Often when we talk about air pollution we talk about various gases and compounds, but what we should really be talking about is how they combine together. For instance if there is CO2 from a smokestack, and there is also sulfur in the air, and other pollutants they form and make additional compounds. Some of these compounds might combine with organic matter and the moisture in the air. The amount of heat, sunlight, and static in the air also make a difference. We can prove this in a lab. In fact the University of Riverside in California has a very interesting atmospheric simulation lab for this very purpose.
Now then, I would like to bring something else up. There was an interesting article in the September 3, 2012 issue of Bloomberg BusinessWeek titled "the End of Flying Blind," by Alan Levin and Thomas black which spoke about how many airlines were switching from radar to GPS so that they might fly a more direct route. When we have frequency which is shot with power into air molecules it changes the dynamics of the formation of the compounds within the air and thus, how those particles and compounds come together and it makes a difference.
If we remove all the radars, and all that old technology and replace it with low energy GPS units from satellites, they we will change the amount of frequency in our atmosphere, especially in areas where there are many airports, and other frequency plumes from various communication devices. Consider if you will that almost all of the frequency spectrum today is being used for communication purposes, and that's a lot of bombardment through the atmosphere especially at lower altitudes. It is indeed thickening the air (molecular alignment), and causing the molecules to come together at a higher rate.
When this happens overwater off our coast line it also changes the dynamics of the wavelet droplet salt-spray and evaporation process, the formation of clouds, and although it only does this to a very small degree, it does make a difference, and it does matter, and we must do research to find out how much. We do know that the government HAARP project did affect localized weather and cloud formations. Less frequency pollution would mean thinner air, and less clumping together of the pollution which is already there.
Interestingly enough many geo-engineers who are talking about how to modify our atmosphere and control climate warming have suggested that putting more particles in the air can help block sunlight. Well, more frequency in the atmosphere increases particle accumulation and molecule formation as well. Sometimes I feel as if humans are not putting all the components together, and therefore can't understand why their data isn't coming out right.
One University working with the NOAA and the U.S. Navy is using special frequency and sensors to study the El Niño effect, but as they add energy to the system and the atmosphere they are no longer only observing it, they are also affecting it. This shouldn't surprise anyone as physicists have known this for quite some time, but it is interesting that they would attempt something like this without calculating the reality that they are changing what they are testing, therefore any readings they get will automatically be off - by how much they can't know without a satisfactory baseline, perhaps from a different method.
Judging by all the global warming research that I've read it seems as if we are making quite a few mistakes with where we put our sensors, what we are measuring, and what we had expected to find compared to what has always been or the natural cyclical atmospheric realities here on Earth. Okay so, that's my discussion for today and I am glad to have given you some new information to think about, information that you haven't considered the prior. If you'd like more cool things to think about, you might wish to subscribe to my articles, and I will tell you lots of things that you don't know.
No comments:
Post a Comment