1. Registering for the Forum

    We require a human profile pic upon registration on this forum.

    After registration is submitted, you will receive a confirmation email, which should contain a link to confirm your intent to register for the forum. At this point, you will not yet be registered on the forum.

    Our Support staff will manually approve your account within 24 hours, and you will get a notification. This is to prevent the many spam account signups which we receive on a daily basis.

    If you have any problems completing this registration, please email support@jackkruse.com and we will assist you.

What happens when CO2 is added with EMF?

Discussion in 'The EMF Rx' started by Jack Kruse, Apr 11, 2014.

  1. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    In order to understand this correlation mismatch, one must understand what is occurring in the chart below

    The two regressions – regressions of both Y-axis 1 – ΔT or global temperature anomaly and Y-axis 2 – Mauna Loa measured carbon ppm – are aligned manually and made congruent so as to remove any reference range bias. This allows you the reader to make observation in perspective to a tight relationship between carbon ppm measures at the Mauna Loa NOAA observatory and the global temperature increases since 1958.

    But one must remember that this apparent tight relationship is forced by me, through an annual and necessary adjustment of the two-axis regression alignment. If we apply this same regression alignment (the straight line in the graphic to the right) to other timeframes as well, suddenly the two curves do not match up as cleanly.

    However, of key note even inside this clean and annually re-aligned graphic are several observations:

    • Atmospheric CO2 levels are increasing by a square law. A square law means that two carbon emission considerations or more are underway, not just one: the carbon contributor itself and the mechanism of impetus behind its acceleration. This because,
    • Economic activity levels on the part of man are not increasing by a square function – nor even this fast in slope. Moreover, there was no slowdown in carbon ppm trends attributable to the global economic depression from 2008 – 2012.
    • Global temperature increases are rising linearly, while carbon ppm amounts appear to be chasing (dependent on) this trend by means of a responsive acceleration (linear anthropocentric and unacknowledged natural acceleration serving a square law increase)
    • There is no acceleration-to-acceleration relationship anywhere inside this relational data. There is one discrete change in temperature trend at 1965, a trend which remains linear thereafter – yet carbon ppm are in continuous acceleration. Therefore, their only viable mechanism is dependency, not independence as a variable.
    In other words – global temperature increases appear to be leading carbon ppm increases – and are not solely generated by them. Otherwise, we would observe a mutual acceleration, which simply does not exist in the data. Atmospheric carbon certainly will also serve to increase global temperatures – however this effect appears to be drowned out by another primary temperature change impetus. In model terminology, the heat is behaving like a strong independent input variable and not a constrained-dependent output result. The point is that – another source of global heating may be evident here – and we have ignored this, possibly to our peril. This is a very critical difference in observation from most of the material I have reviewed in the media.
  2. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    If one insists on using average watts per square meter measures to prove out a case for a specific model of climate change which involves atmospheric carbon trapping solar radiation – then that model prediction should be confirmed by observing a commensurate reduction in the reemergent albedo of Earth as observed from space. In other words, if our atmosphere traps solar radiation at a greater rate than in the past, then quod erat demonstrandum we should observe a 100% commensurate reduction in that radiation which reemerges from Earth’s atmosphere back into space. The problem is, that we are not observing this commensurate level of albedo reduction. The data does not support the narrative of climate change.

    A 2017 study by scientists Ned Nikolov and Karl Zeller published in the Journal of Environment Pollution and Climate Change elicits that the albedo of Earth has not diminished at a level sufficient to explain nor corroborate 100% of the GISTEMP global increase in temperatures
  3. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    The paper by Nikolov and Zeller is exceptionally interesting, a big step forward, and probably a door-opener to a new ‘paradigm’.

    something else may be driving the production of CO2 and methane emissions into the atmosphere aside from simply man. That something else is

    a. a strong independent input variable which is already hotter than historical without external impetus,
    b. functions independent of carbon and methane emissions, and
    c. is at the same time causing the planet’s oceans to warm at a rate unachievable through man’s activity alone.

    There is only one energy source in contact-proximity to the Earth’s oceans,
    which can deliver enough kinetic energy to speed up all the Earth’s ocean currents by 15% in just two decades…

    and it is not the sun, and certainly not the Earth’s atmosphere. It is the Earth's core and how it interacts with EMF's is the key everyone has missed.

    It is a well-established fact that the global Schumann Resonance range banding-power peak serves as a very precise indicator of global temperatures.
    Recent Schumann Resonance banding-power has ranged upwards through more of the higher frequencies inside the established eight resonance harmonics (six of which manifest in the graph example below); indicating a weakening in the Earth’s magnetic moment generated from its solid core.


    nnEMF seems to affect the magnetic moment of the Earth core to transfer heat from the core to the oceans to increase ocean temperatures. The signal for the increase in temperatures is the increase in ocean currents. This manifests in alterations of local tides and the migrating North poles. Its signal shows up in life with altered methylation patterns, and in energy loss in living things that live within the sphere of the influence of the Schumann variation.

    M. Sekiguchi, M. Hayakawa, et. al.; Evidence on a link between the intensity of Schumann resonance and global surface temperature; Ann. Geophys. 2006

    It’s well established that in modern times, the axial dipole component of Earth’s main magnetic field is decreasing by approximately 5% per century. Recently, scientists using the SWARM satellite announced that their data indicate a decay rate ten times faster, or 5% per decade.

    Global Research; The Weakening of Earth’s Magnetic Field Has Greatly Accelerated, Could Have Apocalyptic Implications for All of Us; 12 Apr 2019
  4. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Mankind can make the inference that 3 substantial changes are at play in both the Earth’s inner and outer cores which serve to generate our planet’s magnetic moments.
    1.higher Schumann banding
    2.acceleration of geographic location
    3.weakening of the Earth’s magnetic moment

    All 3 run commensurate with and sensitive in dynamic to the last two decades of extreme climate change. All 3 changes historically have served to correlate well with global temperatures. These changes cannot be ignored as potential contributors vis-à-vis the ‘heat coming from beneath our feet’.

    As the Earth's outer rotational body’s angular velocity slows, angular momentum is conserved. Both mass and kinetic energy in the form of heat, increase inside the outer rotational body, while decreasing in the inner and outer core.The total system energy of the Earth is conserved.

  5. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Earthquakes and volcanic activity pertain to activity changes in the upper mantle and especially the asthenosphere = how energy is being transmitted from inside of Earth back to space. What is in between both layers? The oceans.
  6. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    The chart below and quote below come from a 2016 study by Arthur Viterito regarding an observed lockstep synchrony between magnetic dip pole movement, mid-ocean seismicity and global temperatures since 1979.

    “The Correlation of Seismic Activity and Recent Global Warming (CSARGW) demonstrated that increasing seismic activity in the globe’s high geothermal flux areas (HGFA) is strongly correlated with global temperatures (r=0.785) from 1979-2015. The mechanism driving this correlation is amply documented and well understood by oceanographers and seismologists.”

    Viterito A., The Correlation of Seismic Activity and Recent Global Warming. J Earth Sci Clim Change. 7: 345.
  7. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    Ironically it was in the 1850-80s when man began to use electromagnetism for the first time in Earths history.

    Did the Earth show any signs of reaction?

    Arctic Ocean Warming Began Already In Early 20th Century, Meaning Natural Factors Strongly At Play, Not CO2

    When we looked at the whole 800-year timescale, our temperature and salinity records look pretty constant. But all of a sudden at the start of the 20th century, you get this marked change in [deep ocean current fed] temperature and salinity—it really sticks out. Climate simulations generally do not reproduce this kind of warming in the Arctic Ocean, meaning there’s an incomplete understanding of the mechanisms driving Atlantification.

    ~ Co-lead author Dr. Tesi Tommaso from the Institute of Polar Sciences of the National Research Council in Bologna
    Paleodocteur likes this.
  8. Jack Kruse

    Jack Kruse Administrator

    If this mechanism is at play deep ocean water should show bigger temperature changes than the surface. Has it?


    Abyssal Oceans are Absorbing More Novel Heat Content per Cubic Meter of Ocean (ΔT-gigajoules/m3) than are Surface Oceans by an Enormous Margin – This is Neglected and Highly Critical Path Climate Science

    Durack, Gleckler, et al. Ocean Warming: From the Surface to the Deep in Observations and Models; Oceanography; 9 Dec 2018

    The strongest warming rates are found in the abyssal layer (4000–6000 m), which contributes to one third of the total heat uptake with the largest contribution from the Southern and Pacific Oceans.

    Desbruyeres, Purkey, et al. Deep and abyssal ocean warming from 35 years of repeat hydrography. Geophysical Research Letters

    1. most heating of oceans occurs in the abyssal depths
    2. The heat transfer of the core enters the oceans and crust. Gas hydrate vents are heated and become more active leading to more tectonic movement and volcanism
    3. Permafrost/Tundra is heated and releases both carbon dioxide and methane. These geoformations now become MORE active during the winter months in which the sun is increasing in declination because the heating is happening from below not above where humans live.
    4. Historic atmospheric-ocean deep/abyssal belt cooling deep convection touch points (Weddell Sea effect) no longer cool the atmosphere as they once did, thereby resulting in an increase in overall atmospheric temperatures
    5. The catalytic decay of volatile organic compounds into alkanes, alkanes into methane, and finally methane into carbon dioxide – all release latent energy into the atmosphere – indirectly and catalytically heating it. Fossil fuels have a minimal effect on this.

    Remember there is still a ton of old oil and gas deposits from Earth 4.6 billion history in the crust. The heat from below heats them up.......in vastly larger quantities to create novel volatile organic compounds, methane, and other alkanes.

    Each spring as the Sun’s geographic position crosses the Vernal Equinox for the Northern Hemisphere, the ‘already warmer’ permafrost and tundra from the winter heater below release proportionately even more VOC’s, methane, and carbon dioxide into the air than they did in the past. This resolves the mystery as to why methane increases are far outpacing what climate models have predicted. It has nothing to do with use of gas by humans.

Share This Page