Wednesday, 29 June 2011

The weather is nature

    The earth is a sphere 25,000 miles in radius. To have any effect on the weather we really need to change the heat properties in or radius of 6,000 miles. But cities have an impact over 4 square miles. So to the weather systems, human cities don't exist.

    So the local carbon dioxide levels has no significance. We are interested only in the global carbon dioxide level. High school biology teaches that plants metabolise carbon dioxide, to form carbohydrates an surplus oxygen: the latter they excrete.

    Animals only evolved to metabolise oxygen and carbohydrates to form more carbon dioxide: because at the end of the Permian 90% of life on earth died as those two little carbon dioxide in the global air.

    Harvard University doing a worldwide mineral analysis and confirmed that since the little ice age ended, carbon dioxide had been static.

    The weather has changed, but obviously that is nothing to do the carbon dioxide. The late 20th century was in a natural warming phase, which I said in 2002 would end 2004.

    2005 the natural weather started cooling: hence nuclear power moved their PR from global warming to climate change. Which he is nuclear speak for global cooling. Obviously nothing to do with the static carbon dioxide level.

    What about all the academic papers written on global warming? Blaming it on increasing levels of carbon dioxide. When this was a biological impossibility. The orphans of those papers have no place in academia.

    They are writing fiction on behalf of nuclear power. As are the people writing about man made climate change: an oxymoron if there was any.

    Carbon dioxide is static around the globe. Nuclear power is fatal around the globe. All together 'Fukushima!'. That is what nuclear power does. Burning fossil fuels increases life on earth. And has no effect on the weather.

JonThm9@aol.com

Tuesday, 28 June 2011

Gas of life

    Outside of an ice-age biology converts all the carbon dioxide from the air into carbohydrates. The excess oxygen is excreted-oxygen is the greatest pollutant in earth history.

    The little ice age CO2 was at 4 ppm. Since then he's has remained at 2 ppm. Why do you think it is the global warming gas then?

    Because every time a scientist who first to this here erroneous fact nuclear power pays their money. Every time a newspaper publishes that erroneous date they also receive cash.

    Biology metabolises all the carbon dioxide. So in a warm period like it is today, carbon dioxide stays at 2 ppm. And the climate is controlled by regular solar emission cycles.

    Nuclear power did Chernobyl in 1986. Then last year it did Fukushima which may well turn out to be a worse nuclear incident: so they haven't learned. And the developed world is rejecting nuclear power.

    Which obviously exclude France.

Gas of life

Carbon fiction


By JonThm9@aol.com


I am getting frustrated that you never engaged with this argument: biology sinks all the available carbon dioxide to form new life on earth. There has been no increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide since the little ice-age ended. When carbon dioxide was at twice the present level.


The historically carbon dioxide does not coals global warming. Level rises falling natural global cooling. I do not been to insult you, but this is a rather important point.


The way nature uses the turbulent flow of high pressure water or steam to release helium and oxygen gases plus loads of heat means there is loads of nuclear fusion on earth going on all around and in us.


Not a word in two years! You are a clever guy. Engage.


Monday, 27 June 2011

Low carbon is so low life

    Biology's as carbon cycle teaches that plants metabolise all the available carbon dioxide to support life on earth. All the science professors who wrote papers on man having increased there carbon dioxide level in the air are doing nuclear PR; and obviously should not be in education.

    Harvard University has put on record in last August's New Scientist that minerals from around the world has shown no increase in carbon dioxide levels in the global air for 200 years.

    Rises in carbon dioxide are limited to city centres, and are transient. Once the air gets to above the countryside we are back to two ppm carbon dioxide. Local increases have no effect on the global weather systems.

    So man is burning of fossil fuels increases life on earth, but has no effect on the world's weather systems. Low carbon means low life. Nature uses the turbulent flow of high pressure water or steam to do free, non toxic molecular nuclear fusion.

    Turning regular water into helium and oxygen gases plus heat. No carbon dioxide, no plutonium.

    All this was known to science professors in 1986. They kept quiet, and took the money or came from nuclear power, via the funding agencies, to write spurious papers his intent was to kill.

    Fukushima shows you the idea. World's biggest repository of plutonium in the world is in Cumbria. When it goes up, England will be uninhabitable for ever.

Sunday, 26 June 2011

Climate impossible


We were all taught when were Xi that biology talk in all the available carbon dioxide it could, and produced free oxygen and carbohydrates. The limit to life on earth was available carbon dioxide. That is why animals evolved: to metabolise carbohydrates and the waste gas of plants-oxygen.


1986 Chernobyl happened. It was no accident, it is free is that nuclear power is a fatal technology. They spent a third of a billion pounds and 25 years trying to rehabilitate themselves. They invented the quack science of global warming: to say that carbon dioxide, for the first time in history, for no known reason would affect the weather.


They ignored the 1930s, which were the hottest year is on record. And there was very little man produced carbon dioxide then. In contrast the 1950s was a post war boom, with loads of carbon dioxide. But the harshest winters for 200 years.


The natural warming appears of the weather ended 2004, exactly as predicted by solar cycles. I wrote an Internet document about this 2002. It was a bad hurricane year. So they invented the quack science or climate change.


Since then there have been few hurricanes and loads of flooding. And global cooling. This stooges to nuclear power are trying to regain the carbon dioxide is now waiting a cooling the world. Whereas for 25 years they predicted he would dry and warm the world.


2010 I was in Brazil then Fukushima happened. Showing that nuclear power was still has fatal and toxic has ever. If we reprocessed the plutonium stores are Sellafield. It loses some much money. It desperately wants the our price to be higher. But will not stop it being fatal.


All the academics who have written papers assuming a rising level of carbon dioxide in the air have better produces high school biology. It is not possible. Harvard University has also have the mineral record around the world has shown no such increase over last two centuries.


Man-made global warming and climate change through increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the air are impossible.

Carbon lies

    Does carbon affect the climate? Hell no. That is all lie from nuclear power to scare the stupid. Reinforced by academics by a vested interest.

    The warm middle ages, warmest. In history. No man-made carbon dioxide to speak of. Seuls by 20 feet lower.

    1930s, the depression so little economic activity of carbon dioxide production. Warmer than today. 1938 the the the the warmest year on record. There carbon dioxide were being produced by burning coal. But nobody bothered.

    1950s, the post war boom. Lots of carbon dioxide, but the harshest winters this century. 1956 was a bad year. So carbon dioxide has no impact on the weather.

    Rightly so, as high school biology teaches that biology converts all the available carbon dioxide into extra life on earth. Harvard University published in New Scientist August 2010 that there have been no mineral record of a increase in free carbon dioxide for 200 years.

    Emissions have nothing. It is a level of carbon dioxide in the air that my time master. But he has remained static for 200 years. Animals only higher in the little ice-age. Through history carbon dioxide rises in ice-ages when there are fewer green plants are.

    Global warming was invented as idea after Chernobyl. To distract is from the fatal nature of nuclear power. 2010 Tokyo nuclear do Fukushima, showing that nuclear power is toxic, polluting and fatal 25 years after Chernobyl. Basically, it was has been.

    It only appears to make economic sense while they produce plutonium is stored at Sellafield. One decent earth tremor and the north of England is army in habitable for 100,000 years: that is the hidden uneconomic nature of nuclear power.

    By releasing additional carbon dioxide man has increased life on earth. It is quite possibly the best thing man kind has ever done for nature. There is no effect on the weather. No matter how mentally defective you are. There has been no change in the free carbon dioxide in the air for 200 years.

    All the academics who have written papers on man-made global warming or climate change should highly not be in education. Nuclear power is wasting its money by backing these people. Because nobody in the world believes them.

    Nuclear power is stuck: it is toxic, polluting, fatal and uneconomic. It will coals the total depopulation of Tokyo over the next 20 years. That is what nuclear power does. It ended my PhD. It ended my video reporting. It can't change its nature. It is a technology mankind should not allow on earth.

Moléculaire de l'énergie de fusion nucléaire

Masse de He = 1,661 '10-27 kg
«H = 1,674 × 10-27 kg
C2 = 1.5x1025 km à 1 bar
Ef = (2xHm-Hem) x1.5x1025) = 2.5305x10-2/per atome de H
Mf = (2xHm-Hem) = 1.687x10-27

Le E ≈ 0.02.5 Watts / H
Chaque jour, Hed = 5,125 ppm de Il est fait et a perdu à l'espace
La masse totale de l'air = 5,1480 × Am 1018 kg

Masse de H fusionné Hf = = 8.67x10 AmxMf-9
Total énergie de fusion = EF / Hf = 4.9x1015 Watts par jour
Donc pas mon 1023 Watts. Seuls 4.9x1015 Watts par jour. Ou 1.8x1018 Watts par an
180.000.000.000.000.000.000 Watts.
Ce n'est pas négligeable.
Jonathan Thomason JonThm9@aol.com T / F 0161 848-0416

分子核融合エネルギー
彼は=1.661の質量"10〜27キロ
"H=1.674×10〜27キロ
C21バールで=1.5x1025キロ
HのEF=(2xHm- HEM)x1.5x1025)=2.5305x10-2/per原子
MF=(2xHm-裾幅)=1.687x10- 27

E≈0.02.5ワット/ H
毎日HEDは=彼の5.125 ppmを作り、空間に失われる
空気アムの総質量は、=5.1480×1018キロ

Hの質量は、Hf= AmxMf=8.67x10- 9を融合
一日あたりの総核融合エネルギー= EF / HF =4.9x1015ワッツ
そうではない私の1023ワット。 1日あたり4.9x1015ワット。年間1.8x1018ワットまたは
180,000,000,000,000,000,000ワッツ。
The

Thursday, 23 June 2011

Nuclear power kills

    After Chernobyl nuclear power went into overdrive to suggest reasons why we should allow is fatal, polluting and uneconomic technology to exist on earth. Their best guess was to induce everybody to take psychotic drugs.

    They seized upon carbon dioxide; the limit to life on earth. Plants convert all the available carbon dioxide into plant bulk and oxygen. More carbon dioxide results in more plants and more animals.

    More carbon dioxide does not increase the level of or gas in the air. It increases life on earth. The air level is fixed by the efficiency of photosynthesis. So the level of carbon dioxide only increases in ice-ages.

    Nuclear power declare it caused global warming, as the natural weather was in a periodic warming phase: which is due to end 2004. There is no historical data suggesting this. They just used their money to pay academic stooges: who really have no place in education.

    2005, nuclear power hadn't got any new nuclear plants. There Switzerland was talking about getting six. It appears that not only nuclear power selecte through high school biology. 2005 the global weather started cooling: six years ago. This isn't a temporary blip. The natural weather cools and warms according to predictable solar cycles.

    So it will next warm in 2032. The same year Germany will close down the last of our superb power plants. Japan will end all nuclear power 2035 at the latest. Tokyo will fully depopulate because of Fukushima in 2030.

    2010 sore the most disastrous nuclear incident in the history of nuclear power: the industry is just not safe. It is subsidized by the panel of plutonium in Cumbria. If that is reprocessed, nuclear power loses money.

    So one decent earthquake and the whole of the north of England is uninhabitable for 1000 years. If you have and has now in Cumbria, sell it. Unless of course you are seriously suicidal.

Wednesday, 22 June 2011

Climate lies

    The level of carbon dioxide in the air is determined by the efficiency of photosynthesis. In a temperate period like we are coming out of, it is two parts per 1,000,000. A global level that has not changed in the last 200 years.

    Harvard University has confirmed; plant life has increased since the industrial revolution. That is where man is carbon dioxide went to. And this is known to every science academic on the planet.

    Some of whom have generated income from manmade global warming and climate change: both of which are based on the global increase in carbon dioxide. This was not possible. What we have seen is transient, local, fictitious rise is in this gas.

    So every academic paper on this subject area written over the last quarter of a century is the composition of a dangerous fantasist who should not be in education: carbon dioxide is the gas of life.

    Nature uses carbon dioxide to do biological molecular nuclear fusion: Google it. I have published volumes about how nature does nuclear fusion on the web.

    It is free, cheap and safe. Unfortunately it generates no carbon dioxide. But it turns water into a whiff of inert helium and the oxygen you breathe in. Manmade global warming was the fabrication of nuclear power, its stooges and the stupid.

    No we know her to do nuclear fusion from water, why would anyone be not certifiable do nuclear fission. Obviously a serious death wish for life on earth.

Tuesday, 21 June 2011

Bacteria do fusion

    I was told in 1982. That growing bacteria give off radiation. I was incredulous. But it was right. Bacterial mitochondria do biological molecular nuclear fusion:

CO2+3H2O->CH4+He+γ+3O+E1    E1=3x1023 Watts per gram of hydrogen

    All forms of MNF contribute 6x1028 Watts of heat to nature. I know this number may be run by a factor of 1000. But I am away folk singing and writing modern poetry. This means it may only be 10 times as important as direct solar radiation.

    There is no radioactive isotope which could undergo decay and emit nuclear radiation. MNF is the only possible source of such a radiation. It is responsible for the production of ozone above fields, at waterfalls with breaking waves. You breathe out methane and ozone as your heart does MNF.

    This process occurs at ten bars pressure and 3° C. The deep sea is the most important site for MNF in the world.

    To get the correct an issue number use E=mc2. Where m is a mass difference between two items of hydrogen and more atom of helium. c2 is 1 the.5x1025 Watts.

Climate gibberish

    The biggest problem with man-made global warming is at eight was formulated around a phantom rise in global carbon dioxide in the air. But photosynthesis pegs CO2 at two PPM today. Any additional carbon dioxide ends up as additional life. So there never walls any rise in carbon dioxide levels in the global air.

    The natural warming phase of the weather was due to end 2004. 2005 it was apparent to all world but the global climate was cooling-exactly what nature predicted. The climate is controlled by a predictable solar cycles, which have ½ wavelength of 28 years.

    So the world will next warm in 2032: book your holidays today.

    Global warming was inspired by Chernobyl. In 2005 nuclear power started pushing climate change. Which says that carbon dioxide must be doing something to the weather. No.

    A static level of carbon dioxide is self evidently doing nothing to the weather. All the academics who have written papers on global warming or climate change are dangerous fantasists; and should not be in education.

    Climate change is nuclear power are making global warming is wrong. Academics are still trying to make a case out for global warming. It never had anything to do with man. If they knew any science at all that would be evident.

    All the climate pundits should be nowhere near education. Somewhere there is a padded cell waiting for them.

Natural weather

The period 1976 to 2004 was at 28 year period of natural global climate warming. Sea ice is buoyant, so when it melts sea levels don’t change at all.
The natural climate has cooled from 2005. It will next warm 2032. The same year Germany will decommission is last nuclear power plant: nuclear power backed the discredited science of global warming after Chernobyl. I am waiting to see how they will react to Fukushima.
Nuclear power is toxic, fatal and polluting. If we take into account the cost of reprocessing the massive stock pile of plutonium in Cumbria it is under economic. This is the biggest stockpile of death in the world.
History shows that ice-ages are accompanied by decreasing world sea levels. There is no conceivable reason sea levels should rise. Any scientist suggesting that they might should not be in education.

Climate debate

Scientists have loads of trouble getting the weather right tomorrow. Yet they tell us they can predict the weather in years. It is all down to you driving a car, they say.
But through history carbon dioxide has acted in tension with the weather. In the warm middle ages man produced very little carbon dioxide, and it was warmer than today.
1930s again little carbon dioxide produce by man – the we were in the depression. The hottest days on record. In 1938. I have told them I was not alive there.
The 1950s were the post war boom. Loads of carbon dioxide. And scientists were easy predicting the next little ice-age. As the snowfalls every winter was excessive.
1976, hottest year since 38: this time we were in resession.
1986: Chernobyl-. Nuclear power straps round the discredited climate theories for an idea they could adopt to buy themselves a future. Scientists were predicting man made councils were going to call the earth. Ignoring the natural aerosols we call waterfalls.
2004: the world stopped warming naturally. Enter ‘climate change’; without ever admitting global warming was wrong. There has been no increase in free carbon dioxide for 200 years, as plants have converted all man is additional carbon dioxide into new life on earth.
It is beyond the powers all man to affect the level of carbon dioxide in the air. That is controlled solely by natural photosynthesis.
2010 Tokyo nuclear Fukushima: game over for nuclear power and this climate myths. The technology is dangerous, toxic, polluting and uneconomic. Cumbria has accumulated the biggest pile of man made plutonium in the world, hiding the are uneconomic nature of nuclear power.

Reclaim the deserts

6 inches beneath the surface sound there is a layer of soil from the Jurassic period. We can turn the sound to expose the soil, but establish regular windbreaks. We seed the soil with grassy. We use vacuum deceleration to produce massive amounts of pure water to irrigate the new grassland.
We do molecular first year, ten the next and 100 the year after. We return the grass lawns to what is now deserts: this area used to feed the Roman empire with grain in the days of the Roman empire.
Vacuum desalination produces pure water for less than the cost of mains water. I told Sheffield University this 10 years ago. They reacted by ended my PhD, as global warming was their big cash cow of academia.
The global climate cooled from 2005, hence the sudden change to man made climate change. Green plants around the world have converted man is carbon dioxide into additional life on earth. There has been no increase in there carbon dioxide levels in the air for 200 years.

Monday, 20 June 2011

Fix the climate

    The first six months of any PhD is taken up with deciding on your title and what you're going to study. I got as far as use it I would do 'better deceleration methods', and my PhD got pulled.

    The best reason you have given me is for studentship. Yet in last decade I have told the world how to do molecular nuclear fusion from water. Strangely enough, you have never commented on this idea. The validity an importance of the most important Energy System on earth. Which generates no carbon dioxide.

    On a totally separate track Harvard University has confirmed that terrestrial plants around the world have converted all man is additional carbon dioxide into new life on earth.

    This happens to be a basic tenant of life: you said in 2010 that scientists were quite prepared to study subjects they knew to be intellectually invalid. Providing them is available research funding.

    Global warming and later the contradictory climate change; are both based on a fictitious rise in carbon dioxide. That has never happened.

    Only a local, transient, fictitious rise over cities. Which has no importance for the world weather system. So it is already know that the weather farmers short term warming and cooling cycles of 28 years.

    This predicted the world was stop warming 2004: it did. Exactly on the natural schedule. With no change in global carbon dioxide levels for 200 years.

    Nature is powered by molecular nuclear fusion. Since a for the idea out there three years ago, the only reaction I have had from nuclear fission is to say that nuclear fusion is better.

    And that man does not yet know her to do it. But man has done the expansive steam cycle since the 18th century: and this does MNF.

    I was never taught this. I began working on it 2003. In 2008 professor argent suggested the name: as molecular fusion was two ambiguous. Of

    To date I have pumped out on the Internet the details of vacuum distillation: which has been known to science for nearly 200 years.

    People doing high pressure desalination had better adapt or they are out of a job. All the academics studying man-made climate change were too well to renounce it, although percent but employment.

    Useful work would be to investigate molecular nuclear fusion: the Energy System that will drive our futures.

JonThm9@aol.com

Vacuum desalination

    You site the can for five, over them bottom and cylinder in the sea, and connect a vacuum pump at the top. We draw out the water and initially all goes well. Through our viewing ports, we can see the water rising.

    Then at 6 feet the water begins to boil. So the water, stops rising and refined that we are evacuating air and water vapour. After 10 minutes we are trying out pure water: which we pump through a pipe to a reservoir.

    Its salt gets left behind, and exits the tower as brine water. Although it sea water is drawn in to replace it. We have decelerated sea water. This will even work at the dead sea. Anywhere on the sea you have access to pure water for ¼ the price of high pressure desalination.

    Farmers can he crect such a tower in 2 hours. And have access to limitless fresh water without paying higher charges two water company. A vacuum pumps are very cheap to run. In contrast high pressure plants are horrendously expensive to run.

    We have no filters to worry about. Portugal can make all the fresh water it desires, as can the Middle East. Israel can pump pure water out of the salt laden waters of the dead sea.

Sunday, 19 June 2011

Green power

    Green plants in light release helium and gamma wave radiation. They turn carbon dioxide and water into carbohydrates, but excrete oxygen and produce gamma wave radiation.

CO2+(2+n)H2O->C(H2O)n+He+3O+γ+E1

    C(H2O)n is the simplest carbohydrates. It is actually more complicated than this for me and suggests, but it illustrates the idea. Two hydrogens end up as one helium.

    So green plants do biological molecular nuclear fusion from water, taking in carbon dioxide to do so. The amount of life on earth is limited by available carbon dioxide.

    As Harvard University has observed, in the last 200 years free carbon dioxide in the air has also had, but crop yields have gone up by 15%. So mankind's additional carbon dioxide has been converted by the day into more life on earth.

    Global warming was such theoretical rubbish! The world has now been cooling for six years, and now the nuclear stooges lead on about climate change; no mentioning this contradicts global warming. Which was so so wrong.

    So all life on earth is supported by plants taking in carbon dioxide to do nuclear fusion. They release a whiff of helium and oxygen. None of the toxic waste produced by nuclear fission from uranium. Nature doesn't do nuclear fusion, too toxic.

    The simplest way for man to do molecular nuclear fusion is via a steam plasma tube: the human science pantheon already notes that gas plasma is give off nuclear radiation.

    The most exothermic ones are molecular hydrogen. Water the most accessible.

    It is four times as exothermic as nuclear fission. Totally non toxic and free. It destroys both the burning of fossil fuels and fatal nuclear fission.

Free Energy

    Every day nature uses the turbulent flow of high pressure water or steam to turn it into helium and oxygen gases plus loads of heat. And very low powered gamma wave radiation. This is molecular nuclear fusion.

H2O->He+O+γ+E1    where E1=3x1023 Watts/g H

    Every time man boils water, he does it. Including when you boil a kettle. So the gamma wave radiation is so low power it can't even pass through the metal side of the kettle. I was taught in the 1980s that boiler rooms, and turbine halls were not healthy places to hang around in. So commercial MNF generates higher power gamma wave radiation.

    Plants in the light use solar radiation to initiate MNF. This is why the crops produces helium gas and low power gamma wave radiation.

    A flame of fossil fuels does the same! Which is why it works or. If you look at all the conference, the final carbon dioxide and water molecules have more energy than the oxygen and hydrocarbon. If it was not for MNF, a flame of fossil fuels would take in heat, not generate eight.

    I did the calculations, and nature gets 6x1028 Watts of heat a day from this power source. And produces a whiff of helium and oxygen gases. The oxygen isotope is so nearly stable, it is totally safe to bring.

    So no carbon dioxide. No toxic fission waste. Safe, clean free power. From regular water. Heavy water does do more MNF, but waterfalls and the deep doing MNF from regular water. In fact, as the gamma waves produced results in deep water being heavy water.

Climate Change is controlled by the sun

    Plants breathe in carbon dioxide, combine it with water to form carbohydrates and oxygen: the oxygen they excrete.

    At the end of the Permian 90% of life on earth died, as those two little carbon dioxide in the air. Animals evolved to take in oxygen, combine it with carbohydrates and breathe out carbon dioxide. Life on earth only recovered when the balance between plants and animals was restored. And there was enough carbon dioxide for plants to flourish.

    At the end of the 18th century we were in the little ice-age. Man started releasing more carbon dioxide. Gradually the ice-age lifted. But for the next 200 years plants converted all mankind's additional carbon dioxide into new life on earth: this is high school biology, confirmed by my contact at Harvard University.

    By releasing carbon dioxide run his machines man has increased life on earth, but not had any affect on the weather. As there is no more carbon dioxide in the global air.

    Any increase over cities is transient and local, and as soon as the air flows over the countryside we are back to two parts per 1,000,000: its level for last 200 years. Since the ending of the little ice-age. These are predictable and former solar cycles.

    I don't wish to worry but the next one is overdue. Carbon dioxide the essential to biology and life. It is irrelevant to the climate: that was a lie from nuclear power, the stupid, or paid and the brain dead.

Saturday, 18 June 2011

The climate has nothing to do with CO2

    Biology converts all the available carbon dioxide into carbohydrates and excess oxygen. Since the ending of the little ice-age, than carbon dioxide was at 4 ppm, it has fallen and remained constant for last 200 years at 2 ppm.

    The climate is the result of predictable solar cycles. Carbon dioxide increases life on earth but has no effect on the weather.

    Professor Jones requires serious medical treatment.


 

JonThm9@aol.com

Friday, 17 June 2011

Save your money

    In today's 'I', I read they are planning to send up an aeroplane to measure atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. This is 25 years after Chernobyl, where nuclear power adopted the discredited theory of global warming.

    To saying that atmospheric carbon dioxide affected the weather. Trouble is, history does not support this contention. Biology converts carbon dioxide into carbohydrates. So the only time free carbon dioxide rises, is during an ice-age.

    So massive global cooling. In the last 200 years Harvard University has put on record that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have not changed. Crop yields have gone up by 15%.

    Shock horror! That is exactly what high school biology teaches. If you're reading this, then you were taught this fact when you were 11.

    The natural warming phase of the weather started 1976: when all the academics for a prophesising the next ice-age. It was due to end in 2004.

    With all man is additional carbon dioxide you would have thought the weather was still the warming. It started cooling 2005: exactly the natural cycle controlled by solar emission cycles.

    These are cyclical. There a short term cycles of four and seven years. Giving a composite short term climate cycle of 28 years. So carbon dioxide levels have not changed in 200 years, and the obvious he has been no effect on the weather.

    Nature is supported by the heat released by high pressure water or steam in turbulent flow. This does:

H2O->He+O+γ+E1

    Welcome to physical molecular nuclear fusion. Biology has its own version, that revels in the name of the carbon cycle:

CO2+3H2O->He+CH4+3O. ↑+γ+E1

    You knew this. You were taught in high school:

CO2+H2O-> carbohydrates+O

    Most of the methane is combined with water to form carbohydrates. So they can't been no build-up of carbon dioxide in the air. Unless you our brain dead you don't need a plane to checked this for you.

    The only date out there he's are local, transient, doctored levels in cities; in the rush hour. That has no bearing on the world's climate.

    Nature is powered by molecular nuclear fusion. Producing a whiff of inept helium and oxygen-that we breathe in. The helium is lost to space.

    In time we gain hydrogen and at lightning strikes get back our water. That is why he in the Permian there was more oxygen in the air. More molecular nuclear fusion was going on. So we also have lower sea levels.

    Today and sea levels are intention with terrestrial life: if you read above, carbon emissions have increased life. So they had decrease sea level. As there rain is tied up in plant and animal bodies.

    Meanwhile nuclear power did Fukushima. The developed world has declared from 2032 it'll not do nuclear fusion: here on obviously exclude France, which I do not consider a civilised country.

    One decent earthquake, and Paris is history. It will achieve what the Germans did not do.

JonThm9@aol.com

Carbon is life

    Plants take in all the available carbon dioxide from the air. They excrete oxygen, helium and produce gamma wave radiation and the the heat.

CO2+3H2O->He+CH4+O3+γ+E1        where E1=6x1028 Watts of heat/g of H

    Most of the methane ends up as carbohydrates. So all life is powered by molecular nuclear fusion from water. Producing no toxic plutonium. Only inert helium. Or four times more energy that is produced by nuclear fusion.

    Safe, clean, free nuclear fusion from water. Carbon dioxide is an in molecule to allow nature to do molecular nuclear fusion from water. That is why nuclear fission has invested a third of $1,000,000,000 in bad mouthing carbon dioxide: the gas of life.

    Or high temperature, high pressure fusion Taurus is are doomed to failure. As Professor Zimmerman pointed out we neither turbulent flow of hydrogen gas to produce nuclear fusion. At room temperature and pressure.

    Why bother? Nature already does molecular nuclear fusion from water. So does mankind's steam cycle. All the while carbon dioxide supports all life on earth, including yours.

No Climate Change

By JonThm9@aol.com

    Plants have turned all of the man's carbon dioxide into additional life on earth over the last 200 years. There has been no possible effect on the climate. There was never any global warming.

    Man made climate change contradicts that. But it also use wrong. The only academics interested in man-made climate change their object is to get are the research funding from nuclear power into its phantom PR.

    Burning fossil fuels increases life on earth. Has no effect on the climate. Which will next warm naturally in 2032: book your holidays today.

Tuesday, 14 June 2011

Death of Climate Change

    The natural weather has cooling and warming cycles of 28 years. The last one run at two 2004. Professor Jones from East Sussex likes to consider the year age 1995 to 2004. He is obviously a history professor.

    2010 cooled by more than the previous century have warmed. He likes to skate over the 1950s, when scientists were predicting the next ice-age. Also the interwar years, including the hottest year on record 1938.

    Heat at the ignores the warm middle ages. When there is virtually no man-made carbon dioxide, but temperatures were hotter than today.

    He also ignores the fact that green plants convert all the carbon dioxide into life on earth. So man has increased life on earth but not affected the weather: which will next warm 2032. Book your holidays today.

    I note this week that three different press articles have stated that primary school children are no longer top man-made climate change: because is biological rubbish. There has been no increase in carbon dioxide over last 200 years.

    I cannot imagine why anyone be worth wished to study at the University of East Sussex. They are nuclear stooges are not very bright.

The death of education

    Over the last 200 years man has contributed 20% to carbon emissions of nature. This represents a 0.1% per year. There is only two parts per 1,000,000 carbon no because a working dioxide in the air after the little ice-age.

    They're still is. There is 15% higher crop yields than there were in the 18th century. So burning fossil fuels increases life on earth. But can have no possible effect on the weather. This is called the carbon cycle, and he is a basic tenant of biology. Any rise in free carbon dioxide is not possible outside an ice-age. Which occur naturally, according to predictable solar cycles.

    Academics were so desperate for action research money they were prepared to ignore the basic laws of biology. Manmade climate change is their PR invention of nuclear power and its paid stooges: but there again, the world figure that matters five years ago air. After the world started cooling 2005.

    Now the only people who can afford to give university in the UK are the very rich and the very poor: in the latter case, the UK government will pay the tuition fees. A degree is to stop worth it.

    Any organization that is prepared to ignore of basic law of nature for its own financial advantage does not deserve to exist. The scientists who have written papers about a biologically impossible increase in carbon dioxide should not be in education.

    Harvard University put on record in New Scientist 2010, that there have been no global increase in carbon dioxide in the air. Yet 100,000 people around the world are earning a living from the fictitious science of man-made global warming.

    The weather is nothing to do with CO2. Carbon dioxide stimulates life on earth, it has no effect on the weather.

Carbon dioxide is life

    Plants convert all the available carbon dioxide into carbohydrates and oxygen. Animals evolved to combine the two, to produce more carbon dioxide.

    The limit to life is available carbon dioxide. They could never be a builder of this gas in the air due to man.

    Instead we do more life on earth and sea exercise of the carbon circuit. Man's chemical engines based life on earth. Have no effect on the weather.

    That was PR by nuclear power who do not do biology. They do not understand the carbon circuit. You not understand the climate. You are specialist in total lies.

    The funding agencies of Chemical Engineering very excited because here was aware together nearly limitless power. World governments have spent a third of $1,000,000,000,000 on this phantom science: only a third of a billion has come from nuclear power.

    Global warming was adopted by nuclear power in a natural warming phase of the world climate. Just as the world scientists were coming out of predicting the next ice-age.

    The world started cooling naturally 2005. I predicted this in 2002. So nuclear power now push man-made climate change. To say for the first time in history A non existent increase in carbon dioxide in the air will affect the weather in some way.

    As life experiments more water gets tidied are on land. So sea levels go down. Nuclear power have been predicting sea level rises since 1986: the year off Chernobyl. It hasn't happened.

    We get floods, scientists say it is climate change. The get local drouts, that's his climate change. No direct money is documented sea levels fall that will be climate change.

    All produced by an increase in free carbon dioxide that is a biological impossibility. We get an increase in life. No effect on the weather.

    So this is predicting man made climate change are raping engineering and physics. I have the engineering master's degree. I worked hard for it. They are devaluing it.

    To get out research funding. The planning agencies are meant to be super ethical. But they have no problem in taking research funding for nuclear power. And paying for totally spurious papers to be a reason.

    They need to have five there and ethical standards to themselves. And stop compromising science education. The only way to increase free carbon dioxide is to have an ice-age.

    Which is the result of solar cycles. Nothing to do with man. When I was in Brazil have the Rio festival Japan suffered Fukushima.

    Within 20 years the world's largest maker of city will be totally depopulate it. And Japan will suffer a massive increase in cancer rates: that is what nuclear power does.

    Japan will never recover from this tsunami: which was coals by natural volcanism. Just made a lot worse why nuclear plants being flooded.

    Windscale in the fifties, however nuclear incident coals by rerouting the water cooling system. Chernobyl 1986 blow of its reactor core, caused warmer water circulation problems.

    Fukushima 2010 was caused by flooding of being used fuel or two is cooling pit. He each releases more radiation than the last, according to the International Atomic Energy Authority And. Atomic energy hasn't fallen anything in 60 years.

    Only her to kill on a continental scale.

By JonThmn9@aol.com

Monday, 13 June 2011

Bad science

    After Chernobyl nuclear power tried to buy themselves a future by blaming the weather on carbon dioxide. Ignoring the fact that all life on earth is a result of plants metabolising carbon dioxide.

    The limit to life on earth is available carbon dioxide. Xi year old schoolchildren are taught that carbon dioxide is the gas of life. Nuclear power was of school up week, problem suffering from radiation burns.

    Nuclear power of the given for be biologically ignorant. They are fatal, polluting, and toxic murders. Fabricating scare stories is a waste of the evil.

    They invest a lot of money in academia: scientists know about biology is carbon cycle. Ignoring it is a sack of all life aims. Fabricating PR for nuclear power using their weather lies is inexcusable. Such people should not be in education at any level.

    2005 even nuclear power was forced to concede the world was not warming. So they gave us climate change. Reasoning the increasing level of carbon dioxide in the air must do something bad. So stupid.

    Biology has ensured that mankind's additional carbon dioxide has ended up as additional life on earth. There is no more carbon dioxide in the air today than there was after the little ice-age ended.

    Interestingly, free carbon dioxide rises in an ice-age. So obviously does not cause global warming. People who think it does are a serious need of medical treatment.

    Carbon dioxide causes life. Solar cycles cold weather. They are predictable. And the forecast the world was started cooling after 2004. 2005 the world ended its next 28 years cooling. It will next warm in 2032.

    Why then they'll be no nuclear plants operating in Europe. There might be a couple left in Japan. I doubt it. Nuclear fission is toxic, polluting and uneconomic: holiday in Fukushima or if you don't get the idea.

    Nature is supported by molecular nuclear fusion on water. Producing a whiff of helium and oxygen. In time we lose the helium to space and gain hydrogen. At lightning strikes we get back our water. Free and safe. No plutonium.

    No carbon dioxide, which is a shame as that boosts life on earth.

Total fiction

    I am an engineer, but like all scientists on this planet I have heard of their biology is carbon cycle. This says that plants take in carbon dioxide in the light. Combine it with water and produce carbohydrates and excrete the surplus oxygen.

    They also produce heat and gamma wave radiation: as photosynthesis is biological molecular nuclear fusion. Nature is powered by MNF. So years mankind's steam cycle. Whenever we boil liquid water we do MNF.

    The carbon cycle predicts that outside an ice-age free carbon dioxide in the air is linked to the efficiency of photosynthesis to take this gas in. In modern times this is two parts per 1,000,000.

    Worse still, a level that has remained static since the little ice-age: then it was twice the present terrestrial levels.

    Only local, transient increases in carbon dioxide or possible. Though probably not reproducible. Was the win circulates the air we are back to two ppm. This explains why and I found the air in New York as devoid of carbon dioxide as the air in the light district.

    Mankind's additional carbon dioxide has resulted in more life on earth. Tying up water in the local ecosystem: so mean sea levels have fallen. The climate over the earth is more temperate.

    The exact opposite of the changes hypothesised by nuclear power: who do Chernobyl and Fukushima. The most toxic industry allowed on earth today.

    Carbon dioxide is a limit to life on earth. It is the gas of life. And because there is no build up of carbon dioxide in the air only the brain dead think he can influence the weather.

    Academics are being duplicitous: they are quite prepared to publish scientifically impossible papers in the funding agencies will pay for it.

    In turn the funding agencies are totally ambivalent: as nuclear power will pay them for such phantom science.

    Burning fossil fuels boosts life on earth. And has no effect on the weather. Nuclear power kills pollutes and is toxic to all life.

Why live in Tokyo?

    It is a 30 kilometres from the worst civilian nuclear incident ever: according to the International Atomic Energy Authority everybody in that city is drinking bottled water and not eating local produce.

    In the age of the Internet there is no reason to loop in the world metropolises. People in Japan do not stumpy. 5% of the inhabitants of Tokyo will leave a year. So in 20 years nuclear power will have cools the world's largest metropolis to totally depopulate.

    As people leave, the exit will increase. So 15 years seems a good estimate. That is what nuclear power does. Carbon dioxide increases life on earth with no effect on the weather: that was the nuclear line by paid stooges and the stupid.

Sunday, 12 June 2011

Making fresh water

By JonThm9@aol.com

    This came out of my PhD at Sheffield University in 2001. Strangely enough, they didn't tell anyone. As extra plant growth fixes the erroneous science of global warming. Nature do that in 2005 though. The the man made climate change is a snappy name for natural weather. Harvard University has put on record that plants have ensured there has been no increase in carbon dioxide in the air since the ending of the little ice-age.

    So there never walls any man made global warming or climate change: that the world had already guessed that one. It was PR fiction by nuclear power who have blown up a nuclear plant 30 kilometres away from Tokyo. Tokyo is us drinking bottled water and waiting to die.

    If we erect an over them bottom tower sat in the sea, we can establish a vacuum pump at the top and formed out an endless supply of pure steam. We players against a metal plate after reservoir, and produce an endless supply of pure water.

    Ideal for irrigating dry lands all over the world. But if the those sat next to the sea. The sea water evaporates. So we extract pure steam, and salty brine the is at the base of the tower back into the sea.

    And this uses 18th century science to desalinate water, for ¼ charge of high pressure deceleration. Form and can establish their own low pressure tower, and have access to unlimited amounts of pure water.

    Ideal for drinking or irrigating plants.

Saturday, 11 June 2011

Climate Change against biology

    Climate change is opposed to all the biology we ever have allowed: plants and bacteria take in carbon dioxide, and excrete oxygen: the greatest pollutant life has ever known. They build carbohydrates.

    Animals evolved as there was too little carbon dioxide in the air: they ate plant bulk, and excreted carbon dioxide-the gas of life. It is outside man is power to alter the level of carbon dioxide in the air.

    That is a function of the efficiency of photosynthesis. Mankind's feeble emissions of carbon dioxide have served to increased life on earth. There is no more carbon dioxide in the global air than last 200 years ago: that is a biological impossibility.

    Manmade global warming and climate change are fiction by paid stooges on behalf of nuclear power: who did Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Friday, 10 June 2011

Limit to life

    Is available carbon dioxide in the air. Plants and bacteria convert this into additional life on earth. So as Harvard has pointed out global carbon dioxide has not varied in 200 years.

    The important were here is 'global'. Towns and cities are such a small proportion of the earth's surface they have no effect on the weather. Over cities we may get a local, transient rise in there carbon dioxide.

    I was in New York eight months ago, and the air outside the hotel in the morning air tasted just like the air in Cumbria. It was not super sharp, as you would expect air more carbon dioxide in to be.

    Nuclear power adopted the discredited idea of 'global warming' after Chernobyl: bargaining that there get new plants before the natural weather started cooling. Which was in 2004. This was 1986. The winter of 1982 had been hard, but from 1976 the global weather warmed naturally. At least in America or and the UK.

    Asia had its own long term weather cycles: that global warming was PR targeted at the UK and America.

    So what happened in 2005? The weather started cooling. 2010 was the coldest winter since 1983. But now the natural weather is in a cooling phase: so you ain't seen nothing yet.

    So the natural weather will be over cooler and calmer: which is a shame for climate change. Which proposes that carbon dioxide, for reasons not explained, with no historical backing, will make the weather more extreme.

    I was in America for hurricane Andrew. I thought the weather was a bit breezy. So the natural weather turns to the extreme. Over last five years Irish order is has been less extreme.

    The most dramatic weather events have been floods. In Australia and Asia. Global warming predicted a drier world with higher sea levels. But as plant life expands rain is tied up in plant and animal bodies. So we are going to see lower sea levels.

    Plants smooth out weather cycles. So we are going to see more temperate weather, with more life on earth. With no possible effect on the weather. As there is no more carbon dioxide in the global air.

    Then nuclear power does Fukushima. Nuclear power was already the least popular technology on the earth. Only people in serious need of a mental health section are going to advocate nuclear power.

    Particularly as we now realise nature does molecular nuclear fusion from water: hence their production of helium gas and gamma wave radiation where ever we have the turbulent flow of steam or high pressure water.

    My thanks here to Professor Zimmerman, for crystallising my initial thoughts on the area.

Nature does fusion

    Throughout nature there are high kinetic interactions of steam or high pressure water: this means the turbulent flow of hot smokers in the sea, reverse go waterfalls or the deep sea currents. Even your own heart gets in on the act as a plants biology around your body.

    This interaction is characterised by the release of heat, gamma wave radiation and production of helium and oxygen gases. We are saying the molecular nuclear fusion of water.

H2O->He+O+E1    where E1=1.5x1025 Watts

    Every day 6x1028 Watts of heat is produced this way. 10,000 times more heat than we get from direct sun light. A lot of MNF is a result of sunlight though. It is the most important Energy System on earth.

    It produces a whiff of helium and oxygen. The helium is lost to space unreacted. The oxygen we breathe in. The sun shines via atomic nuclear fusion, which is two murderers: it kills all life for thousands of miles.

    The kettle in your kitchen does safe molecular nuclear fusion. Which produces a lot of energy, but no death. And critically, produces no plutonium or toxic death. And it's free.

Monday, 6 June 2011

Natural fusion

Plants do biological molecular nuclear fusion:

CO2+3H2O+5O2->CH4+He+5O+γ+E1    where E1=1.5x1025 Watts per gram of hydrogen fused

The physical world does it more simply:

H2O+O2->He+O3+γ+E1

Each day the natural world gets 6x1028 Watts of heat from this source, for free. It goes on in the deep, in fields of green crops in light, at waterfalls, breaking waves, growing bacteria and animal blood systems including your own heart and arteries.

    This would allow the medical imaging of heart arteries with no radioactive source. This can be very important.

    The process takes in carbon dioxide. And produces no plutonium. Waterfalls produce a minuscule amount of strontium, though I have yet to see the details here.

    Man is steam cycle has been doing it since the 18th century: which is why power generation turns to use a steam turbine.

    Steam engines do it: though they insist are burning fuel. They could use some of the generated power to generate electricity. And uses electricity to drive microwaves. So produced the same apple power with no carbon dioxide production.

    I told Sheffield University 2001, that replacing a cooling tower with a helical turbulence heat exchanger would have reduced fuel burn by a factor of nine, for no cast. That was before I knew about molecular nuclear fusion. It now looks like he would totally replace any fuel burn other than starting up the plant.

    The area I find most interesting is your own beating heart does MNF: which is why you breathe out helium and methane, though you don't breathe in any helium. A life person also liberates gamma wave radiation, obviously been no nuclear fission. Therefore your body has to be doing nuclear fusion.

    Power plants liberate dangerous levels of nuclear radiation. As do water boiler rooms. Nature is driven by MNF. So at these five densities it is totally safe: you will leave to be aged 70, irradiated by your heart every day of your life.

    So power with no plutonium of carbon dioxide: plants take in all the available carbon dioxide, so there never has been a rise in the level of this gas globally. The levels of our cities are transient and two why known to have any impact on the weather.

    Plants use of membranes around their photosynthetic organ, to enrich the water. So heavy water does do more MNF. But regular water will do MNF. Nature is powered by it.

    The and so should we be: we have been using molecular nuclear fusion for over 200 years. Without realizing its.

    There is no reason on earth did you toxic, expensive, polluting and fatal nuclear fission: that is bomb technology from the Second World War. We should left it there.

Sunday, 5 June 2011

Phantom science

    There were many problems we've global warming: not least that when the totally natural solar cycle indicated the us climate should cool, it did. Exactly on schedule.

    The trace of carbon dioxide in the air was always insufficient to have any effect on the climate. 2ppm is just two little. That was the free industrial level.

    That was still the level in the countryside. Only in towns and cities are there any transient rise to under 3 ppm. When I ensured nuclear power has realise this, the transient higher in New York City of 3.7ppm, was mortified by 100, and five added. So we got 375ppm. This figure never had any effect on the real global of carbon dioxide in the air.

    For London the rationale value was 2.7ppm. Again this is massaged to 275ppm. This has no relation to reality, not even in London's City.

    Sheffield man is a had a rush hour value of 2.4. Strangely enough, this figure was never published. Instead it was pretended that the 375 figure had meaning to Sheffield.

    There are a lot of hills around Sheffield. Even the rush hour value might have struggled to get over 2ppm.

    So the whole global warming debacle did not concern itself with global date are for carbon dioxide in the air. If it happens, every biologist in the world would have confirmed that outside an ice-age the level of this gas was fixed at 2ppm.

    To pretend they global volume was any higher was the highest level of academic dishonesty even imaginable.

    We then get on to the problem that carbon dioxide has no effect on the world climate. Nuclear power waived its money and pretended the science here was established.

    The science here was totally phantom. The only way to raise the level of carbon dioxide in the global air is to arrange an ice-age.

    Historically the climate has moved into a mission to carbon dioxide, not totally disconnected. Nuclear power and its paid stooges were not interested in fact. They have dreamt up the phantom science of global warming and were not prepared to brook any argument.

    Then in 2005 the world climate cooled. Nuclear power had invested ¼ billion dollars are fiction of global warming. World governments had invested ¼ trillion dollars.

    It was their last hope for a future. Nuclear plants are replaced every 25 years: if you don't want a Fukushima or Chernobyl to occur. So they dreamt up man-made climate change.

    To saying that carbon dioxide would affect the weather in some bad way: details to be decided on, depending on what actually happens.

    Big problem; global carbon dioxide is fixed at 2ppm: so what has happened to all of carbon dioxide emitted by man is machines? Plants have converted it into new life on earth.

    Every successive day there are more plants to take in carbon dioxide. Those plants will be eaten or burnt, but new plants will be waiting to take in there carbon dioxide, the gas of life.

    Japan has abandoned its nuclear power schemes. Germany has declared it war ended its in 2022. The UK and the U.S. will build no plants, and the U.S. will sop other countries building and.

    The original intention of nuclear power plants was to build plutonium for nuclear bombs. So America must stop other countries adopting nuclear power, or we will all end up dead.

    Nature uses high pressure water or steam in turbulent flow to do molecular nuclear fusion. Producing helium and oxygen gases, plus four times the heat of nuclear fission.

    For free. With no plutonium. Nuclear power is dead. Which is what it wanted for us all.

No build up

    Since the little ice-age green plants have taken in carbon dioxide to do photosynthesis. Leaving only 2ppm carbon dioxide in the evening air around the world. Cities have are transient higher levels of carbon dioxide, but after the rush hour we are back at 2ppm.

    Unless you rewrite the biochemistry of photosynthesis they can't be any more carbon dioxide in the global air. Carbon emissions are a joke by nuclear power. And actually represents the extra life mankind is establishing and maintaining on earth. You were told they had summoned to the weather.

    As there has never been a build up in carbon dioxide in the air caused by man, they can never have been any effect on the climate coals by carbon dioxide. Not so for nuclear power.

    Nature does not do toxic nuclear fission. Man has to concentrate the radioactive isotopes and use an engineering plant which cost billions of dollars to construct to turn some of the mass into heat. Abnormal heat.

    There never was any global warming: it is a natural climatic cycle. We are in a cooling phase now. The only people who still believe in Global Warming are nuclear power. The only individuals introducing abnormal heat into earth's ecosphere.

    Meanwhile nature is powered by molecular nuclear fusion: turning water into helium and oxygen gases with a lot of heat. Totally non toxic, safe and clean. No carbon dioxide and no plutonium.

    The easiest way for man to do this is a via a steam plasma tube: as I told Sheffield University 2008.

Saturday, 4 June 2011

Engineering research

    The way academic work functions is that academics mindlessly study an idea for 20 years, and then the idea is disproved. The all then study the new idea.

    Global warming gave them 25 year study. It ran into trouble 2005 when the world began cooling. Academics counted with 'this is only a short term effect' but after six years it was obvious to the world that carbon dioxide had no impact on the world climate.

    2007 I made a video pointing out that biology's carbon cycle produced a natural sink for carbon dioxide: it states 'the limit to life on earth is available carbon dioxide'. So no more carbon dioxide we added, and the more life we will get.

    Harvard University confirmed this: as my contact there was in medicine, and I sent him copies of the link to the video. They found, there have been no increase in free carbon dioxide for 200 years: the since after the little ice-age had ended.

    An ice-age are the only way to raise carbon dioxide in the air. So it is linked to global cooling, it does not cause global warming. As there have been no change in this gas in the air for 200 years, there can have been no effect on the climate.

    What we have observed is natural weather. Which has 28 years cycles. If you want to see today's weather Google the same date in 1983: 28 years ago. Don't look at the BBC. There weather forecast for today have buried by 6° C in the last four days. They have no idea.

    So the carbon cycle destroys man-made climate change. There has been no increase in global carbon dioxide: the only increases we have seen are transient local rises over cities. Was this air moves to the countryside we are back to 2ppm.

    All the academics will now study how the fluid flow of molecular hydrogen does nuclear fusion: power with no toxic waste, and no carbon dioxide. That is the gas of life, by emitting more carbon dioxide we just increased life on earth.

    Molecular nuclear fusion from water is free and clean. It does:

H2O+O2->He+O3+γ+E1    E1=1.5x1025 Watts of heat

    All the authors like James Lovelock obviously failed high school biology. Do not buying their books. There is cheaper ways to light a fire.

Friday, 3 June 2011

Global impossibility

By JonThm9@aol.com

    200 years ago air man produced little carbon dioxide. Animals produced is cold. There are 20% of the carbon dioxide in the air is produced by mankind's machines. This equates to 0.1% additional carbon dioxide every year.

    Like me you're not remember the 1950s. In Bolton there was 2 feet of snow at Christmas. All the scientists were easy predicting the next ice-age. These were the post war boom years. The all the coal burning gave a peak of of carbon dioxide output.

    Going further back the internal war years were marked by a lack of economic activity, and the hottest summer as this century. Who ever thought up man made global warming do not know their history.

    They also did not know their biology. A rise in free carbon dioxide is impossible outside an ice-age, says green plants evolved 670,000 years your. Every science professor on the planet knows this.

    And yet some other published papers on global warming. They were not even determined in 2005 when the world climate moved into a natural cooling phase. Man made climate change is baseless fiction from nuclear power: it can't happen.

    Carbon dioxide increases life on earth, he's has no effect on the global climate. I heat all this to Sheffield University 2001, they ended my PhD. Since then I have learned a lot about the carbon cycle and the impossibility of organic carbon changing the weather. Carbon emissions are a measure of how much new life mankind has created on earth.

    Such individuals should not be in education at any level. Even as a primary school milk monitor, they are unsuited. There has been no builder of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere: in any case, that has no historic effect on the climate. Carbon dioxide goes up in an ice-age.

Increasing life on earth

    At the end of the cretaceous life hit a brick wall: there as there was insufficient carbon dioxide for plants to grow. They could only metabolise the carbon dioxide in the day, they had released by day life of.

    90% of life on earth died. It got out of this problem the animals evolved to metabolise oxygen, the waste gas of plants, with plant bulk animals had eaten. Man's chemical engines turn oxygen into carbon dioxide; while doing molecular nuclear fusion. Google it, I have published 800 pages on the subject on the Internet.

    Burning fossil fuels returns life to the ecosphere that died at the end of the late Jurassic, with the dinosaurs. There was 60% more life on earth they are various today. So burning all the fossil fuels would return of life to hire was in late Jurassic.

    60% more life on earth, syl was 65 metres lower, temperature range from the equator to pole 10° C less than it is today. Earth's golden time.

    As man has released more carbon dioxide plant life on earth has increased. So the next air there are more sinks for the gas. This was confirmed by Harvard 10 months ago. There has been no increase in the evening carbon dioxide in the air. As photo synthesis has converted all the extra carbon dioxide into more life on earth.

    Plants have excreted more oxygen, and there is more food, so animal life has also increased. My PhD on global warming ended 2001. Presumably when professor Zimmerman realised that global warming was PR fiction by nuclear power.

    2005 the world moved into a natural cooling phase of the global climate. So nuclear power started pushing man-made climate change: without ever admitting man-made global warming has always been unsubstantiated fiction.

    In the last 200 years mankind has increased the available carbon dioxide by 0.1% a year. This is a 10th of the natural gyrations of carbon dioxide in the year. Nature has not even noticed we have evolved.

    That was an erroneous three and from Soylent Green. So it was right my PhD got ended. It was so wrong I was never awarded my PhD for disproving the feasibility of global warming.

    It was always a biological impossibility. Just think of the killed a third of $1,000,000,000,000 research money could have done. The diseases we could have cured. The famines we could have prevented.

    Instead we are paid physicist and engineers to strut around talking biological impossibility years for massive, undeserved salaries

The plants take in CO2

    In the light, plants combine carbon dioxide with water to produce carbohydrates. And excrete the surplus oxygen. Animals only evolved to metabolise oxygen, combine it with plant bulk and produce more carbon dioxide.

    The biggest mass extinction of prehistory at the end of the cretaceous, when there was in sufficient carbon dioxide in the air. 90% of life on earth died; and life I only got over this problem when animals evolved.

    At night plants take in oxygen and combine it with carbohydrates: they do animal respiration when there is no light. Animals do it all day and night. So the gas you need to breathe in, is the waste gas of plants. The worst pollution in earth's history.

    670,000 years ago green plants evolved. They are better at sinking carbon dioxide than bacteria are. Bacteria still take in carbon dioxide in the deep sea. The limit to life on land and in the seas around the earth is available carbon dioxide.

    Man is machines have contributed 0.1% extra carbon dioxide in the last 200 years. Prehistory shows that the only way carbon dioxide levels in the air can rise is if we have an ice-age. The cover the sea, and have fewer growing plants on the land.

    Harvard university put on record last August in New Scientist magazine, that there have been no increase in carbon dioxide since it fell to the little ice-age of the 18th century: down to the present global level of 0.2%. Likely over cities we may get transient levels higher. But as soon as the air moves over the countryside we are back to 0.2%.

    Local, transient increases in carbon dioxide had no effect on the weather. As cities are such a small area of land surface of the earth. I note that all academics in England collect the local value fabricated by New York in the rush hour.

    They need to sit for a lecture course on statistical lying techniques: that's what the fabric. Five the New York is. A Scientific lie. All science professors know that it is biologically impossible for carbon dioxide levels in the air to rise outside of an ice-age.

    Five years ago there were 180,000 people earning their living from man made climate change. Which was their PR concoction of nuclear power after the world started cooling, naturally, 2005. Man made climate change is fiction.

    There has been no increase in levels of that gas in the air for 200 years. There is no historic data set on carbon dioxide warming the climate. All doing anything to do climate. The levels of or gas rise in an ice-age. When the weather is both colder and calmer.

    And big problem for nuclear power: carbon dioxide does not affect the climate, it increases life on earth. It is the green gas.

    Nature produces heat lyre the turbulent flow of high pressure water or steam. It produces helium and gamma wave radiation. So it does molecular nuclear fusion. We can power at engines using the system, and burn no fossil fuels and years no toxic fission fuel rods.

    I made he and the two words: Fukushima, Chernobyl that is what nuclear power does. Burning fossil fuels increases life on earth and has no effect on the world climate: as known to every science professor on the planet.

Thursday, 2 June 2011

CO2 and climate

    The warm middle ages was warmer than today. The south of England has a wine industry in the open air: no Polytunnels were required. At the time man produce a very very little carbon dioxide. Only through and the occasional coal or wood fire.

    Fast forward to the 28th century and there carbon dioxide levels have not been level. The 1930s saw very little economic activity so very little carbon dioxide. 1938 was the warmest year on record: even warmer known 2005.

    The world has been cooling their for six years. Every year are seeing my canines carbon dioxide emissions increase, but the global temperatures have fallen.

    In the last 200 years a massive 20% of the carbon dioxide produced is from man's machines. This equates to 0.1% additional carbon dioxide every year. Plants have taken this in to do more Photosynthesis. Nature has not even noticed we have evolved. Our carbon dioxide has decided to more life on earth.

    Lets go back to the 1950s: the post war boom years. Loads of additional carbon dioxide through call burning. The scientists were easy predicting the all sides of the next ice-age. As the snowfalls at winter in the UK were about 2 feet. Not the light, sting we usually get, although whol into a heart we got 2010.

    So we observe carbon dioxide supports life. So the level of this gas left in the global air is determined solely by the efficiency of photosynthesis to taking in. Mankind's emissions have increased life on earth, but have no effect on the global weather.

    On my PhD in 2001 I said global warming PR by nuclear power. My PhD got ended for no reason. 2005 the world started cooling; so nuclear power dreamt up man-made climate change. As 2004 have been a bad hurricane year.

    These are totally predictable and that year was expected to be a bad, totally natural, or came years. Since then things have quietened down. Before you believe that the cloud has anything to do and there carbon dioxide, ghett the climate pundits to explain the warm middle ages to you.

    And Aston how much funding they get from nuclear power, funnelled through the funding agencies.

Wednesday, 1 June 2011

Life on earth

Is the result of plants and bacteria metabolising carbon dioxide: to form carbohydrates and excrete oxygen. The limit to life on earth is available carbon dioxide.
At the end of the cretaceous 90% of life on earth died. Life I only recovered as animals evolved to metabolise plant bulk and oxygen. Oxygen is the greatest pollutant in earth history.
We are blind to this as we have evolved to metabolise oxygen. Biology actually uses carbon dioxide to do biological molecular nuclear fusion.
This is why green plants in the light release helium and gamma wave radiation. Even though there is no source of nuclear fusion. Life does nuclear fusion from water-molecular hydrogen.
The key catalyst is fluid turbulence with steam or high pressure water.
Man evolved the contract to steam cycle in the early 18th century. At the end of that century he noted the expansive steam cycle worked better, as it did physical molecular nuclear fusion.
Like waterfalls or the deepsea do. This is why water walls give off gamma wave radiation. And the water heats up by 20° C as it falls through the arctic air. At the base of the waterfall we have a pall of heated steam.
We also get off helium. This has never been explained by the professors of physics or engineering: who want to avoid mentioning that nature can do nuclear fusion, when they can’t.
They can. The steam cycle does loads of physical molecular nuclear fusion. They have given noted the release of gamma wave radiation and production of heat, from steam, jets, and IC engines.
This is clean power with no carbon dioxide or toxic fission waste. The deep does MNF. Again the production of helium and gamma wave radiation is written up in the human pantheon.
So mankind has 300 years experience of doing nuclear fusion. He has actually been doing it from when he first boiled water on the natural forest fire.
To increase the amount of MNF we are doing, we should boil water under pressure, with a blues mesh of titanium wire in the waterfalls.

Jonathan Thomason 117 Merchant’s Quay, Salford Quays Greater Manchester M50 3XQ
JonThm9@aol.com T/F 0161 848-0416