and zinc. It is assumed that phenobarbital and PCN enhance the biliary
excretion of these metals by increasing the transport of GSH, the carrier molecule,
from liver to bile.

------------------------------------

Title
Effect of lipoic acid on biliary excretion of glutathione and metals.

Author
Gregus Z; Stein AF; Varga F; Klaassen CD Address Department of
Pharmacology'
University Medical School of P]ecs' Hungary.

Source
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol, 114(1):88-96 1992 May

Abstract
Several metals are excreted in bile as glutathione complexes' and their
biliary excretion is facilitated by increased hepatobiliary transport of
glutathione. The present study analyzed the effect of lipoic acid (LA; thioctic acid;
37.5-300 mumol/kg' iv)' an endogenous disulfide which can be reduced in
vivo to a dithiol' on the hepatobiliary disposition of glutathione-related
thiols and the biliary excretion of metals (10 mumol/kg' iv) in rats.
Administration of LA enhanced the biliary excretion of reduced glutathione in a
dose-dependent
fashion. Despite increasing glutathione output' LA (150 mumol/kg' iv) did not
increase' but rather decreased' the biliary excretion of methylmercury'
cadmium' zinc' and copper' which are transported into bile in a
glutathione-dependent
manner' as indicated by a marked reduction in their biliary excretion
after diethyl maleate-induced glutathione depletion. In contrast' biliary
excretion of
inorganic mercury' which is minimally affected by glutathione depletion'
was dramatically enhanced (12- to 37-fold) by LA administration. Following
inJection of LA' the concentrations of endogenous disulfides in arterial
blood plasma (e.g.' cystine' glutathione disulfide' cysteine-glutathione'
protein-cysteine' and protein-glutathione mixed disulfides) were
considerably diminished'
while the levels of endogenous thiols (e.g.' glutathione and cysteine)
were
increased. This finding indicates that LA' probably after enzymatic
conversion to
dihydrolipoic acid' can reduce endogenous disulfides to thiols. It
appears that
LA induces the transport of glutathione into bile by the temporary
formation
of dihydrolipoic acid-glutathione mixed disulfide' which after being
translocated into bile is cleaved to LA and reduced glutathione. Because
the glutathione
molecule thus transported into bile cannot complex metals at the thiol
group'
this might be the mechanism for the observed failure of the LA-induced
increase in biliary excretion of glutathione to enhance the
hepatobiliary transport
of metals that are transported into bile as glutathione complexes (i.e.'
methylmercury' cadmium' zinc' and copper). The observations also raise
the
possibility that endogenous dihydrolipoic acid' by forming a stable
complex with
mercuric ion' may play the role of a carrier molecule in the
hepatobiliary
transport of inorganic mercury.

----------------------------

Title
Biliary secretion of glutathione and of glutathione-metal complexes.

Author
Ballatori N; Clarkson TW

Source
Fundam Appl Toxicol, 5(5):816-31 1985 Oct

Abstract
As bile is the main route of elimination of many metals, a large number of
studies have been directed toward the characterization of the hepatobiliary
transport of both endogenous and exogenous metals. Although some
progress has been
made, we still know little of the basic mechanisms involved in the
hepatocellular uptake of metals, in their intracellular translocation
and metabolism, or
in their transport into bile. Our recent studies have focused on the last
step in the hepatobiliary transport of mercury, namely, the secretion of
the metal from liver cells into bile. The rate of secretion of methyl and
inorganic mercury into bile was low in suckling rats and rapidly increased to
adult rates
soon after weaning. These changes closely followed similar developmental
changes in the biliary secretion of reduced glutathione (GSH). When GSH
secretion into bile was completely inhibited, without changing hepatic levels of
GSH or mercury, mercury secretion was also completely blocked. mercury
secretion paralleled individual and sex-related differences in GSH secretion. At
the same time, the secretion of mercury was independent of bile flow, of the
thiol and mercury concentration gradients between bile and liver cells, and of
those between bile and plasma. Our results, therefore, indicate a close
coupling between
the secretion of mercury and that of GSH. These in vivo findings, along
with in vitro studies by others in vesicles isolated from the canalicular
membrane of
the liver cell, indicate a carrier-mediated transport system for GSH, but the
nature of the linkage of this transport system with mercury secretion is not
yet fully established. Our data and those in the literature are
consistent with the involvement of at least two steps in the movement of mercury
from liver cells to bile--the formation of a mercury-glutathione complex in the
liver cell, followed by the secretion of this complex through a process closely linked
to GSH secretion. The identification of GSH as an endogenous complexing
agent in the transport of metals between tissues and body fluids now permits
the design of therapeutic strategies aimed at exploiting this transport vehicle to
effect the removal of metals via physiological routes of excretion. The present
discussion considers the role of GSH in the hepatobiliary transport of metals.
In doing so, a brief review is given of current understanding of hepatic GSH
metabolism and transport.

Et in Arcadia ego

08-02-2005, 05:08 PM

Tweedle Dee's in rare form I see..

:rolleyes:

Insurrectionchemistry

08-03-2005, 10:04 AM

Interesting article on CO-2 dissolved in oceans temperature mechanism.

The Oceans are a major sink for dissolved CO-2, as well as carbon renderings from phytoplankton.

When UV-b damages the phytoplanton induced clouds, that form due to the DMS / DMSO emissions, that allows more of the Sun's heat to raise the temp of the surface water of the Oceans and this directly and highly affects how well CO-2 can get into the ocean storage. As the ocean's heat, the CO-2 levels rise.

The rise of CO-2 in the atmopshere leads to higher air temps and much more energetic storms. The effect is most predominant in the cooler waters near polar regions.

Again, the leading domino is the UVb damage to the phytoplanton that shuts down lots of the solar heat shielding for the oceans, so the surface water temps heat to higher than normal.

Some of the following articles speaks to this temperature dependent CO-2 solution in oceans effect, but is off base for omitting the UVb, phytoplankton, DMS / DMSO, and loss of cloud shielding over the oceans that means they absorb for heat.

Now, one might notice why chemtrails are aimed at causing lots of clouds in the polar zones, as this will make great efforts toward lowering the atmopsheric CO-2 levels. It all works just like the fizzies in a cola, keep it cool and the CO-2 stays in, heat it up and it comes out.

All these principle effects were mapped out at ORNL by myself in the mid-1980s and even all these global satellite imaging methods to track in real time what is doing what.

F_S gets another A+ for recognizing this as THE significant factor for CO-2. It also means she has more than enough information to zap Reynolds into nothing and become the leader of the chemtrails activism movement based upon knowledge and truth.

http://i-newswire.com/pr39907.html

Rising fossil fuel emissions may actually decrease the Earth's natural capacity to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, according to a newly published study--which means that the warming of Earth's climate could accelerate even faster than scientists have anticipated.

(I-Newswire) - The study, which was posted on-line this week by the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is based on a new computer simulation of the global carbon cycle developed by Inez Fung of the University of California at Berkeley and her colleagues, with support from the National Science Foundation ( NSF )'s climate dynamics program.

Fung and her coworkers put particular emphasis on modeling how carbon dioxide emissions affect the strength and capacity of the environment's natural carbon repositories, including plants, soil, rain, clouds, bacteria, phytoplankton and oceans. The researchers also used observations from the past two centuries to project the coming century.

Their major finding was an inverse relationship between the rate at which carbon dioxide is emitted from the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas, and the capacity of land and ocean to absorb that carbon dioxide: the faster the emissions, the less effective were the carbon sinks.

There are a number of reasons for this, Fung explains. In the ocean, for example, carbon dioxide from the atmosphere mixes fairly rapidly into the upper layers, down to about 100 meters or so. Then from there it slowly leaks into the deep ocean, where it will stay sequestered for centuries. But rising global temperatures warm the upper layers and make the ocean more stratified, so that the carbon dioxide has a tougher time mixing further downward.

On land, meanwhile, climate warming tends to dry out the tropics and reduce plant growth there, which in turn reduces the rate of photosynthesis and carbon uptake.

Taking all the effects together, says Fung, "our finding implies that carbon storage by the oceans and land will lag farther and farther behind as climate change accelerates with growing carbon dioxide emissions, creating an amplifying loop between the carbon and climate systems."

The team's model used the low range of temperature increases for the 21st century, predicting a rise of 1.4 degrees Centigrade for a "business-as-usual" fossil fuel emission scenario. Overall, said Fung, the model agrees with others predicting large ecosystem changes, especially in the tropics.

"Carbon exchange among Earth's atmosphere, oceans and land, and its relationship to climate, is one of the most challenging issues in environmental sciences today," said Jay Fein, director of NSF's climate dynamics program. "Fung's results have important implications for future potential climate changes: climate warming would increase the airborne part of carbon dioxide derived from human activities, and would in effect amplify climate change."

-NSF-

Media Contacts
Cheryl Dybas, NSF ( 703 ) 292-7734 cdybas@nsf.gov

Insurrectionchemistry

08-03-2005, 05:30 PM

Speaking of Oceanography types that know about this problems with the plankton / UVb, one such person was ---> Brian Downing Quig.

He was very active internet activist on this problem and others.

jayreynolds

08-03-2005, 06:03 PM

Speaking of Oceanography types that know about this problems with the plankton/UVb, one such person was ---> Brian Downing Quig.

He was very active internet activist on this problem and others.

"Brian Downing Quig"?
Whoever would use a name like that?
Is this a real person, or just another of your made-up friends?
Where did he get his degree in oceanography, and where does he display his claims?
Jay

PS, speaking of friends, where's your buddy Wayne&co?

Insurrectionchemistry

08-03-2005, 06:09 PM

Same kinda name as: "Milton William Cooper"

I suppose they are off working on handing you and your GOP pals your heads in a hand basket. (Figuratively Speaking) I don't chase them around like you do.

Reynolds is ruined.

Tell us about William Cooper again, wasn't he a Phoenix type.

Aren't you a big Phoenix GOP type?

DvdGStwrt

08-04-2005, 12:25 AM

William, again?

Around and around and around the wheels spin and we haven't (in 3 years) got so much as one foot further.

(sigh)

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 06:15 AM

Hi DGS,

Depends on if one wants to learn about all the crooked mess down in Phoenix, then you get about six feet deeper into seeing some problems.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 08:56 AM

Interesting news piece on ice shelf break up. Emphasis should be on UV-b and loss of sun shading / reflective clouds that allows cooler ocean surface temps that absorb and sequester more CO-2.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1429905.htm

Antarctic ice shelf collapse linked to global warming

The collapse of a huge ice shelf in Antarctica in 2002 has no precedent in the past 11,000 years, a study that points the finger at global warming says.

Measuring some 3,250 square kilometres in area and 220 metres thick, the Larsen B iceshelf broke away from the eastern Antarctic Peninsula in 2002, eventually disintegrating into giant icebergs.

By chance, a US-led team of geologists had gathered a rich harvest of data around the iceshelf just before the spectacular collapse, including six cores that had been drilled into marine sediment.

The cores contain the remains of plankton and algae embedded in layers of minerals, and their radiocarbon and oxygen isotopes provide clues about ice cover and climate change over the millennia.

Iceshelf thinned

The researchers, reporting in the British science weekly Nature, say since the end of the last Ice Age, some 11,000 years ago, the iceshelf had been intact but had slowly thinned, by several dozen metres.

Its coup de grace came from a recent but decades-long rise in air temperature, they say.

"The modern collapse of the LIS-B 1/8Larsen B iceshelf3/8 is a unique event within the Holocene," they write.

"The LIS-B eventually thinned to the point where it succumbed to the prolonged period of regional warming now affecting the entire Antarctic Peninsula region."

Balmy weather

The Holocene is the period of relatively balmy weather that followed the last Ice Age.

The research is the latest in a series of studies to sound the alarm about the effects of climate change in Antarctica, where the bulk of the world's freshwater is locked up.

The Antarctic Peninsula, which juts northwards out of West Antarctica, is considered a warming hot-spot.

Temperatures rising

Over the past half century, temperatures in the peninsula have risen by around two degrees Celsius.

In recent years, the peninsula has lost ice shelves totalling more than 12,500 square kilometres, equivalent to four times the area of Luxembourg.

Of the 244 glaciers that drain inland ice and feed these shelves, 87 per cent have fallen back since the mid-1950s, a British study published in April says.

Greenhouse effect

Global warming, also called the greenhouse effect, is caused by carbon gases mostly discharged by burning oil, gas and coal, that trap the sun's heat.

But Earth's climate also goes through natural oscillations of warming and cooling, resulting in Ice Ages and the milder interglacial periods in between.

The new study does not say that man-made global warming was responsible for the Larsen B's demise.

However, it refers to a steep rise in the temperatures over the past several decades, a phenomenon that climatologists concur was unleashed by fossil fuels.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 09:07 AM

UK's version

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/article303492.ece

Ice shelf collapse was biggest for 10,000 years
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
04 August 2005

The disintegration of the Larsen B ice shelf in Antarctica was an unprecedented event in geological history The disintegration of the huge Larsen B ice shelf in Antarctica was an unprecedented event in the past 10,000 years of geological history, a study has found.

Research by scientists from Hamilton College in New York, based on the scrutiny of six ice cores from the vicinity of the ice shelf, found that a collapse of this size had not happened during the period since the end of the last Ice Age.

The piece of ice which sheered away from Larsen B into the sea in 2002 was roughly the size of Luxembourg. The study, published in the journal Nature, shows that the ice shelf had been thinning over the millennia but went through a more rapid loss in recent decades, probably due to global warming.

In March 2002, scientists announced the Larsen B ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula had entered a phase of rapid break-up with more than 50 billion tons of ice spilling into the Weddell Sea to form thousands of massive icebergs. It had been known for many years that the ice shelf was thinning and in retreat but the speed of its final collapse astonished scientists. It took just 35 days for the Larsen B ice shelf to fall away completely after a Nasa satellite detected the first ruptures in the 1,255 square miles of ice at the end of January 2002.

Although the disintegration of ice shelves does not itself cause sea levels to rise (because they are already floating), their loss is thought to speed up the flow of ice from ice sheets on land, causing sea levels to rise. Larsen B's smaller neighbour, Larsen A, broke off in 1995 and other much bigger ice shelves nearby, such as the Ross and Ronne, are also considered to be at risk of disintegrating, according to studies by the British Antarctic Survey in Cambridge.

Researchers have measured a 2.5C increase in average temperatures in the Antarctic peninsula over the past 50 years and many scientists believe there is little doubt that this rise can be linked to global warming and climate change exacerbated by man-made pollution.

The latest study by a team led by Eugene Domack analysed oxygen isotopes and the microscopic plankton called formanifera, which are found in ice cores dating back 10,000 years. "We infer from our oxygen isotope measurements in planktonic formanifera that the Larsen B ice shelf has been thinning throughout the Holocene [from the present to 10,000 years ago], and we suggest that the recent prolonged period of warming in the Antarctic peninsula region, in combination with the long-term thinning, has led to collapse of the ice shelf," the researchers said.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 04:04 PM

http://coexploration.org/bbsr/classroombats/html/tempco2plot.html

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 05:41 PM

This Engineering type viewpoint, below, makes a good example of how to sort which came first----the higher temps or the CO-2. If one puts into the discussion below the issue of UV-b and DMS / DMSO being the prime factor in forcing the temp increase in the polar oceans temp., then things work fine. Note the addition of the H20 term as a GHG on the order of CO-2's GWP.

http://www.min.uc.edu/nuclear/htmfile/viewpointR.htm

Published in:
Chemical Innovation: Vol. 31 (#5: May): pp. 44-46; 2001
A journal of the American Chemical Society: Editor: Michael Block [myb96@acs.org]

Republished in:
Energy and Environment: Vol 12; pp. 351-355 (2001)

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/ci/31/special/may01_viewpoint.html

Robert H. Essenhigh
Does CO2 really drive global warming?
I don’t believe that it does.

To the contrary, if you apply the IFF test—if-and-only-if or necessary-and-sufficient—the outcome would appear to be exactly the reverse. Rather than the rising levels of carbon dioxide driving up the temperature, the logical conclusion is that it is the rising temperature that is driving up the CO2 level. Of course, this raises a raft of questions, but they are all answerable. What is particularly critical is distinguishing between the observed phenomenon, or the “what”, from the governing mechanism, or the “why”. Confusion between these two would appear to be the source of much of the noise in the global warming debate.

In applying the IFF test, we can start with the clear correlation between the global CO2 profile and the corresponding temperature signature. There is now in the literature the report of a 400,000-year sequence clearly showing, as a phenomenon, that they go up—and down—together (1). The correlation is clear and accepted. But the causation, the mechanism, is something else: Which is driving which?

Logically, there are four possible explanations, but only two need serious consideration, unless they both fail.

Case 1: CO2 drives the temperature, as is currently most frequently asserted; and
Case 2: Temperature drives the level of CO2.

Both appear at first to be possible, but both then generate crucial origin and supplementary questions. For Case 1, the origin question is: What is the independent source of CO2 that drives the CO2 level both up and down, and which in turn, somehow, is presumed to drive the temperature up and down? For Case 2, it is: What drives the temperature, and if this then drives the CO2, where does the CO2 come from? For Case 2, the questions are answerable; but for Case 1, they are not.

Consider Case 2. This directly introduces global warming behavior. Is global warming, as a separate and independent phenomenon, in progress? The answer, as I heard it in geology class 50 years ago, was “yes”, and I have seen nothing since then to contradict that position. To the contrary, as further support, there is now documentation (that was only fragmentary 50 years ago) of an 850,000-year global-temperature sequence, showing that the temperature is oscillating with a period of 100,000 years, and with an amplitude that has risen, in that time, from about 5 °F at the start to about 10 °F “today” (meaning the latest 100,000-year period) (2). We are currently in a rise that started 25,000 years ago and, reasonably, can be expected to peak “very shortly”.

On the shorter timescales of 1000 years and 100 years, further temperature oscillations can be seen, but of much smaller amplitude, down to 1 and 0.5 °F in those two cases. Nevertheless, the overall trend is clearly up, even through the Little Ice Age (~1350–1900) following the Medieval Warm Period. So the global warming phenomenon is here, with a very long history, and we are in it. But what is the driver?

Arctic Ocean model
The postulated driver, or mechanism, developed some 30 years ago to account for the “million-year” temperature oscillations, is best known as the “Arctic Ocean” model (2). According to this model, the temperature variations are driven by an oscillating ice cap in the northern polar regions. The crucial element in the conceptual formulation of this mechanism was the realization that such a massive ice cap could not have developed, and then continued to expand through that development, unless there was a major source of moisture close by to supply, maintain, and extend the cap. The only possible moisture source was then identified as the Arctic Ocean, which, therefore, had to be open—not frozen over—during the development of the ice ages. It then closed again, interrupting the moisture supply by freezing over.

So the model we now have is that if the Arctic Ocean is frozen over, as is the case today, the existing ice cap is not being replenished and must shrink, as it is doing today. As it does so, the Earth can absorb more of the Sun’s radiation and therefore will heat up—global warming—as it is doing today, so long as the Arctic Ocean is closed. When it is warm enough for the ocean to open, which oceanographic (and media) reports say is evidently happening right now, then the ice cap can begin to re-form.

As it expands, the ice increasingly reflects the incoming (shorter-wave) radiation from the sun, so that the atmosphere cools at first. But then, the expanding ice cap reduces the radiative (longer-wave) loss from the Earth, acting as an insulator, so that the Earth below cools more slowly and can keep the ocean open as the ice cap expands. This generates “out-of-sync” oscillations between atmosphere and Earth. The Arctic Ocean “trip” behavior at the temperature extremes, allowing essentially discontinuous change in direction of the temperature, is identified as a bifurcation system with potential for analysis as such. The suggested trip times for the change are interesting: They were originally estimated at about 500 years, then reduced to 50 years and, most recently, down to 5 years (2). So, if the ocean is opening right now, we could possibly start to see the temperature reversal under way in about 10 years.

What we have here is a sufficient mechanistic explanation for the dominant temperature fluctuations and, particularly, for the current global warming rise—without the need for CO2 as a driver. Given that pattern, the observed CO2 variations then follow, as a driven outcome, mainly as the result of change in the dynamic equilibrium between the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and its solution in the sea. The numbers are instructive. In 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) data on the carbon balance showed ~90 gigatons (Gt) of carbon in annual quasi-equilibrium exchange between sea and atmosphere, and an additional 60-Gt exchange between vegetation and atmosphere, giving a total of ~150 Gt (3). This interpretation of the sea as the major source is also in line with the famous Mauna Loa CO2 profile for the past 40 years, which shows the consistent season-dependent variation of 5–6 ppm, up and down, throughout the year—when the average global rise is only 1 ppm/year.

In the literature, this oscillation is attributed to seasonal growing behavior on the “mainland” (4), which is mostly China, >2000 mi away, but no such profile with that amplitude is known to have been reported at any mainland location. Also, the amplitude would have to fall because of turbulent diffusive exchange during transport over the 2000 mi from the mainland to Hawaii, but again there is lack of evidence for such behavior. The fluctuation can, however, be explained simply from study of solution equilibria of CO2 in water as due to emission of CO2 from and return to the sea around Hawaii governed by a ±10 °F seasonal variation in the sea temperature.

Con't

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 05:42 PM

Impact of industrialization
The next matter is the impact of fossil fuel combustion. Returning to the IPCC data and putting a rational variation as noise of ~5 Gt on those numbers, this float is on the order of the additional—almost trivial (<5%)—annual contribution of 5–6 Gt from combustion of fossil fuels. This means that fossil fuel combustion cannot be expected to have any significant influence on the system unless, to introduce the next point of focus, the radiative balance is at some extreme or bifurcation point that can be tripped by “small” concentration changes in the radiation-absorbing–emitting gases in the atmosphere. Can that include CO2?

This now starts to address the necessity or “only-if” elements of the problem. The question focuses on whether CO2 in the atmosphere can be a dominant, or “only-if” radiative-balance gas, and the answer to that is rather clearly “no”. The detailed support for that statement takes the argument into some largely esoteric areas of radiative behavior, including the analytical solution of the Schuster–Schwarzschild Integral Equation of Transfer that governs radiative exchange (5–7), but the outcome is clear.

The central point is that the major absorbing gas in the atmosphere is water, not CO2, and although CO2 is the only other significant atmospheric absorbing gas, it is still only a minor contributor because of its relatively low concentration. The radiative absorption “cross sections” for water and CO2 are so similar that their relative influence depends primarily on their relative concentrations. Indeed, although water actually absorbs more strongly, for many engineering calculations the concentrations of the two gases are added, and the mixture is treated as a single gas.

In the atmosphere, the molar concentration of CO2 is in the range of 350–400 ppm. Water, on the other hand, has a very large variation but, using the “60/60” (60% relative humidity [RH] at 60 °F) value as an average, then from the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers standard psychrometric chart, the weight ratio of water to (dry) air is ~0.0065, or roughly 10,500 ppm. Compared with CO2, this puts water, on average, at 25–30 times the (molar) concentration of the CO2, but it can range from a 1:1 ratio to >100:1.

Even closer focus on water is given by solution of the Schuster–Schwarzschild equation applied to the U.S. Standard Atmosphere profiles for the variation of temperature, pressure, and air density with elevation (8). The results show that the average absorption coefficient obtained for the atmosphere closely corresponds to that for the 5.6–7.6-µm water radiation band, when water is in the concentration range 60–80% RH—on target for atmospheric conditions. The absorption coefficient is 1–2 orders of magnitude higher than the coefficient values for the CO2 bands at a concentration of 400 ppm. This would seem to eliminate CO2 and thus provide closure to that argument.

This overall position can be summarized by saying that water accounts, on average, for >95% of the radiative absorption. And, because of the variation in the absorption due to water variation, anything future increases in CO2 might do, water will already have done. The common objection to this argument is that the wide fluctuations in water concentration make an averaging (for some reason) impermissible. Yet such averaging is applied without objection to global temperatures, when the actual temperature variation across the Earth from poles to equator is roughly –100 to +100 °F, and a change on the average of ±1 °F is considered major and significant. If this averaging procedure can be applied to the atmospheric temperature, it can be applied to the atmospheric water content; and if it is denied for water, it must, likewise, be denied for temperature—in that case we don’t have an identified problem!

What the evidence shows
So what we have on the best current evidence is that

global temperatures are currently rising;
the rise is part of a nearly million-year oscillation with the current rise beginning some 25,000 years ago;
the “trip” or bifurcation behavior at the temperature extremes is attributable to the “opening” and “closing” of the Arctic Ocean;
there is no need to invoke CO2 as the source of the current temperature rise;
the dominant source and sink for CO2 are the oceans, accounting for about two-thirds of the exchange, with vegetation as the major secondary source and sink;
if CO2 were the temperature–oscillation source, no mechanism—other than the separately driven temperature (which would then be a circular argument)—has been proposed to account independently for the CO2 rise and fall over a 400,000-year period;
the CO2 contribution to the atmosphere from combustion is within the statistical noise of the major sea and vegetation exchanges, so a priori, it cannot be expected to be statistically significant;
water—as a gas, not a condensate or cloud—is the major radiative absorbing–emitting gas (averaging 95%) in the atmosphere, and not CO2;
determination of the radiation absorption coefficients identifies water as the primary absorber in the 5.6–7.6-µm water band in the 60–80% RH range; and
the absorption coefficients for the CO2 bands at a concentration of 400 ppm are 1 to 2 orders of magnitude too small to be significant even if the CO2 concentrations were doubled.
The outcome is that the conclusions of advocates of the CO2-driver theory are evidently back to front: It’s the temperature that is driving the CO2. If there are flaws in these propositions, I’m listening; but if there are objections, let’s have them with the numbers.

References

Sigman, M.; Boyle, E. A. Nature 2000, 407, 859–869.
Calder, N. The Weather Machine; Viking Press: New York, 1974.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change 1995: The Science of Climate Change; Houghton, J. T., Meira Filho, L. G., Callender, B. A., Harris, N., Kattenberg, A., Maskell, K., Eds.; Cam bridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 1996.
Hileman, B. Chem. Eng. News 1992, 70 (17), 7–19.
Schuster, A. Astrophysics J. 1905, 21, 1–22.
Schwarzschild, K. Gesell. Wiss. Gottingen; Nachr. Math.–Phys. Klasse 1906, 41.
Schwarzschild, K. Berliner Ber. Math. Phys. Klasse 1914, 1183.
Essenhigh, R. H. On Radiative Transfer in Solids. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Thermophysics Specialist Conference, New Orleans, April 17–20, 1967; Paper 67-287; American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: Reston, VA, 1967.

Robert H. Essenhigh is the E. G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ohio State University, 206 W. 18th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210; 614-292-0403; essenhigh.1@osu.edu.

============

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/ci/31/i12/html/12box.html

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 07:15 PM

"All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." (Schopenhauer)

jayreynolds

08-04-2005, 08:22 PM

If one puts into the discussion below the issue of UV-b and DMS / DMSO being the prime factor in forcing the temp increase in the polar oceans temp., then things work fine.

But Jimbo, the author certainly hasn't "put into the discussion" anything about UV-b or DMS/DMSO. Will you write to him with a coherent outline of your claims and see what he says about them?

I think not, but if you have the balls the result would be very interesting.
Or, if you wish, just wrap up your grand conspiracy theory as well as he has, 2-3 pages, and I'll be happy to submit it for you.
Jay "still waiting after all these years" Reynolds

Insurrectionchemistry

08-04-2005, 09:23 PM

Ah come on Reynolds---stop playing dense.

Tell us about that corrupt system of Phoenix GOP politics you married.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-06-2005, 05:33 AM

http://www.science.org.au/nova/018/018key.htm

The ocean is a reservoir of carbon
Huge quantities of carbon are cycled between the biosphere (forests, grasslands and marine plankton), the atmosphere and the ocean. The ocean is the largest active reservoir of carbon, containing 50 times more than the atmosphere. Of the 6 to 7 billion tonnes of carbon released into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, 3 billion remain in the atmosphere, 1 to 3 billion are absorbed by the ocean and up to 2 billion appear to be absorbed by the terrestrial biosphere.
The Southern Ocean is one of the few areas of the world's oceans where surface waters are dense enough to sink into the deep sea. These waters absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and by sinking into the deep they effectively pump it out of the atmosphere. Without this process, the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would be much faster.

Understanding the global circulation and conditions under which surface waters sink into the deep ocean is therefore critical for scientists estimating the timing and magnitude of climate change.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-06-2005, 05:39 AM

http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=4267

The water masses formed in the Southern Ocean spread throughout the world ocean; in fact, the characteristics of more than 50% of the ocean volume reflect the ocean-atmosphere-ice interactions taking place in the Southern Ocean. When these new water masses sink from the sea surface, they carry oxygen and carbon dioxide into the deep sea, to ‘renew’ or ‘ventilate’ the sub-surface ocean. In the absence of dense, oxygen-rich water sinking near Antarctica, the deep ocean would have very low oxygen levels. In this sense, the Southern Ocean acts as the ‘lungs’ of the deep sea.

The water sinking in the Southern Ocean also carries carbon dioxide into the ocean. About one third of the carbon dioxide produced by human activities is accumulating in the ocean, slowing the rate of climate change due to the enhanced greenhouse effect. Of this, 40% is being sequestered in the Southern Ocean by water masses sinking from the sea surface as part of the overturning circulation. (The role of the Southern Ocean in the Earth’s carbon cycle is described in more detail in ‘The Southern Ocean and the carbon cycle: unfinished business’ ).

As well as gases like oxygen and carbon dioxide, the Southern Ocean absorbs heat from the atmosphere. The overturning circulation carries the excess heat from the surface down into the interior of the ocean, causing sea-level rise through thermal expansion. The formation, sinking and circulation of Southern Ocean water masses will contribute to the regional distribution and rate of sea-level rise in the southern hemisphere as the Earth warms in response to the enhanced greenhouse effect.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-06-2005, 05:46 AM

http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=4247

The Southern Ocean and the Carbon Cycle: unfinished business

Over the past ten years we have unravelled much of the major mystery that surrounded the role of the Southern Ocean in the global carbon cycle. We have made major advances in quantifying Southern Ocean uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide, and the role of Southern Ocean biological productivity in the transfer of carbon to the deep sea. But important puzzles remain.

Global carbon cycle models estimating the amount of anthropogenic carbon dioxide absorbed into the ocean from the atmosphere show a wider variation for the Southern Ocean than anywhere else. Even the observations are not in full agreement – atmospheric data suggests a smaller uptake than that estimated from ocean data. The effectiveness of biological processes in moving carbon from the surface to the deep sea is now recognised as high, but the reasons remain unclear, and thus the possible role of biological carbon transfers in past variations in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels remains unknown. Until these issues are resolved, we cannot predict the future of Southern Ocean contributions to the control of global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

Figure 1. For the 1980s, the oceanic uptake of anthropogenic CO2 versus latitude from a range of ocean carbon models.

The recent results from the Ocean Carbon Model Inter-comparison Project illustrate the range in model estimates of the oceanic uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Figure 1 shows the latitudinal flux of anthropogenic carbon dioxide into the ocean simulated by the models. The uptake peaks occur in the high latitude Southern Ocean, the equatorial ocean and the high latitude North Hemisphere. From the models, the global uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide for the 1980s varied between 1.5 and 2.2 gigatonnes of carbon (Gt C) annually which is about 30% of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions during this period. The Southern Ocean accounts for approximately 40% of the ocean uptake and 50% of the variability between the models. Observational analysis of the accumulation of anthropogenic carbon dioxide from repeat oceanographic measurements (Figure 2) suggests that the lower bound estimate of the uptake is more consistent with observations (Matear 2001).

Model-based predictions indicate the Southern Ocean is a major global sink for anthropogenic carbon dioxide, but sparse data and limitations in measuring techniques have made observational tests of the models difficult. High quality data now emerging from the internationally coordinated Joint Global Ocean Flux Study/World Ocean Circulation Experiment (JGOFS/WOCE) carbon dioxide ocean survey are providing information on how much and where anthropogenic carbon dioxide is accumulating in the ocean. These data are a vital test of the carbon dioxide uptake predictions from models and combined with atmospheric data are leading to a major improvement in our understanding of global and regional carbon budgets for both the oceans and land.

An example of the pattern of carbon dioxide accumulation along a hydrographic section in the Southern Ocean south of Australia is shown in Figure 2. The pattern of accumulation is intricately linked to the uptake shown in Figure 1 and to the large-scale circulation of the Southern Ocean. Old deep water that has a low anthropogenic carbon dioxide rises up in the offshore region around Antarctica and takes up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Some of this water mixes with other water before sinking to the seafloor, carrying with it anthropogenic carbon dioxide, to form Antarctic Bottom Water. The southern end of the section in Figure 2 is one of the few locations around Antarctica where surface waters become dense enough to sink to the seafloor and carry anthropogenic carbon dioxide.

A component of the water which originally welled up off Antarctica is carried north in the surface ocean. As the waters move north they exchange with the atmosphere taking up more anthropogenic carbon dioxide. Eventually, they contribute to the formation of Subantarctic Mode Water and Antarctic Intermediate Water. The mode and intermediate waters are subducted into the ocean interior taking anthropogenic carbon dioxide away from contact with the atmosphere. The formation and subduction of these water masses provide major pathways for anthropogenic carbon dioxide uptake by the ocean and help sustain the large uptake by the Southern Ocean.

Another major advance has been the recognition of the importance of iron to Southern Ocean ecosystems. Use of new measurement techniques and open ocean iron fertilisation experiments have shown that the lack of this essential micro-nutrient limits phytoplankton production in much of the Southern Ocean. Combining these observations with ice-core based estimates of increased dust supply during the time of the last major period of glaciation on Earth (the last glacial maximum, about 25,000 years ago), suggests that increased iron deposition from continentally derived dusts could partially explain the ~80ppm lower carbon dioxide levels of the glacial era in comparison to the pre-industrial era of a few hundred years ago.

Figure 3 shows a SeaWiFS ocean colour satellite image of a large ‘bangle’ shaped area, about 80 km across, of abundant phytoplankton in the Antarctic Treaty region south of Tasmania (near 61°S). The enhanced growth, known as a ‘bloom’, was artificially induced during the NZ-UK-Australian organized Southern Ocean Iron Release Experiment (SOIREE) by the addition of about 10 tons of ferrous sulfate heptahydrate over an area of around 55km2, and persisted for at least six weeks during which an eddy in the Antarctic Circumpolar Current stretched it out and curled it around into the bangle shape (Boyd et al., 2000).

Con't

Insurrectionchemistry

08-06-2005, 05:47 AM

Following SOIREE in 1999, additional iron fertilisation experiments have been carried out by US and European research consortiums, and more are planned. The primary goal of these studies is to advance understanding of the controls on phytoplankton communities and their role in the global carbon cycle, but they have also raised the possibility of intentional fertilisation for carbon dioxide management or even fisheries enhancement. Knowledge of marine ecosystems is still too rudimentary to permit the efficacy or risks of these ideas to be fully evaluated.

Iron limitation, cold waters, and low light levels (as a result of deep mixing driven by high winds) keep phytoplankton production at low to moderate levels in the Southern Ocean. But the amount of carbon transferred to the deep sea in settling particles appears to be surprisingly high – close to the global median, and higher than regions such as the North Atlantic where phytoplankton abundances are much higher. In Figure 4 the Southern Ocean results are shown in pink, and have all been obtained since 1997 by Australian, U.S., Japanese and French research groups.

Figure 4. Export flux of organic carbon: Northern and Southern hemispheres

The increase in Southern Ocean anthropogenic carbon dioxide contents has been determined from repeat observations along the WOCE SR3 section.

These carbon transfers to the deep sea are based on the particles collected in no more than a few square metres of sediment trap funnels, extrapolated to the millions of square kilo metres which make up the Southern Ocean. Each trap has a large funnel and a set of about 20 cups which rotate beneath the funnel at fixed intervals during a year long deployment. The traps and the yellow floats that keep them upright after deployment are strung out in a line of equipment 3 km long behind the ship before the final release of the 3 tonne mooring weight.

The ecosystem controls on these vertical particulate carbon transfers are not understood – we do not know which types of phytoplankton communities play the major role in this carbon ‘export’ from the top 100 metres of the sea, much less the role of the food-webs of the next 1000 metres in altering this ‘exported’ material. This includes the key issue of whether iron fertilisation leads to increased carbon transport to the deep sea, and not just increased surface phytoplankton production. No artificial iron fertilization has lasted long enough to assess export, and we are still developing methods (such as stable isotope compositions, biomarkers, and shell assemblages) to permit this possibility to be assessed from the deep ocean sedimentary records from the time of the last glacial maximum.

Planned future programs to further advance our knowledge of the Southern Ocean carbon cycle include:

• remeasurement of ocean carbon inventories to determine how climate variations affect atmosphere to ocean transfers,

• comparison of particulate carbon export between the iron-poor regions south of Tasmania and the relatively iron-rich regions near Heard, McDonald and Kerguelen Islands and

• development and deployment of automated moorings which can make biogeochemical measurements and collect biogeochemical samples to augment our growing but still very sparse observations from ships and satellites.

These programs are core objectives of the proposed Cooperative Research Centre for Antarctic Climate & Ecosystems, a proposal currently being evaluated for possible funding. If approved, this will take the place of the existing Antarctic CRC, due to wind up in June 2003.

Tom Trull,
Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre,

and Richard Matear & Bronte Tilbrook,
Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre & CSIRO Marine Research

References

Matear, R. J. (2001). "Effects of Eddy Para metreizations and Numerical Advection Schemes on Ocean Ventilation and Anthropogenic carbon dioxide uptake of an ocean general circulation model." Ocean Modelling 3: 217-248

McNeil, B. I., B. Tilbrook and R. J. Matear (2001) The storage and uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide in the Southern Ocean south of Australia between 1968 and 1996. Journal Geophysical Research, 106: 31,431

Orr, J. C., E. Maier-Reimer, U. Mikolajewicz, P. Monfray, J. L. Sarmiento, J. R. Toggweiler, N. K. Taylor, J. Palmer, N. Gruber, C. Sambine, C. Le Quéré, R. M. Key and J. Boutine (2001). "Estimate of anthropogenic carbon uptake from four three-dimensional global models." Global Biogeochemical Cycles 15: 43-60.

Insurrectionchemistry

08-06-2005, 06:06 AM

Now one can begin to see the crack-pot science that is being promoted by places like Chemtrails Central, or CTC. Drug promoting CTC's types can't do the science needed to understand Global Warming and its dominant factors and this leads many of them to make false claims on chemtrails activities.

CTC's and other's scurrilous claims that chemtrails cause droughts shows that these people don't know the main equations for climate change and how UV-b has a dominant impact on this effect via the Southern Oceans heating from phytoplankton loss and DMS / DMSO cloud seeding loss.

CTC is more about how to get clicks on this paying banner item on their web page and this comes via making these false and misleading claims on climate sciences and chemtrails. Swamp Gas, FL Kook, Thermit and others just want anything irresponsible promoted that gets more clicks on their paying banner

Many on CTC want to draw in drug promoting rather than deal with their errors and the additional risks to commercial aircraft that comes via promoting such bogus sciences and false claims. The atmosphere at CTC appears one that does irresponsible things to get more money from the banner. Perhaps this is how some of these drug oriented types get their funds, and help the Govt. conceal what is really going on with global shield and other climate control efforts.

This thread has seen two pominent examples of those that seem to want more drugs to numb their already deficient brain activity, than intelligently discuss the dominate factors of global warming and the chemtrail / global shield methods to mediate the impact.

Persons that claim chemtrails cause droughts appear to already be affected by drugs, because chemtrails induce more rain and clouds, not less. Chemtrails are a response to the UV-b factors that killed the production of global cloud systems that changed the rainfall patterns and caused global warming. UV-b driven and dominated Global Warming pushes rainfall patterns to higher elevations and species extinction factors follow this trend.

CTC is all about scurrilous claims and fabricated sensationalism that doesn't in any way fit the realities. CTC is an embarrassment to human intelligence. Degenerate persons from CTC appear to promote "We want more drugs legalized to numb our brains," so we can't think of these realities. And if you don't go along with our scams to fool the public and get more banner money, then we will harass those that expose us.