The Calbuco eruption adds another layer to climate debate

calbuco eruptionThe eruption of Calbuco, one of Chile’s 500 active volcanoes, has captured the world’s attention with strikingly beautiful images and stories of hasty evacuations. However, the really important story behind this eruption is even subtler: it is a vivid illustration of Earth’s awesome natural geological forces. It’s a rare glimpse into the powers that can move mountains, rip continents apart, and more importantly, alter our climate.

The Calbuco eruption is a wake-up call for “consensus” global warming theory climate scientists; it shows that geologic forces eclipse man-made global warming, adding another layer to the climate debate.

It’s time for climate scientists to include the affects of these natural forces into computer models and climate pattern predictions. Calbuco is releasing massive amounts of particulate matter, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and sulfur dioxide into the upper and lower atmosphere, and in turn altering our climate. The degree to which this eruption changes earth’s climate will be seen in months to come. But make no mistake, it will alter our climate.

Geological forces have had and are still are having an underappreciated but very important effect on our climate and climate-related events. The theory of plate climatology contends that periods of active Earth tectonics and volcanism can be correlated to periods of active climate change and climate-related events.

Simply put, increased tectonic activity, either locally or globally, equates to more faulting and volcanic activity, which leads to more heat and fluid release from these active geological features into both the oceans and atmosphere. Altered heat and fluid input equates to climate change.

It is extremely important to note that volcanic eruptions are not rare events. They vary in magnitude, but volcanic eruptions occur daily all over the world. Ninety percent of all active volcanoes are located in the deep ocean. They are largely unmonitored, save for the fact that recent research indicates that they emit vast amounts of heat, CO2, and methane.

Research by MIT shows that large numbers of smaller and moderately active land-based volcanoes, which had been unmonitored, also emit significant amounts of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere. MIT notes that these sulfur dioxide emissions have acted to alter our climate by reducing atmospheric temperatures.

Climate scientists who support the global warming theory have for many years contended that climate variations, primarily increases in atmospheric temperature, were all controlled by emission of man-made CO2. Their recent admission that atmospheric CO2 content has continued to rise and that atmospheric temperatures have not risen in 18 years has forced them to reassess this notion.

So why did widely heralded computer models and the Global Warming Theory miss the prediction of the 18 year warming pause?

The short answer is that climate scientists failed to predict / model the “pause” because they were, and still are atmospherically biased. For many years climate science has been stuck in a “it’s all about the atmosphere” mindset. This bias has blinded them. They have improperly interpreted or in some cases ignored mountains of compelling non-atmospheric data, much of it geological in nature, which would have aided in the prediction of the pause. Often there rationalization was that geologic forces, as per the Calbuco eruption, are rare and unpredictable. Not true. They are common and can be correctly included into models once adequate data is collected.

Scientific bias is more common than you might imagine. Formulating correct answers to well-defined scientific questions can only be made when in possession of three elements: an open mind, sufficiently accurate data, and most importantly, a diverse data set of proper resolution.

Amazingly, when lacking any of these elements, many of us, including scientists, still charge full speed ahead to what we deem are compelling answers. These answers then form the basis of how we perceive and judge the validity of the relevant scientific theory. Sadly, and not to surprisingly hastily and ill-formed answers are often proven incorrect. It then becomes necessary to alter our perception of, and confidence in, the relevant scientific theory. This is exactly what occurred when climate scientists prematurely pronounced that the theory of man-made global warming was fact.

During the last five years, scientists have amassed better data sets with increased accuracy, tighter spatial distribution, more diverse parameters, and representing a longer time period. This new information has clearly demonstrated that geological forces have a very strong impact on climate and climate-related events including the relative influence of man-made CO2, warming of the oceans, selective melting of glaciers by sub-glacial and fault-induced hot springs, mega-droughts, alteration of deep ocean currents, Tsunami’s, El Niños, and so on.

Two newly released and independent studies (here and here) both conclude that natural forces in the form of unusually strong and persistent trade winds are the cause of the 18.5 year global warming hiatus. It is here contended that these altered trade winds are a side effect of a geologically warmed ocean. This geological heat emanates from a volcanically and tectonically active area in a deep ocean portion of the western Pacific. This warmed ocean cell has acted to alter trade winds. When this new research is considered in the context of the MIT study, it is possible to conclude the following.

  1. Natural geological forces have overridden / trumped the effect of all man-made CO2 released into the atmosphere during the 18.5 warming pause.
  2. “Consensus” climate scientists now admit that the 18.5 years of no increase in atmospheric warming is real, not a fabrication of global warming skeptics.
  3. Atmospheric temperatures have remained relatively constant for 18.5 years. Climate scientists have essentially admitted that an important element of our climate hasn’t significantly changed during this period. So the phrase “climate change” is not well supported by actual climate data, and some might argue misleading.
  4. Implementation of pending carbon taxes should be tabled until a more accurate measure of the impact man-made CO2 has on our climate can be established. This can only be accomplished by studying and then include the effect of geological forces into climate models and research.
  5. Political arguing concerning climate trends and solutions should be put aside, giving scientists room to do unimpaired and diverse research?

Images of the Calbuco eruption are indeed awe-inspiring and strikingly beautiful. However, looking closely we can see something else, a need to alter our mindset from believing in “climate change” to believing in the need to change the “climate theory.” It’s time to consider an alternate climate theory, one that properly includes all relevant natural forces, the plate climatology theory.

This is the real story behind the Calbuco eruption.

James Edward Kamis is a Geologist and AAPG member of 40 years and has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. Years of research / observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is also an important driver of the Earth’s climate.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    David M

    |

    You must realize there are people out there that still are insistent volcanos and earthquakes are caused by global warming. As much as you try talking to them they are so brainwashed they will cry global warming til they are blue in the face.

    • Avatar

      JayPee

      |

      I am not responsible for their stupidity. If they cannot release themselves from the bonds of their predisposition, may they wallow in their ignorance. I, for one, will leave them behind.

      When, additionally, they will blindly argue and resist reason, I feel no duty to rescue them.

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    [i]”They have improperly interpreted or in some cases ignored mountains of compelling non-atmospheric data, much of it geological in nature, which would have aided in the prediction of the pause. Often there rationalization was that geologic forces, as per the Calbuco eruption, are rare and unpredictable. Not true. They are common and can be correctly included into models once adequate data is collected.”[/i]

    Talk about not seeing the forest for all the trees… I think many well-meaning scientists are just so pigeon-holed into narrow areas of study they never take a big step back to see the larger picture. This is a boon to the relatively small numbers of climate manipulators who are driving an agenda.

    Solar and tectonic variations should logically be considered at the TOP of any list of climate influencers rather than being relegated to footnotes or passed over altogether.

    The trouble with tectonic influence is similar to the trouble with solar variations; political activists have a hard time blaming them on free market economics and the like, so good luck receiving any meaningful funding for non-atmospheric research…

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      The best ways in which we could improve modeling results, would be by removing the BS positive feedback loops, and the funding.

  • Avatar

    4TimesAYear

    |

    [quote]I think many well-meaning scientists are just so pigeon-holed into narrow areas of study they never take a big step back to see the larger picture[/quote]

    I’ve been saying that for some time. There are just too many variables. Whether they’ll ever be able to get them all into a climate model is extremely doubtful. The odds are astronomical. I like Christopher Essex’s presentation on the subject. It really makes the point of exactly how detailed the model would have to be. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19q1i-wAUpY[/url]

    • Avatar

      Gator

      |

      First they would have to be able to identify them all, and they haven’t.

  • Avatar

    Mike Ryan

    |

    It would be useful to have an educated estimate of how much CO2 is belching out into the atmosphere at the moment from Calbuco. Equicalent to 500, 1,000 or 10,000 coal fired power stations?

Comments are closed

No Trackbacks.