Additional Notes to: Mighty Maniacs 2008


<< BACK to NOTES
ADDENDUM + Re: Mighty Maniacs 2008
___________________________________________________

--- Gary Gene Ford [1946-2013] wrote ...
[Re: Global warming theory breaks wind?] ... to:


Prescott Sheldon Bush <*************@thefirsttwins.com>,
"Peter D. Ward" <****@ess.washington.edu>, Daniel Bowen <************@gmail.com>,
Jentje Goslinga <***********@shaw.ca>, Stanton Friedman <******@rogers.com>,
bruce maccabee <******@compuserve.com>, Stephen Goodfellow <*******@goodfelloweb.com>,
Allan Safarik <*****@sasktel.net>, Jess Walls <*****@suddenlink.net>,
Joe <********@hispeed.ch>, brad smith <*****@thule.org>,
"Greg Lunt J.D." <********@yahoo.com>, Ken Deibert <*****@cal.net>,
********@yahoo.com.ar, Dick Farley <**********@aol.com>,
Frank Ford <************@yahoo.com>, Mark Thornally <**********@yahoo.com>,
Hsing LEE <*******@shaw.ca>, Bill Gallagher <*********@gmail.com>,
Norman Bowden <************@msn.com>, Ed Yco <*****@earthlink.net>,
lensman <*******@sbcglobal.net>

Thanks for the Interesting INFO, Prescott, Old Boy!

The Good Fog Presser looks to be an interesting Scientist -
I just hope he's not contracted an incurable case of Green
Hound Disease (better than Living Slug Disease, tho')!

Daniel, I am doubtful of Net Energy from relieving H2S of
its Sulfur, given the Capital Expenses and Operational Control
and Safety Bound Energy Consumptions, as in removal of
H2S from Sour Gas, as H2S IS - after all, - TRULY One
Dangerous Dandy GAS to deal with, with chronic exposures
to sub-lethal concentrations suspected of having a cumulative
neurological deficit damage potential over 1-5 ppm.

Aside: Norman, is the NSA REALLY
analyzing all these rollicking exchanges?

"The REAL WORLD is Far More COMPLEX
Than THEY (want YOU to) Believe" - GGFord

By the way, I meant to imply, but didn't exactly
say below, that Winds arising to convect Heat from
the Tropics to Higher Latitudes, and, as well,
Wind-Whipped/Sun-Warmed Waters which may experience
Surface Salinity increase due to evaporation of
H2O - NOT SALT - should act as Drives for Ocean
Currents, as where Ocean Water is taken away,
and/or some remaining water changes buoyancy from
salinity change, there are Drives to move water,
such as with surface or deep water flowing in,
replacing removed surface water, leading
to currents.

Add in Solar/Lunar Tide effects on various Deep and
Shallow Oceanic Flow Barriers, and additional drive
for Currents is established.

Serious Reduction of Ocean Currents almost DEMANDS
a serious reduction of volume of Oceanic Water.

Now, How DOES Wind cause Motion of Ocean Water?!

One way is by moving water aside - new water generally
then flowing in from somewhere, often from below, when
sufficient depth allows, as in Fish/Seabird/Guano friendly
Deep Oceanic Up Welling, offshore, Chile, where Winds from
Offshore can also create a Northward Current along the West
Coast of South America.

HOW Can Water be "moved aside" by Wind?!

... By SURFACE FRICTION on the Water Underlying the Wind.
aided by, as well as further causing, presence of waves as
obstacles to surface winds, even interaction on the Wrinkly
Capillary-Dominated, small wavelength, surface feature
wavelets upon Bulk Gravity Waves, agents of Wind/Ocean
Surface friction.

Solar Heat and Wind Driven, Evaporation Fluid Volume/Density
Changes, with Heat and Air Density Variations Driven Winds
acting on Ocean Surfaces through Air/Water Friction, along
with Lunar/Solar Ocean Tides interacting with solid obstacles
to flow, stirring in some Coriolis Effects for BOTH Wind and
Water flows, SHOULD, in my opinion, produce Ocean Currents.

I simply find the "Stagnant Ocean" idea likely a gross exaggeration.

But - OKAY! - Currents may be caused to CHANGE.

Is it then Global Ocean Currents STILLING?! - or -
Instead, some "Global Ocean Currents CHANGE!"?

Gary, 4 THE SWIMP - Iowan Idiot/Mighty Maniac/COSMOS CHILD
Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

Prescott Sheldon Bush wrote:

Peter Douglas Ward, Ph.D., is a paleontologist and professor
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/shapeoflife/explorations/bio_ward.html
of Geological Sciences at the University of Washington
in Seattle. He is currently examining the nature of the
Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event with studies
in France and Spain involving detailed field work which
concentrates on ammonites and bivalves. Ward is also
researching speciation patterns and ecology of the living
cephalopods Nautilus and Sepia. A final field of research is
examining the stratigraphic history of West Coast Cretaceous
basins through detailed biostratigraphy and basin analysis.
http://www.ess.washington.edu/People/faculty_bio/ward-bio.html

"More than 200 million years ago, a cataclysmic event known as
the Permian extinction destroyed more than 90 percent of all
species and nearly 97 percent of all living things. Its origins
have long been a puzzle for paleontologists. During the 1990s
and the early part of this century, a great battle was fought
between those who thought that death had come from above and
those who thought something more complicated was at work.
Paleontologist Peter. D. Ward, fresh from helping prove that
an asteroid had killed the dinosaurs, turned to the Permian
problem, and he has come to a stunning conclusion.
In his investigations of the fates of several groups of
mollusks during that extinction and others, he discovered that
the near-total devastation at the end of the Permian period
was caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide leading to
climate change. But it's not the heat (nor the humidity)
that's directly responsible for the extinctions, and the
story of the discovery of what is responsible makes for a
fascinating, globe-spanning adventure.
In Under a Green Sky, Ward explains how the Permian extinction
as well as four others happened, and describes the freakish
oceans--belching poisonous gas--and sky--slightly green and
always hazy--that would have attended them. Those ancient
upheavals demonstrate that the threat of climate change
cannot be ignored, lest the world's life today--ourselves
included--face the same dire fate that has overwhelmed
our planet several times before."
www.amazon.com/Under-Green-Sky-Warming-Extinctions/dp/006113791X

--- brad smith wrote:

the guys that are into "saving" lives are losers.
we need depopulation.
http://www.thule.org/plan.html

"Gary Gene Ford" [1946-2013] writes:

"HOLY FOG PRESSER!" ...

Daniel, you're ON
A Rockin', BOILING ROLL!

Things to consider about the Permian Catastrophe
and claims of NO OCEAN CURRENTS while blaming
'Natural' CO2 for the Action:

(1) The Ocean Floors of the Earth are about 180 Million Years
or less old, much brand new, most in between.

Sea Floor from the Permian, is NOT preserved in the Ocean
today but exists, often contorted, even metamorphic, scattered
throughout locations on the Continents, where saved by
uplift from Oceanic Trench Subduction.

Here and there, Mountains have Exposed it; but since almost
All Deep Drilling is for Oil and Gas, and as Most OIL and Gas
wells are drilled with detailed analysis to depths shallower than
the Permian, evidence of what the Sea Flows (seen from flow
action on the Sea Floors of the Day) were doing during the
Permian Catastrophe, may be somewhat sparse, even very
incompletely preserved, even largely unknown, I would wager,
in terms of thorough World Sample.

SO HOW DO WE KNOW? ...

Maybe Some OCEAN Currents STOPPED,
as for instance Tectonic Plate movements
closed parts of their courses into shielded
bays or otherwise trapped off, such as
by Oceanic Volcanic Ridges?!

But SURELY, with a Moon CLOSER
(Geophysicists assure us), and with a
Shorter Month, Permian Ocean Tides
were likely stronger than ours now,
and may have induced SOME
Considerable Ocean Flow/MIXING,
especially in areas where tides butted up
against Continental Margin Barriers? ..

Additionally, the configuration of Continents
was Different during the Permian Catastrophe
than it is now, TODAY!

WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE? =
that THE OCEANS WERE ALL
SO STAGNANT back than,
stinking of Hydro-Sulfides ...
like a Rotting Marsh?!
.
(2) Yes, the Volcanoes of the Earth, as the FOG PRESSER
Allows, were indeed mighty spewers of CO2, from time to time.
Two or Three Decades Ago, there was a Scientific American
Article by a French Geophysicist discussing precisely the large
Out-gassing of CO2 by Volcanism, suggesting it was getting
Time for ANOTHER Outburst, as some slow moving, huge
bubble of magma may be working its way toward the crust,
ready to burst forward with Heat and CO2.

I remember that the Frenchman ALSO claimed CO2 at the K-T
(Cretaceous-Tertiary) Boundary appears to have been EIGHT
TIMES (8x) as Great as it is 'Now' (2 or 3 decades ago),
which would still have been several times as large as
the 1000 ppm which the Goad Fog Presser bandies about ...

IF SO, why didn't the Oceans STAGNATE at K-T Time?

OR MAYBE THEY DID?! ... To WHAT Degree?!

We need Impartial and Well Informed (rather than decorated,
dogturnated, 'well programmed'. crapademics in 'doctrinal sync'
with current CO2-Hate-Mongers) Geophysicists and Geologists
to give us more information, I think.

(3) In early several years of this decade, NASA published maps of
Carbon MON-Oxide "Rivers" flowing from Seasonal S.E. Asian
Forest Burnings.

The Flow roughly went over Hawaii, where the
ONE Authoritative, Dogmatically Correct for
the Whole Earth, CO2-Measuring Station resides
on a dormant volcanic Peak on "The BIG Island"
(along with some Astronomical Observatories,
I seem to remember ...).

If CO1 fails to mix over those thousands of miles, why
would CO2 be THAT much different?

Neither CO1 nor CO2 are experiencing pure substance
phase changes over such a trip., but I will allow that CO2
is quite water soluble and can be "brought down" to the
Surface of Land/Ocean with Cold Rain.

HOW can we be sure that the steady rise of
CO2 - "as measured" (In Hawaii!) - has not
been reflecting an increase of Forest Burning
in S.E. Asia?! Or Coal Burning in India
and South China?!

And BY THE WAY, shouldn't there be a Seasonal Variation
of CO2's portion of our Atmosphere due to Photosynthetic
Plant Growth Cycles?

Makes me want to say ...

"Who Writes WRONG on The Who The What The WHY?!
WAIT O THING I I I I I I ... " - as Jack Kerouac wrote in
his book "Desolation Angles" after his trap killed a Rat at his
Summer Employment Fire Look-Out Station near Skagit Lake,
Washington, just South of Canada's Border, where he could
look North each Night to see "Mount Hozomeen, most beautiful
mountain, I ever seen!"

"The REAL WORLD is Far More COMPLEX
Than They (want YOU to) Believe!: - GGFord

Gary, smelling a Funds/Brown Shirt Political Power Play/and a
Global Grabademic/World-Wide Technocratic, "We're BETTER
than THEM [the UN-Dogturnated, OF COURSE!} ..."
'Coups d'Etats' Conspiracy-by-Similar-Interests,
RAT ATTACK in Progress, just as usual.

Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

Daniel Bowen wrote:

Gary,

What I found particularly 'precious' about this theory is that it
threatens the most dire consequences (EVERYBODY WILL DIE!)
but all hangs upon the runaway operation of a routine natural
process .......... over the course of thousands of years, and
AFTER a SEPARATE and catastrophic event; the stoppage of
ocean currents, which has not happened, and shows no actual
signs of happening. If anyone has a better recent example of an
unprovable piece of alarmism (at least on such a scale), I should
be amused to see it.

Another interesting point about this theory from a scientific
point of view is that it is yet another climate theory that
is completely and utterly reliant on the operation of the
water cycle, but only potentially reliant on CO2 levels.
Indeed it is completely and universally accepted that the
vast majority of any global warming that takes place, or will
take place, will be caused by a change in the water cycle,
with water vapor rather than CO2 trapping the vast majority
of atmospheric heat. CO2 can only be considered a global
warming threat if it in fact triggers changes in the water
cycle through its small warming effect.

I suspect that in both the H2S and the global warming scenarios
CO2 rather than water vapor is implicated as the CAUSE of water
vapor changes rather than the effect of them, mainly because CO2
levels may be measured and compared at different times, with the
presumption that CO2 levels do not vary in the atmosphere much,
while it is obvious that water vapor levels do vary greatly from
place to place due to the fact that water undergoes the full range
of phase changes at Earth temperatures. There are in fact many
cases in the fossil record that would point to CO2 levels
FOLLOWING rather than PRECEDING global warming, but to
acknowledge the significance of this would be to deprive many
chemically and mathematically oriented scientists of the means
to proclaim a precise history or future of climate. A social
history of the world and the long-standing and common use of
fortunetelling shows us that experts in society generally would
prefer to paw through the entrails of a sheep or engage in a
multitude of similarly inconvenient acts rather than acknowledge
that they do not in fact, have precise information about the future.

Anyway, while this course of action would of necessity take
place far into the future, it is worth noting that even if Peter
Ward is right, the stoppage of oceanic circulation and the build
up of gasses in the deep ocean from anaerobic decomposition
in fact would eventually allow for the practical use of renewable
and biomass derived energy, and would further permit, if
conducted on a sufficient scale, the forestalling of the mass
extinctions that Ward is vaporing about.

You will perhaps have heard of ocean thermal energy
conversion (OTEC), a process that takes advantage of
temperature differentials between hot surface water
and cool water from the deep ocean.
The eradication of traditional oceanic circulation
would produce far more locations where such a scheme
would be viable, and the surface water would reach
higher temperatures, greatly increasing the
efficiency of power generation, converting tropical
oceans into giant solar panels.

As for H2S generation, this would not be an enormous problem
right away (at least on the scale under discussion) in most areas.
While Ward mentions the trouble caused by H2S off the Namibian
and Chilean coasts, the trouble is caused by immense amounts
of LOCAL H2S production COMBINED with, and dependent for
their existence upon, strong local coastal upwellings of cold,
nutrient rich water from the deep ocean. The H2S is produced
by unusual concentrations of decomposing algae, and the algae
is dependent on the nutrient-rich, but oxygen-poor water of the
coastal upwellings. If the ocean currents were more or less
turned off, the H2S would be produced less swiftly, and would
either stay trapped in a cold layer of water near the bottom, or
would disperse slowly enough not to cause great and notable
trouble. Note as well that even if the ocean contained a
great deal of H2S, it would naturally be concentrated and
contained in deep oceanic water layers for thousands of years,
and would not generally poison sea life nearer the surface.

Ward is suggesting that the gasses trapped in the lower levels of
the ocean would eventually come bubbling up in a surge, and
this would indeed happen if enough time passed and IF nothing
was done about it but this need not be the case.

There are several gasses produced by anaerobic decomposition,
most notably methane, the main constituent of natural gas.
This methane, if at reasonable concentrations, may readily be
extracted from deep saturated waters and be used for fuel.
Lake Kivu in Africa, on the border of Rwanda and the DRC
(Congo) is one of several unusually deep African lakes that
have deep layers saturated with gas. This gas is a safety hazard,
as large disturbances, like landslides falling into the lake, can
send a wave of suffocating gas crashing into nearby towns,
but it is fairly simple to relieve the dangerous pressure
gradually, because after a bit of initial pumping to get the
reaction started, the gas-saturated water will come bubbling
out of a pipe stuck in the deep water like soda from a shaken bottle.
In most of these deep lakes, the gas in the deep layers is relatively
useless CO2 (although it would provide opportunities for
greenhouse farming) produced by local volcanic systems
(the EARTH is putting out a lot of CO2, not just people), but
in lake Kivu, there are a lot of useful gasses generated by
anaerobic decomposition that can serve as fuel, and which
are now in the process of being developed as a major regional
power source.

Even H2S is quite flammable, and the process used to convert
it to elemental sulfur also produces considerable amounts of
steam useful for power generation, not to mention the industrially
useful sulphur (sulphuric acid is in fact, the most important
industrial chemical on earth).

An OTEC plant that exploits ocean heat for power pumps an
enormous amount of water, and is ideally suited for the extraction
of useful industrial and fuel gasses from the water of the deep
ocean. In this way, not only heat energy from ocean water, but
also the energy captured by oceanic photosynthesis would become
usable for human needs.

Those poor mammal-like-reptiles! They just didn't know how to
exploit a natural solar-panel-biogas-generator! Teeth and claws
may have low carbon emissions, but 'mother-earth' will get
you anyway!

Daniel

----- Original Message -----
*From:* Gary Gene Ford <******@shaw.ca>
*To:* Daniel Bowen <************@gmail.com>
*Cc:* Jentje Goslinga <***********@shaw.ca>; Mark
Thornally <**********@yahoo.com>; STAN
<******@rogers.com>; bruce maccabee
<******@compuserve.com>; Stephen Goodfellow
<*******@goodfelloweb.com>; Allan Safarik
<*****@sasktel.net>; Jess Walls
<*****@suddenlink.net>; Joe <********@hispeed.ch>;
brad smith <*****@thule.org>; Hsing LEE
<*******@shaw.ca>; Greg Lunt J.D.
<********@yahoo.com>; Ken Deibert <*****@cal.net>;
********@yahoo.com.ar <********@yahoo.com.ar>; Stephen
Pierce <*******@piercesupport.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, March 06, 2008 8:22 PM
*Subject:* Re: Global warming theory breaks wind?

Daniel,
that guy (see below) knows so much about H2S
and human health - what is his professed field? -
I sincerely hope he's NOT a Physiologist!

But it's simply wild speculation: his assertion
that 1000 ppm (0.1%) CO2 in the air would
result in stopping Ocean currents.

Likewise ... his bold assertion that Arctic
Ice MUST vanish with such levels of CO2.

After all, the Earth's Stratosphere is still likely to
remain considerably colder than the Troposphere,
even if the temperature of the latter were to rise
a few degrees ...

While Warmer Seas and Near-Sea Air could bring
about much more evaporation and air-transport of
moisture, leading to increased precipitation, once
such increased airborne moisture reaches into the
colder stratosphere, with the Atmosphere thus so
loaded with more Oceanic Evaporation, moisture
will become dumped elsewhere ... on Land and
Sea, the Land Portion being liquid forming into
Swollen Creeks and Rivers, moving back to the
Ocean, but also absorbed into formerly drier soils
and incorporated into a possible expansion of the
Land's Vegetation, aided by Increased CO2 as
well as by Increased Water - BOTH, given
Sunshine, PRIME INPUTS to Green Plant
Photosynthesis.

Did I forget SWOLLEN LAKES?!

If Ground Water, Vegetable Flesh, Creeks, Rivers,
Lakes should increase, from increased precipitation -

NOTE: The Seas are about 70% of the Surface of
the Earth, albeit some, as with land, are indeed in colder
regions - but at least half of the Oceans in WARMER
Parts of the Globe? -

THEN the Ocean Level Might Even FALL, especially
should enough extra Precipitation were to fall in Our
Currently Very Extensive in Land Area, High Northernly
Latitudes - Russia/Canada/Alaska/Greenland,/Scandinavia -

as Snow in the DARK Northern Winter, and if more fell
than could be conveniently shed in the Warm Season ...
shades of Milankovitch Cycles!

Has Anyone ELSE read George Gamow's
BIOGRAPHY OF THE EARTH?

After all, it is LACK OF OVERHEAD SUNSHINE
which makes the Arctic Cold in WINTER, and NOT
AT ALL *some* *deficiency* of Airborne CO2"!

Ocean currents are driven by a variety of "mechanisms",
including EARTH SPIN-Solar/Lunar Tidal Interactions
of Oceanic Water with asymmetrical Oceanic Canyons,
Submarine Mountain Chains and Continental Margins,
only loosely linked with Water Temperature or CO2
content.

Ocean Currents are ALSO driven by Winds.

Now, it is TRUE that on Ocean-less VENUS, there
is little variation in Planetary Temperature, but there
ARE Immense Mass-Flows of its outrageously dense
(as compared to Earth's) Atmosphere: it has been said
that the force of moving Venusian Air scouring past its
rocky surface may generate wind-forces a strong as Earth
Winds at an order of magnitude-faster Earth winds.

Wind Resistance (Bernoulli Stagnation) Pressure being
One-half Mass-Density times Velocity SQUARED, you
know, don't you? - Err, DOES Frog Presser WARG?

Yes, VENUS has NO Ocean Currents, but then Venus
has NO Ocean to have currents it yet has surface Winds
which appear to drive relentlessly, if winding-ly, from one
pole of its very lazy spin to the other, flowing back again
at a higher altitude, approximating Ocean Currents in their
mass transport ...

WHO KNOWS how more forceful such winds could be
if Venus had an Earth-style, 24 hour Spin Rotation Period,
instead of its now slow, slow rotation over its LAZY 240
or so Earth Day Long VENUSIAN Day?!

I sincerely HOPE the Good Frog Presser is NOT trying for
a CO2-Effects Comparison between Earth and VENUS , as ...
You see, Gross Molecular Mass of Venusian Air, dominated by
its 9O% CO2 Content, spiced with high molecular mass H2SO4,
greatly exceeds Earth's, and with a pressure of 90 or more Bars,
Venusian Air contains many orders of magnitude more CO2
molecules than does Earth's merely 1 BAR (at Sea Level Land
Surface on average), less than 0.04% CO2 fraction, Atmosphere.

Finding Climate Similarities between Slow Spinning, Ocean less
Venus, and Fast Spinning, Ocean Dominated Earth, with Venus
Receiving just about TWICE the Warming Solar Radiant Power
Density influx as does Our Earth, seems a JOKE at Best, in my
humble opinion.

I Do HOPE The Elect Frog Presser is NOT arguing from NAuSA
Venereal Global Runaway CO2 Greenhouse Numerical Simulations
of the Computer/Numerical Methods WEAK 1970s and 1980s!

I would like to know how WARG gets off saying that there
would be NO Ocean Currents in a Slightly Warmer Earth
with our current Continent and Ocean configuration; which
is very DIFFERENT than during the Permian Catastrophe!

Is he a Physical Oceanographer? - Is it Hubris of Authority?
PERHAPS AN INFALLIBLE HOLY CATHOLIC POPE?!

Yes, Winds are also involved in driving Ocean Currents, as are
such mechanisms as falling buoyancy of increased density, by
salinity increased Tropical Surface Water, when much water
becomes evaporated to the Air...

The mass-density, hence "buoyancy" of Ocean Water depends
NOT ONLY only upon its Temperature, but very much also
upon its Salinity, which can be substantially increased at its
surface by enhanced Tropical Evaporation on Sunny Days.

If Ocean Currents were to Cease, than what besides very
increased Atmospheric WINDS would be left to transport
the Abundant HEAT of the Tropics to less Solar Blessed
on average, Higher Latitudes?

SHOULD WINDS were to have to pick up the TASK,
wouldn't they need INCREASE, and INCREASING,
then move Ocean Water, too?!

NO OCEAN CURRENTS?!

What! - Are the OCEANS to BOIL Away, Instead?!

It is a sobering and scary image, but OTHER Experts,
Solar Astrophysicists as a matter of fact, do assure us
that the Earth will one day be baked by a Helium
Burning SUN ... but do not worry! ... all higher
life forms may have long before died due to
the Earth's Geologically Relentless burial
of Carbon Compounds, leaving just a
Carbon Starved and Barren Earth,
right on schedule by the Alien
Planetary Mining plan ...

"What a RELIEF, to be RID of that
STINKING GREEN Overburden!"
perhaps some of them may say?

ARE MANY OF "THE GREENS"
Really B-R-O-W-N ?!

Or would they ACTUALLY LIKE
much more H2S on Earth to please
their H2S breathing Alien Masters?
-----------------------------------------
H2S Note:

Every year in Alberta, people die from H2S
inhalation - its present in most Natural Gas
here and in most Petroleum Solution Gas.

H2S is extremely dangerous at just 50 ppm,
while at 200 ppm unconsciousness comes
within seconds.

Dr. Goslinga has taken a special course in
H2S precautions and safe rescue (air tank
and face mask required) - perhaps he will
correct me if I am in error about H2S?
---------------------------------------------------
"The REAL WORLD is Far More Complex
Than THEY (want You to) Think!" - GGFord

Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm


ERRATA
__________________________________________________________
Daniel Bowen wrote:

WIRED www.wired.com
Science : Planet Earth

Hydrogen Sulfide May Kill Us, Bring Us Back to Life

By Kim Zetter -- Email
03.03.08| 3:30 PM
www.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/03/peter_ward_qa

Peter Ward tells the crowd at TED 2008 about the perils of
hydrogen sulfide, which he says wiped out 90 percent of Earth's
species during the Permian period.
Courtesy Ted Conferences

TED 2008 Coverage
Conference to Tackle Origins of Evil, Theories of Everything
More TED News on Wired's Epicenter Blog

Millions of years before the dinosaurs were apparently killed by
an asteroid hitting our planet, the Earth experienced another
mass extinction that was far more devastating. The cause for
that, paleontologist Peter Ward says, was actually homegrown:
Hydrogen sulfide in the oceans and atmosphere turned the sky
green and choked off oxygen for plants, animals and marine life.

Ward, who teaches at the University of Washington and who
spoke at the Technology, Entertainment and Design (TED)
conference last week, says that global warming caused by
humans could reproduce the same hydrogen sulfide gas
conditions that killed more than 90 percent of life during
the Permian period, when the extinction occurred. And we
might just do it faster than nature did.

Ward, who published a book about the extinctions last
year called
Under a Green Sky
, is involved in a
project with Arizona State University to design a
$60 million atmosphere chamber to reproduce the
Earth's atmospheric conditions from the Permian
period--as well as any other period they want -- and
recreate the die-off with plants grown in the
chambers. The aim is to see what kinds of signs are
left behind so they can then look for them in nature
today and see what they tell us about evolution.

Although hydrogen sulfide has the potential to be a
mass murderer, researchers have recently discovered
a possible medical use for the deadly gas that
could, ironically, also save millions of lives.
Tests have only been conducted on mice, but so far
they show that hydrogen sulfide injected directly
into the heart of mice suffering a medically induced
heart attack puts their bodies into a state of
suspended animation and results in the heart cells
sustaining less damage than those of mice who did
not receive the injections.

Ward spoke with Wired.com about the possible risks and benefits
of hydrogen sulfide and how gas masks may be in our future.

*Wired:* Explain how the Permian mass extinction occurred.

*Peter Ward:* Step one is, there's an enormous release of flood
basalts coming out of cracks in the earth, and huge amounts of
magma from the deep Earth comes out. These things go on for
millions of years, and the volume of lava is extraordinary. It
may have covered an area the size of the continental U.S.

Now, the lava doesn't kill much, except the poor, stupid animals
that were crazy enough to be around there. But as the lava comes
out, carbon dioxide bubbles out with it and a lot of carbon
dioxide goes into the atmosphere to the point that we estimate
the carbon dioxide levels hit 3,000 parts per million. [Current
carbon dioxide levels are about 380 parts per million.]

This causes the oceans and the planet to warm, and once you do
that you stop ocean currents. Once you stop currents, you lose
oxygen in the ocean, because it's circulation that keeps the
ocean oxygenated. This allows a type of bacteria to take over
that creates hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Animal life cannot live in
water that has a lot of hydrogen sulfide in it. When you have
concentrations of greater than 80 ppm of hydrogen sulfide, or you
get up to 200 ppm, which is easily done, you'll kill every animal
[in the ocean]. Eventually so much hydrogen sulfide leaks into
the atmosphere that it kills animals and plants.

*Wired:* How many land species were there at the time and how
many were killed?

*Ward:* On land you had hundreds of species of mammal-like
reptiles -- the first stage of mammals. It was over 90 percent
extinction, not just of land animals but of ocean animals and
plants. Only 50 percent [of species] in the asteroid-dinosaur
stage died. So this was way, way worse.

*Wired:* How long did it take for this to happen?

*Ward:* It occurred slowly, over thousands of years. We still do
not know precisely how long.

*Wired:* It's believed that hydrogen sulfide was the cause of at
least two other mass extinctions, right?

*Ward:* Actually, I think it's up to 12. Every mass extinction
except the dinosaur extinction seems to have been caused by this.
It's all about when the Earth decides to spit out these big burps
of magma that come to the surface. But a big mass extinction from
global warming has not happened in 100 million years.

*Wired:* We place the blame for our current global warming
situation on rising CO2 levels created by man. But the previous
episodes of global warming and mass extinctions were entirely the
cause of nature. It seems as if we could do everything in our
power to reduce man-made global warming and still face global
warming and mass extinction from nature if we have flood basalts
at the level that occurred during the Permian period.

*Ward:* Not really -- those past episodes were from very rare
flood basalts. There may not be another of these, as the Earth is
cooling as it ages.

But we've had these mass extinctions [from hydrogen
sulfide] when carbon dioxide has hit 1,000 ppm.
We have not hit that [level] for 100 million years.
But we are currently at 380 ppm -- and climbing
rapidly at 2 ppm a year and accelerating -- and this
is the highest CO2 I think in the last 40 million
years. The only time [these extinctions] ever
happened in the past is when these big flood basalts
happened. But now /we're/ making it happen far faster
than the flood basalts ever did. This is a unique
event in the history of the planet.

*Wired:* What would life look like as the Earth's oxygen
is slowly choked off by hydrogen sulfide and how long
would it take?

*Ward:* This really is a long way off. This is something
that's going to take thousands of years. The oceans take
a long time to change from oxygenated to a place where
there is no oxygen on the bottom. But once it starts,
you can't stop it.

I think sea-level rise is a more imminent danger. The thing that
we have to do is, we have to save the ice caps, because if the
ice caps go, (the hydrogen sulfide scenario) is the inevitable
next step. One thousand ppm (of CO2) is all it would take to get
rid of all the ice caps on the planet. We'll be at 1,000 in 200
years or less. Which means good-bye ice caps on planet Earth,
which means 240 feet of sea level, which means good-bye San
Francisco, Seattle, New York and on and on.

But if losing the ice caps makes us uncomfortable [because of
rising water], the hydrogen sulfide is going to make us extinct.
In 500 years, I can see a world where everyone will be wearing
gas masks. Those that [have] them will live; those that don't
will die. We humans are here for the long haul, and if we do not
stop heating our atmosphere, we will suffer a very nasty fate.

*Wired:* Are there any areas on the planet where we
can see the beginnings of something like this already
happening with hydrogen sulfide?

*Ward:* Right now off the coast of Namibia there is
hydrogen sulfide coming out. Fisheries went in and
killed off all the anchovies and sardines. Then the
plankton comes up, and there are no fish to eat them
and they go to the bottom and rot. That rotting
produces hydrogen sulfide and it rises to the surface
and is causing all kinds of havoc. Where I live
[Washington state] we have hydrogen sulfide hot spots
coming from the old logging camps. All the wood waste
that was buried in the last two or three centuries is
now rotting to the point that well-diggers have to
[carry] a gas mask because if they puncture one of
these hydrogen sulfide bubbles it will kill them.

*Wired:* Recently researchers have posited that there's also a
possible medical benefit from controlled use of hydrogen sulfide.
You've called it the next and best boon for medical science. What
are the practical applications of the gas?

*Ward:* With H2S, a mammal can be turned functionally into a
cold-blooded animal and cooled far lower than could otherwise
take place [to slow down the progression of injuries]. This could
save a lot of lives [in a medical crisis]. The Buffalo (Bills)
football player (Kevin Everett) who had the accident
-- the reason they were able to do the neurological stuff they
did on him was because they were able to cool him [until they
could treat him]. In a situation like that, you're buying time.

The critical part of a heart attack, it has been shown over and
over, is that if you can get them to a hospital fast enough they
will survive. So let's say you're in Iraq and they've just blown
your leg off with an IED. You're bleeding out. You're dead. Put
the hydrogen sulfide in -- you bleed out, but you're slowed down.
You get to the hospital, and they fill you back up again with
blood again.

Each cell (already naturally) produces a minute amount of
hydrogen sulfide, and it causes that cell to reduce activity. So
when you're in a crisis, it's as if [the cells and body] come to
the conclusion, "I'm in a crisis; I can't be expending energy, I
better go into reserve [mode]."

So [if you give someone hydrogen sulfide] to replace the oxygen,
theoretically, instead of that lack of oxygen killing you, your
metabolism shuts down so low, your need for oxygen reduces
immensely. We're talking about a situation where your heart only
needs to beat once a minute or so. What we're really talking
about is not suspended animation; we're talking about
[medically-induced] death. And then we bring you back. We're
going to artificially kill people so it buys us time, and then
bring them back alive.

*Wired:* How long could you stay in that state?

*Ward:* Four to six hours in mice, and they come back perfectly
the same. The trouble is ... we don't know what's going on in the
brain cells. And this is the biggest issue with this. How much
brain death will there be? There will be some. So here's the
ethical dilemma: If I get in a car wreck, my wife who loves me
dearly, would she rather have me back as a vegetable, a
half-Peter? What if I come back without any memory of her
whatsoever? Or what if I can't write? Is it better to have me
like that ... or is it better to just let me be dead? Going in,
you don't know what you're going to get coming out.

*Wired:* So why would you say this is the greatest
boon to medicine?

*Ward:* Because for some people, they will come out fine.
That woman who had the stroke (Jill Bolte Taylor, who
spoke at TED last week), she rebuilt everything.
Brains rebuild. Yes, you have all this damage, but there's
no reason you can't rebuild right around it to get exactly
where you were [before the accident]. But we'll be able to
save a hell of a lot of lives. ...
© 2008 WIRED www.wired.com

See also: GOOD OMENS 1990


"Gary Gene Ford" writes:
Date: Mar 16, 2008 5:58 PM

Brad,

thanks for the comment about the "thumb less wonders"!

It IS indeed a mystery how THEY could have made much,
unless they only type in - or Telepathicate? - appropriate
commands and plan-choices into a link with their highly
advanced, fabricants and other intelligent machines ...

But THEN, maybe the "little ogre[en, y] men are NOT
the Builders at ALL, but the little 'men' instead are rather
only "ready-mix"/temporary use biobots whose material
substance is returned to "ships stores" and experience/
memories downloaded to data storage and for analysis,
at each mission's end?!

Now as to those Incredible Flying Machines and their
most unusual fuels ... Hydrogen Superoxides are indeed
usual, especially with the formulas you remembered, but
the [reducer] fuel isn't so unusual ...

Hydrazine and some hydrazine derivatives are routinely
used as fuel, with nitric acid or Nitrogen Dioxide used as
oxidizer, in many maneuverable earth satellites and space
probes, because ...

(1) the two items ignite spontaneously on contact.,
and do not require an ignition source;

(2) they are stable in a space environment when kept
separately;

(3) they are liquids or can be made liquid at practical
temperatures and pressures, thereby negating a need
for heavy duty, hence heavy, pressure tanks.

(4) Relatively Pure Iron is rendered "passive" by
concentrated Nitric Acid, which might stop acid
attack if used as an inner layer of the oxidizer
tank; and

(5) the combustion exhaust resulting has sufficiently
high specific impulse for the orbital adjustments
required ...

As to any unusual colored or gelling, slimy mixtures
were you by chance thinking instead on variations
of boron-based fuels, boranes or boro-cyclics?

In any case, as to the UFO Craft ...

I am sure the HOLY MOTHER SHIPS must be
both made of more, and able to fuel with more,
than Man can currently currently Imagine.

Certainly, 'Visitors from the Future' I find just as valid
an alternate explanation over your amazingly successful
Teutonic Engineers of the Iron Man from the Tea House
and the Wolf's Lair.

Sincerely,

Gary, Surviving XT Victim, Mighty Maniac and Cosmos Child.

Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

brad smith wrote:

Hydrazine is very volatile and drives the scud, I forget what chemical
signature it is.
but the H2O8 might be H3O8, still with extra oxygen and still a form of
hydrogen peroxide.. These vehicles are edge of space, where there is
still a thin atmosphere but little oxygen. The main problem mentioned in
the Aviation Week article in 1989 was the volatility and various ways to
hold the stuff in the fuel tanks without it reacting and melting,
foaming its way out. So, if they had aurora in 89 and they are generally
50 years ahead with the unrevealed stuff, the so-called phony alien
technology, its not alien its just way ahead. Little big headed three
fingered clones can't manufacture shit. They would have to hire beings
with opposed thumbs to build their transportation.
In short, "aliens" are bogus, there aren't any here.

Gary Gene Ford wrote:

Thanks, Brad!

I have never ever heard of H2O8 or H2O10.

They sound AWFULLY unstable.

WHAT Would their STRUCTURES be like?!

Now some WEIRD, and rarely named these days,
at least in Modern Castrated Chemistry TEXTS,
such as C2O3 do in fact Exist, unstably - but H2O8?

Come, now, Brad - you're toying with us, aren't you?!

As to H2O2 ... and splitting off Hydrogen - Where
does the ENERGY to Accomplish THAT come from?!

Are you SURE they're not splitting off Oxygen?!

You aren't proposing Zero Point Energy Extraction,
as per recent fad popular science physics friction,
are you ... (wink! wink! nudge! nudge!)????

THOUGHT FOR THE PICO SECOND:
When will the Man from La Mancha
ride the Laputan Express?!"
- Flying Island Revue's Rumpelstiltskin/J. SWIFT.

Gary, for The Swimp
"From the MIND's Well, Perpetual THOUGHT Clouds swell ..."

Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

brad smith wrote:

Of course it is used as a fuel in top secret flying craft.
Hydrogen Peroxide is the donor, the hydrogen split from the oxygen
during flight and using the forward progress of the craft for the
energy necessary to split the molecules.
A special process using the "boundary layer" and two skins on the
craft with a space between inner and outer skin.
One called "aurora" uses H2O8, they also use H2O10, these fuels are
inherently unstable, easier to break than H2O and provide the oxygen
necessary to run in space where there is no atmosphere.

Gary Gene Ford wrote:

Thanks for the reply, Daniel!

Hydrogen is a common element on Earth -
every water molecule in the Oceans has
two hydrogen atoms in it.
Unlike Oil and Gas, which are portable fuels ready to burn,
Hydrogen is not much found on Earth in a Ready-Burn Free
State. Water, you see, is Not very burnable in Earth Air.

The reason we are mining Oil and Gas is that they ARE
readily available, and we use only a portion of their energy
extracting and refining them.

Oil and Gas are also found spread widely, if often sparsely,
over the Earth, which is Great, for they are easily made into
Practical, Portable, Pump able, High Energy Density (per
volume) Liquids - Gasoline, Fuel Oil, Diesel Fuel - and, for
Natural Gas, Methanol - ready to be burnt with Earth Air.

Hydrogen is not very practical, from Volumetric and Pressures
required standpoint, in comparison, due to the Portability Issue.

IF Hydrogen were such an excellent vehicle fuel ...

??? Then surely the USAF would be flying aircraft on it,
the USN powering ships on it???

Trouble with Hydrogen starts with its outrageously low
"critical temperature", which basically that it can not be carried
as a compact liquid in any practical Earth Bound Vehicles.

H2 also has an outrageously wide range of flammability and
explosive mixtures with air, unlike gasoline and diesel fuel.

Try to Imagine Road "Accidents" with Liquid Hydrogen
Tankers?! ...

SO WHY IS HYDROGEN
USED IN THE "Space Shuttle"?!

Because LIQUID HYDROGEN has a high energy to mass.
or energy-to-Earth's-surface-weight, ratio, and can be carried
in a vehicle we are willing to Fly at HIGH RISK ...
a risk much higher than allowable on Public Roads.

Think of the bad LOSS Record of the Space Shuttle "Fleet".

Think also of the immense expense of each of their launches.

In the Shuttle's Case, BOTH Liquid H2 and Liquid O2
are entered as very cold liquids and kept that way by allowing
slow boiling, with gases H2 and O2 being vented off - ie,
wasted! - topped off just before a flight.

THAT's "Permissible" because the Shuttle
is already a BIG Financial White Elephant
for OTHER - including Political - Reasons.

The combustion of H2 with O2 is also ideal for
High Specific Impulse Rocket Engine Exhaust.

Hydrogen doesn't work so favorably for powering
hundreds of millions of automobiles on liquid -
OR gaseous - hydrogen.

NOW, just as growing of some GREEN Bio-Fuels
can raise the price of basic grains, and thus of meat
of farmed animals feed such grains, thereby raising
the costs of Nutrition (to please Polar Bear Lovers),

So, also, Green-Brown-Shirt-Mandated Hydrogen
use would likely make great demands on pure water,
which last is a rarity in many parts of the world, if we
are to need electrolyze to H2 and O2 by input of More
Highly Organized, More Useful, Electrical Energy - as
taken from WHAT?! - than gets released on Burning
of that Hydrogen, threatening thereby to encroach on
scarce potable fresh water resources ... were Hydrogen
Fuel THE Mandated standard portable fuel.

IF Hydrogen is such a GREAT FUEL ... please, think,
people, write to your Governments, to Demand that
Your Military Covert to using Hydrogen as their main,
or better yet their ONLY, fuel!

Would President McCain push for such a Conversion?

I CAN SEE IT NOW!!! ...

* Hydrogen Powered AWACS!!!!!
* Air Craft Carriers?!
* B-52s ... B2s ... F22s?! ... A10 Wart Hogs!

I can EVEN Imagine ... Hydrogen POWERED
Abrams 1A1A Main Battle Tanks!

Yes, write your Military Today about this vital issue -
AND SAVE THE POLAR BEARS!

Well, there are other illuminating points of Green Thrust:

Impracticality of Green-Preached Solar Power in Dark, Northern
Winters, or the Environmental Devastation of Desert Ecosystems
by huge Solar Cell Farms peppering the Arizona Desert ... or
Wind Farms in Areas of Sporadic and/or Severely Gusting, Winds,
all need to be very carefully chewed.

Life-Poison Cadmium is a key ingredient of the most practical
and cost-effective new solar cell sheets, and would be eroded
by windblown desert dusts/sands, smashed by freak flash floods,
else by hail/violent storms, thereby polluting Sunny desert/semi-arid,
clear-sky areas (Kansas, anyone?), while large windmills will be in
for frequent and expensive repairs in regions having major gusts
and occasionally violent seasonal storms.

Some People want to use Solar Cells in Manitoba and
Saskatchewan WINTERS - so who's going to
brush off the snow each morning
without damaging the solar sheets?!

How MUCH POWER
do Solar Cells yield
in a Snow Storm,
by the way?!

Green Entrepreneurs stand to "cash in" on Tax Incentives,
Government Subsidies, and Excessive Green Mark Ups,
while Crapademics can lap up Copious Research Grants ...

I predict a Scam several orders of magnitude GREATER than
Dioxin Producing (during the inevitable failure of "High Tech/
High Temperature" Computerized Controls) PCB Incinerators,
which were pushed by Greens, when simple reaction of Cheap
Liquid Sodium at 100 C with PCBs rapidly de-chlorinates PCBs
to Table Salt and very usable Diesel Fuel component Biphenyls,
an eminently scalable, simple industrial process, which would
have been easier, cheaper, with NO Danger of Producing those
Chimney Bursts of Airborne Dioxins (Millions of times more
damaging to the environment than viscous, containable, liquid
PCBs), than the Hugely Expensive, Government Subsidized.
"High Tech" PCB Incinerators which Green Political Pressure
compelled into existence

By the WAY ... Have ALL the PCBs really been incinerated?

Or are they still quietly waiting "their turn" in warehouses?

Why do Greens have to push Ever-Lovin' Polar Bears on us
these days? Why don't they talk about Methyl Mercury and
PCBs, or Redwood Trees and Spotted Owls, much, any more?

Personally, I don't value Polar Bears nearly as much as I value
Monarch Butterflies, Texas Cave Bats, and Giant Sequoia Trees.

CO2 ... Global Warming - er, "CHANGE" (Ocean Level and
Average Temperature) - and NOW, Polar Bears ... THUNK!

Does such gruel easily fill their Greenie Weeny MINDS?!

Maybe many of Today's Greens should get Hybrid Brain Cases?

"The REAL WORLD is Far More COMPLEX
than They (want YOU to) Believe!" - G.G.Ford

Gary Gene Ford - [ 1946-2013 ]
http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/magiboom.htm
http://pw1.netcom.com/~mthorn/divinepr.htm

Daniel Bowen wrote:

Gary,

I would generally agree that capital costs do not presently allow
for economical production of energy through H2S processing, and I
suppose that it is entirely possible that there is not enough
energy produced to allow for a net energy gain when the energy
costs of removing H2S from the seawater are included, but there is
no doubt but that one can obtain a net energy gain from processing
H2S once the gas is obtained. The standard, and rather old Claus
sulfur processing process is highly exothermic, and while a great
deal of research to replace the Claus process is now underway, this
is because the process is seen as wasting hydrogen, which is more
valuable than the electricity or steam produced by its combustion,
and which would be useful in the refineries where H2S is commonly
processed. In any case, extraction of fuel gasses from the deep
sea would not be confined to H2S by any means, but would naturally
include a great deal of methane, which would be expected to be
present in much higher concentrations. H2S processing would be
important but secondary.

I also do not regard the toxicity of H2S to be any great obstacle
to its recovery for industrial or energy production purposes in
this particular proposed application because of the comparative
ease of automation in a nautical context. While oil and natural
gas production on land provides an advantage to the multipurpose
and portable human worker, and while offshore drilling must deal
with highly variable solids, an oceanic H2S extraction plant/ship
would be working with liquids and gasses only, and could have all
equipment moved together as a single floating package. You will
note that oil and gas refineries, while involving much complex
processing, are much more heavily automated than are other portions
of the oil and gas industry. I have noticed that offshore drilling
operations are continuing to automate (or use remotely controlled
equipment) and now even solids oriented companies like De Beers are
getting into the act with the intention of allowing oceanic solid
mineral extraction. Processing of gasses and liquids would be
easier, and moreover, the cost of equipment is likely to decline if
a great deal more H2S is to be processed. Since it would take
several thousand years for deep oceanic gas levels to rise to the
point that they would be either dangerous, or useful, engineering
would have to undergo substantial decline to be unable to work out
a viable process by this time.

Best.

Daniel

P.S.

Mainstream information on NSA monitoring levels below.

NSA's Domestic Spying Grows
As Agency Sweeps Up Data


"Glenn Greenwald" <GGreenwald@gclaw.us> wrote:

To this day, John Wayne is the prototype of the uber-patriotic,
uber-masculine, uber-courageous Moral Republican Warrior.
His imagery is the template that pioneered the brand that the
Right uses to this day to build up their political leaders.
In 1995 -- 18 years after his death -- he remained the most
admired film actor in America. The Los Angeles Times said
that, even years after his death, his image "exmplified the
ideal American fighting man." After 9/11 Peggy Noonan wrote
a column hailing the return of "the Duke" -- of real men who
bellow: "Yer in a whole lotta trouble now, Osama-boy."
Yet John Wayne was one of America's biggest and most
repugnant frauds -- in exactly the way that modern Right-wing
leaders are. At a time when virtually nobody avoided combat,
Wayne did exactly that, using the most dishonorable means
imaginable, throughout all of World War II. Because the most
successful male actors, including older ones, went to fight, he
was able to stay in Hollywood and become extremely rich
playing war heroes. He spent the rest of his life glorifying
every American war and accusing war opponents of being
cowards, Communists and traitors. He crusaded for traditional
American morality, attacking others whom he perceived to
deviate, while he engaged in compulsive womanizing and
adultery, repeatedly breaking up his own family, and wallowing
in pill addictions.
Before there was Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney,
Newt Gingrich, George Bush, Bill Kristol, David Vitter
and even John McCain -- there was John Wayne.
One finds key parts of Wayne in each of them. To this day,
he's the role model for how the Right conducts itself and the
methods they use to swindle the American public.
                                                        -- Glenn Greenwald

P.S. Don't Miss: The Bush NAZI Coke Moonie Connection

   TIBET
__________________________________________________________

See also: The Jester

See also additional notes of a Non Sequitur nature.

And/or: CO2 Outré

ERRATA

__________________________________________________________

<< BACK to NOTES ADDENDUM + Re: Mighty Maniacs 2008

MT © 13,700,000,000 B.C.E, 2008-2013 C.E. ... All Rights Reserved.
Intercepted Transmission - http://pweb.netcom.com/~mthorn/intrnmsn.htm