What does global fever really mean?
- The CO2 in the places that have significant
electrical meaning, IOWs in the air where it can mix with water to
carbonic acid, or in ocean surfaces that are warm enough to be
conductive, there is a certain quantity. By removing CO2 in the
form of fossil fuels, we are increasing the amount in the active
biosphere. It's a similar problem to CO2 as a green house gas as a
forcing, BUT in this case it works!
What is the biosphere? What is life? The question of what is life,
particularly when you realize DNA is just a chemicalis difficult.
I define life as an entity that has feedback loops that may lead to
its replication and future survival. Here is an example. Your hair
is dead, right? Or is it? You can snip it off without pain. BUT,
in a furred creature that you shave, it will not survive in cold
conditions without its fur. When that creature is cold the muscles
near the hairs contract and cause a more isolative pattern of hairs--
those "dead" hairs.
Now, stand back and ask yourself this question--is a glacier alive?
No, of course not, you say? But what about if the microbial
biosphere, as a unit, causes snow feedbacks to an elevation so that
the hydrology throughout the year brings back living chemistry to
the near shore biosphere. And BTW, under the surface of the oceans
the biosphere there is as grand as the biosphere on the Terre
sphere! What nutrients wash into that biosphere from our rivers is
not trivial to them. And it turns out that with the electrically
insulating hydrates and the conductive microbes (compared to raw
chemical diffusion) have a large scale low frequency EMF impact that
moves clouds to bring on the glaciers. Again, are the glaciers
alive or dead? Alive, to me. The whole of the earth is alive in
this waythe earth as a living entity.
When it is hot, you sweat. Cold--you shiver. The source of the
heat or cold doesn't matter as long as you are within a range that
your feedbacks can do something about it. This cold and heat that
the body experiences externally doesn't mean that it makes sense to
stop drinking water on a hot day. That would go under this category-
-stupid. I think many head in the sanders are asking a deeper
philosophical question about ultimate limits of life. One I have
heard and understood to some degree involves the contraction of our
solar system. However, you can say that some day you are going to
die but does it make sense not to drink water, today, if it is hot
and you are sweating?
This is a basic problem of understanding the "math" of a biological
feedback. That's because your body really could be hotter
than "average" AND at the same time you are sweating. Or colder
than average and shivering. Fossil fuel cynics will tell you chaos
then, chaos now, burn fossil fuels. BUT, what is really going on is
modulation then, modulation now, don't pee in your IV bag when it
comes to the earth, a living earth. The big difference in what was
understood about CO2 before and now w/ EMFs and gaia, as I have been
defining it, is the IV bag and the toilet where the urine should go
is more defined by electrical and biological conditions, not by just
the air, where CO2 merely as a green house gas would operate.
This makes, for instance, the volcanic activity and the evidence of
low algae levels of the Eocine epoch interesting, for instance.
Oceans are stratified by temperature and salinity. As oceans warm
as in tropical temperatures, the stratification is almost purely
temperature based. If the oceans warmed to the point that the
surface was very warm everywhere, there would be a reduction in
nutrients for microbial activity. Then, the lack of biological
modulation by the oceans themselves would cause the near shore
hydrate river dynamic portion of Gaia to become more significant as
to whether a region got any rain. Understand, warmer oceans would
be more conductive BUT the SOx from volcanic activity would cause
the cirrus to phase change reduce--reducing the IR trappings of
clouds. Hydrates probably unformed, and also would have reduced the
EMF isolative impact and cloud feedbacks. Then, the system would
rely largely on just the rivers and the warmer oceans to cause some
feedbacks. Climate was probably MUCH more chaotic in terms of
drought and flood events then.
What are we creating now, with higher CO2? Another Eocine? What
does global fever really mean?