Man dying in a baking hot desert

Climate change, global warming – call it what you want – isn’t really my beat. As I’ve said before, I’m not a climate scientist.

So, I can’t say whether the planet is warming; and if it is, then I don’t know whether or not we are causing it. When the Central banks start sticking their oars in, however, my spider senses go off the scale.

Central banks are the most crooked and ethically bankrupt organisations on the planet. If they really wanted to improve things for the world’s people, they could stop bleeding us all dry with their disgusting money printing schemes.

Central Banks getting in on climate change
Headquarters of the world’s greatest counterfeiting gang.

According to the Australian:

“The Reserve Bank, a member of an international group of central banks creating the various scenarios and financial models to enable stress testing, will also use the financial models to analyse economy-wide impacts of climate change and policies seeking to shift the nation to a low-emissions future.”

They are using ASIC to pressure large companies on climate change policies.

The Commonwealth Bank is in on the scheme, saying it will be pulling finance on any form of coal projects within a decade. Perhaps that is why we are now relying on companies like Adani, from Third World India, to mine our coal for us.

Indian Coal miners adding to climate change and the greenhouse effect
Why do we really need these guys to dig our coal up for us?

So, I’ll use this situation to ask a question that keeps bugging me about this “Greenhouse Effect.” I’m asking it, with the hope that someone knowledgeable about climate science can answer it for me.

I was fortunate enough to go to school at a time when science was taught without any Left-Wing sacred cows tagged on. It was just straight science – and physics was my favourite (it doesn’t seem to be on the list of school subjects in Australia anymore).

I still remember learning about the “actual” green house effect. Being in the UK, most keen gardeners had a greenhouse. They were popular because they allowed plants to grow much faster due to the increased temperature.

Those of you who stayed awake during your physics classes will remember that there are three types of heat transfer.

  • Conduction – which transfers heat in solids
  • Convection – which transfers heat in liquids or gasses
  • Radiation – which can transfer heat in a vacuum

Heat from the Sun arrives as radiation. It can therefore travel straight through a glass pane and heat the ground in a greenhouse.

The ground then heats the air, but the air is trapped as it cannot pass out through the glass by convection. The temperature of the air inside the greenhouse is therefore higher than that of the air outside.

The same thing happens to a car parked in the sunshine on a hot day.

How a greenhouse actually warms up compared to the Greenhouse effect

Simple right? And according to the Greenhouse gas theory, the Earth is experiencing the same effect with CO2 acting like a glass pane and stopping the heat getting out. In a few short years, we will all be cooking – or so they tell us.

But the Earth is not like a greenhouse. The Earth’s atmosphere is surrounded by a vacuum. It is not surrounded by more air.

So, heat can only come in by radiation, and can only leave by radiation, right? You can’t have convection (or conduction) in a vacuum.

OK, so different gasses have different heat conduction properties. I’m a welder so I know that (swap Argon for Helium in a TIG set and you need to lower the heat input because less heat is transferred).

Maybe even a trace gas would have an effect on the amount of radiation that can pass through it. Maybe, it is enough to have an effect.

But here’s the kicker. Let’s say that CO2 is acting as an insulator and reducing the amount of heat transfer radiating from the Earth, out into space.

If that were the case, then wouldn’t it be acting as an insulator and stopping radiation coming into the Earth from the Sun?

The difference with CO2 is tiny of course, so you wouldn’t be able to feel it yourself. But with water vapour, that difference is enough to have a noticeable effect.

Water vapour (in the form of clouds) is a much stronger insulator than CO2.

On a summer’s day, heavy cloud cover can reduce the air temperature by 15 degrees Celsius or more. On a winter’s night, low cloud cover can do the opposite.

So, what is the net effect of those insulating clouds in our atmosphere.

Since the Sun is an external heat source, you would think that increased cloud cover would have a cooling effect. With less heat coming in, it doesn’t matter that less heat is getting out.

So, if that small trace of CO2 in the atmosphere is acting as an insulator, surely, it would reduce the temperature of the Earth rather than increasing it. At worst, it would not have any effect – or am I missing something?

It is like putting one of those silver covers over the inside of your windscreen. They stop heat coming in and going out. The net effect, however, is to cool your car

Leave a note in the comments section telling me where I have gone wrong. Otherwise, I’ll be tempted to think that those shameless bandits running our banking system are using this as a scam to steal even more of our money.

Or is that just a conspiracy theory?