10 Mankind encounters the stratosphere

Here I present the opening page of a paper presented to the Royal Society of London in 1908 by Mr E Gold relating to an ‘isothermal layer’ in the atmosphere. ‘Iso’ means equal. At a certain elevation the temperature of the air ceases to decline with altitude and appears to stabilize. This was a great surprise and a challenge to understand and explain. The challenge is still there, more than 100 years later. The science is by no means settled.

Isothermal layer

Teisserenc de Bort was chief meteorologist for the Central Meteorological Bureau in Paris from 1892 until 1896, when he opened his own meteorological observatory at Trappes, near Versailles.

de Bort discovered a difference in the temperature profile between high pressure cells and low pressure cells. The height at which temperature no longer falls was observed to be 12.5km in high pressure cells and only 10 kilometres in low pressure cells.

The question is: Why Is it so?

Gordon Dobson, working in the late 1920s observed that total column ozone is enhanced in low pressure cells and reduced in high pressure cells. Near the surface the air in low pressure cells is colder and denser than high pressure cells because low pressure cells originate in higher latitudes. The expectation is that the air in low pressure cells would be denser throughout the atmospheric column and that there would be more molecules in the atmospheric column, not less. That there are less molecules (lower surface pressure) is due to an anomalous reduction in density aloft due to ozone heating.

This state of affairs is reflected in the temperature of the atmospheric column at 30-40° south seen below:


Notice that the lapse rate is lower and the cold point is warmer in winter when ozone partial pressure increases and low pressure cells are found closer to the equator. From this figure we see that the lapse rate (decline of temperature with altitude) is reduced by ozone above the 300 hPa pressure level (8 kilometres).  The enhanced presence of ozone above and below the point of reversal at 100 hPa is responsible for a warmer ‘tropopause’ than in lower latitudes.  The temperature at the point of reversal is -70° C at 30-40° south latitude whereas it is commonly -85°C above the equator. The warmer ‘tropopause’ is found at a lower elevation than at the equator. It is also found at a lower elevation in cells of low surface pressure than in cells of high surface pressure as observed by de Bort. Cells of high surface pressure originate in lower latitudes where there is less ozone to warm the atmospheric column aloft.

At 50-60° south the ‘cold point’ or ‘point of reversal’ is still warmer as seen below. But its temperature and elevation varies according to the time of the year.  Here, the presence of very cold air from the mesosphere tends to lower temperature in winter against the influence of increasing ozone partial pressure.50-60S

As latitude increases the temperature profile of the atmospheric column is increasingly affected by the presence of ozone at ever lower altitudes. The cold point is not a point of demarcation between ozone affected air and air that is free from ozone.  One might say that the stratosphere is invading and taking over the troposphere. But, more accurately, one would say that the nature of the atmospheric column is changing so as to render the terms ‘troposphere’, ‘stratosphere’ and ‘tropopause’ less and less meaningful. The cold point ascends into the stratosphere as the point at which ozone is present in the atmospheric column descends towards the surface. It is no longer appropriate to refer to the atmosphere below the cold point as the ‘troposphere’. Because its temperature profile is affected by ozone it is as much stratosphere as troposphere.

In truth, as we approach the poles the terms, ‘troposphere’, ‘stratosphere’ and ‘tropopause’ become a source of confusion.  For instance, at 50-60° of latitude we can observe that the  cold point is located in the upper margins of the ozonosphere (defined as a zone containing ozone that influences the lapse rate of temperature with elevation). In winter the cold point establishes at 10 hPa where the greatest heating due to ozone is experienced.  In conventional parlance the stratosphere, considered as that part of the atmosphere below the cold point, would simply have disappeared and the entire column up to 30 hPa would be called ‘troposphere’.

In fact, the term ‘stratosphere’, implying that the air is stratified into different layers with the temperature aloft greater than the temperature below, is  misleading. It is the presence of ozone that is responsible for the formation of the most extensive areas of uplift that extend throughout the entire atmospheric column. This is the enigma of the cold core polar cyclone, cold and dense at the surface, warm and much less dense over a much broader area aloft with ‘aloft’ implying continuation into the stratosphere. It is the stratospheric component that accounts for the lower surface pressure. Does that reality square with the notion of ‘stratified?


For the purpose of understanding weather and climate we should forget about ‘troposphere’ and ‘stratosphere’.  It is more productive to make distinctions between parcels of air that have relatively consistent but quite different characteristics and respect that the parcel has a tropospheric component and a stratospheric component. These parcels pay no respect to the notion of a ‘tropopause’ because it is their characteristics in the ozonosphere that differentiates them.

The description of the atmosphere might then go something like this:


The low density and warmth aloft in a low pressure cells is unrelated to surface conditions. It is due to ozone. Reduced atmospheric density due to the presence of ozone initiates uplift.  Uplift aloft promotes uplift below. Uplift below together with the intake of moist air of tropical origin results in cloud and precipitation.  Cloud reflects solar radiation keeping the surface cool. Cloud absorbs long wave radiation from the surface promoting a warmer atmospheric column. Precipitation results in the release of latent heat warming the atmospheric column and reducing its density. Low pressure cells carry cold air into warmer latitudes maintaining the temperature differential at the surface. Accordingly, by virtue of the ozone in the air aloft, the heat engendered below, the heat gained from long wave radiation by both atmospheric moisture and ozone and the movement towards lower latitudes the pressure differential between cells of low surface pressure and the surrounding atmosphere tends to be maintained. But the process results in the erosion of ozone aloft due to the solubility of ozone in water. Low pressure cells are a watery environment, not within their core but on their wide margins where moist tropical air is drawn into the circulation. For this reason, the life of a low pressure cell is limited. Nothing like this phenomenon is generated in mid or low latitudes. Tropical cyclones have a narrow core that peters out aloft. Polar cyclones have a wide dry cold core below and broaden aloft into an even wider dry core that is plainly located in the region that we have been accustomed to call the stratosphere. In fact its ozone that gives these ascending columns of air their life force.


High pressure cells are formed at lower latitude where the surface air is warmer. The consequent reduction of air density in the near surface air means that the 500 hPa pressure level is located at a higher elevation than in low pressure cells. Aloft, the relative deficit in ozone gives rise to enhanced air density.  This enhanced density aloft is responsible for the greater weight of the atmospheric column in a high pressure cell as measured at the surface.  Settlement occurs in the winter hemisphere associated with cold landmasses and cold water and over relatively cold waters on the western sides of the continents in the summer hemisphere.  Contact with a cold surface cools the air enhancing density and assists the process of descent. Descending air is dry, warming due to compression and relatively cloud free, especially in the core, less so on the margins. As pressure increases in a high pressure cell one would expect geopotential height to fall due to increased density in the lower part of the column. However, it is observed that geopotential height increases and the increase in geopotential height, increases with elevation. This is due to the downwards descent of ozone, making the column warmer and reducing the incidence of cloud.


The difference between the two air masses establishes a horizontal density gradient that is steepest above 500 hPa. The steepness of the density gradient is associated with rapid circular motion and the elevation of low density air. This convective process manifests as a jet stream that circulates around the globe rather than around the periphery of low pressure cells. One arm tends to be located where high latitude ozone rich air meets ozone deficient air from lower latitudes. Another arm of the jet stream manifests at the polar vortex where there is a steep gradient in ozone and air density between ozone rich air on the periphery and ozone deficient air from the mesosphere within the core. Nowhere is this jet stream continuous. It is a porous medium allowing mesospheric air to escape into the wider atmosphere. In summer when surface pressure is lower at the pole and ozone partial pressure falls away in high latitudes mesospheric air no longer descends into the upper atmosphere and the entire polar region is relatively ozone rich. The absence of mesospheric air in the circulation is associated with a reversal of the flow at 10 hPa. The near polar arm of the jet stream disappears as surface pressure falls away and cold air of mesospheric origin withdraws.


The warmth that initiates the ascending circulation in low pressure cells is not at the surface. It is in the upper half of the atmosphere. This is due to the increase in the ozone content of the air in high latitudes due to reduced photolysis of ozone at low sun angles, especially in winter. In today’s climatology (as in IPCC reports), the reason given for enhanced ozone in higher latitudes and the Arctic in particular is ‘the Brewer Dobson circulation’ involving the descent of ozone from aloft in high latitudes. But this transport phenomenon can not explain concentration enhancement. A body of air with a given constitution can not change its constitution simply by moving to another place. Concentration enhancement is made possible by reduced photolysis as the sun sinks towards the horizon and the wave lengths that photolyze ozone are progressively screened out. This enhancement of ozone partial pressure does not explain the higher concentration of ozone in both summer and winter in the northern hemisphere. That is due to the relatively reduced intake of mesospheric air over the Arctic by comparison with the Antarctic. There is an alternative area of descent in the northern hemisphere called the Siberian High and another over the Greenland Hudson’s bay area but nowhere does surface pressure approach that seen over the Antarctic ice mound in winter. The difference in the ozone content of the two hemispheres is reflected in an enhanced erythermal UV index in the southern hemisphere, especially in summer.

In conventional climate science the atmosphere is driven by heating of the surface at the equator. In the climate science that takes account of ozone phenomena ozone is observed to be the single greatest source of atmospheric heating and it is most pronounced in the winter hemisphere. It gives rise to a zone of uplift over the oceans at roughly 60-70° of latitude in both hemispheres.

Conventional climate science has no plausible explanation for the existence of a ‘cold core’ polar cyclone’ and it struggles to provide a plausible reason for the jet streams.

Conventional climate science has no explanation for the planetary low in surface atmospheric pressure at 60-70° south latitude that has intensified over the period of record.

A low pressure circulation that engages the totality of the atmospheric column including what is confusingly described as ‘troposphere’ and  ‘stratosphere’ (low pressure cells at between 30° and 60° of latitude) must be balanced by a matching descent of stratospheric air into the ‘troposphere’. What goes up must come down. That is accommodated in zones of high surface pressure where air descends.  High pressure cells form at lower latitudes where the circumference of the Earth is greater. High pressure cells are accordingly very extensive requiring a relatively slow rate of descent over a very broad area. The ozone descending from the stratosphere is shared over this broad area and much diluted in concentration in the process. The presence of ozone in high pressure cells, while it warms the air and raises geopotential height as the ozone concentration of the air anomalously increases, is insufficient to counter the tendency of the air to settle. As the air is warmed clouds disappear allowing more radiation to reach the surface, the prime source of surface temperature variations on all time scales. This is the subject of chapter 3 https://reality348.wordpress.com/2015/12/29/3-how-the-earth-warms-and-cools-naturally/


Descent also tends to occur at the pole where surface pressure increases in winter due primarily to a shift in mass from the summer hemisphere. The velocity of descent at the pole is no greater than in the upper atmosphere in the mid latitudes, in fact it is possibly less. It may be enhanced according to the vorticity of the circulation driven by ozone outside the margins of the polar cap and also as surface pressure episodically increases. It is retarded when surface pressure falls as naturally occurs in summer.  Research suggests that there is an overriding geomagnetic effect via the behaviour of charged particles in a magnetic field. The polar atmosphere has a low plasmapause and is much subject to ionization by cosmic rays. These factors will tend to facilitate a geomagnetic effect.

There has to be a countervailing force. Ozone, left to its own devices, would keep on lowering surface pressure that has the effect of excluding mesospheric air and allowing the partial pressure of ozone to build up. In any event the advent of summer puts an end to the process. The ozone content of the air is inhibited in summer by increased photolysis. Surface pressure falls as the atmosphere warms and becomes less dense. The winter hemisphere cools and draws in atmospheric mass.  It is in the alternate winter hemisphere that the process begins afresh. This is the reason why surface temperature is seen to increase in winter rather than summer. It is also the reason for the much enhanced volatility of surface temperature in January-February and July August. It is the reason why all points north of 30° south experience greatest volatility in January and February and all points south of 30° south experience greatest volatility of temperature in July and August. Why the split at 30° south. Its because of the ozone supercharged nature of the Arctic atmosphere as against the ozone impoverished nature of the southern hemisphere gives the former greater reach.


It is observed (in IPPC climate science) that an increase in the temperature (or geopotential height) of the ozonosphere in high latitudes (50° through to 90° of latitude) is associated with a loss of atmospheric mass (reduced surface pressure) in high latitudes and a gain in mass (surface pressure increase) in the mid latitudes and elsewhere. What is not observed in IPCC climate science is that this shift in atmospheric mass can be extended to decadal and longer time scales. There is a cycle of change in atmospheric pressure in high southern latitudes that is longer than the seventy years of reanalysis data. This change in surface pressure alters the planetary winds on a relatively enduring basis. The failure of IPCC climate science to realize the cause of this atmospheric shift or to associate it with the manner in which the globe warms and cools over long time periods represents a failure to observe, analyse and reason. This represents a failure to come to grips with the origin of climate change that is natural in origin and the disaster of false attribution.


It can be observed that in the mid and equatorial latitudes, surface temperature increases directly with atmospheric pressure. As described above this phenomenon relates to the change in cloud cover. Surface pressure rises in the mid latitudes as it falls in high latitudes. This is the primary dynamic behind weather and climate change on all time scales.

It is plain that the evolution of the planetary winds and temperature at the surface of the Earth is intimately associated with this flux in surface pressure wrought by ozone heating in high latitudes.

Mr Gold made the following statement in his paper delivered in 1908:

It is clear that there cannot be convection currents to any marked extent in this region

That there cannot be convection in the stratosphere is an article of faith in climate science to this very day.  This error arises due to a lack of appreciation of the heating properties of ozone as an absorber of long wave radiation from the surface of the Earth and conceptual confusions as to the nature of the atmosphere encapsulated in the continued use of the terms ‘troposphere’, tropopause and stratosphere’.  Mr Gold was aware of the heating properties of ozone but had no knowledge of the distribution of ozone according to latitude and altitude, its enhancement in winter hemisphere or the interaction with mesospheric air at the poles that drives change in ozone partial pressure over time.

The result of  ozone enhancement in high latitudes where there is a close conjunction of cold dense air from the mesosphere and warm light air heated by ozone is convection on a massive scale that corresponding to annular or ring like pattern of troughs in surface pressure manifesting in high latitudes and on a scale that dwarfs the manifestations of low surface pressure elsewhere on the planet, even under the pressure of direct solar radiation and massive precipitation, two forces that contribute very little to uplift in high latitudes. The flux in ozone driven convection is what gives rise to the phenomenon known as the ‘Annular Modes’, now well recognized in the annals of the IPCC, but regarded as a mystery both in terms of its mode of causation and its impact on climate.

Convection can be driven by heating of the surface. It can be driven from the lower atmosphere via precipitation at cloud level. And it can be driven by ozone heating in high latitudes where ozone tends to be ubiquitous throughout the atmospheric column.  Of these forces, the most powerful, pervasive and influential is the last. This pervasive regulating force,  is unrecognised in ‘climate science’ as it manifests in the works of the United Nations  International Panel on Climate Change. If it were recognized as the driver of the planetary winds and cloud cover we would no longer be speculating as to whether the activities of man are the cause of ‘climate change’.

Unfortunately, climatology is not yet at first base in understanding the generation of the planetary winds. Without an understanding of the origin of shifts in atmospheric mass or the physics behind the generation of cold core cyclones there is no possibility of understanding the source of natural climate change. We are then extraordinarily susceptible to the arguments of those who seek to exploit our ignorance.

Climate is not complex and nor is climate change. It is in the interest of every citizen, every voter and every taxpayer to take an interest in this matter and not leave it to the those who style themselves as professors, doctors of science or simply as ‘experts’.


It has long been supposed that the solar cycle influences climate and in particular it is supposed that as the sun becomes more active (more sunspots) the earth might be warmer. But, those who have closely examined the data suggest that a maxima in sunspot activity frequently coincides with a cooling of the tropics while the reverse is also the case. There is no evidence that the energy quotient in solar radiation increases with sunspot activity although the composition of solar radiation certainly does change within the sunspot cycle.

On the other hand geomagnetic activity wrought by the solar wind, while it rises and falls with sunspot activity  has a different mode of activity in that it conditions the behaviour of  the Earth’s magnetic field as it manifests in the atmosphere.  The ozone cycle via its effect on surface atmospheric pressure  has the capacity to greatly magnify small changes in atmospheric pressure in the same direction as the initial change wrought by geomagnetic activity. This impacts climate on both shorter time and longer time scales than the eleven year sunspot cycle..

Geomagnetic activity, as an initiating force has the capacity to change the ozone cycle by modulating the amount of NOx that is drawn into the ozonosphere via the polar vortex in winter. An enhanced flow of NOx either from the troposphere or the mesosphere erodes ozone and reduces the temperature of the stratosphere over the pole due to a ‘space occupying effect’. If cold mesospheric air is present the warmer air is displaced to lower latitudes. This is a natural dynamic that depends upon surface pressure, much more active in winter than summer. It is for this reason that ‘sudden stratospheric warmings’ are a winter phenomenon.

This natural ebb and flow of air between the mesosphere and the stratosphere is manifestly more influential in determining the partial pressure of ozone than the flux in short wave solar radiation. When the temperature of the stratosphere over the poles changes there is a knock on  effect, rippling across the atmosphere like little waves on a pond, ever smaller in amplitude as they propagate across the globe into the summer hemisphere.





When we are  trying to understand how a machine or a process works we can approach via a study of each of its particular elements including its physical, chemical and metallurgical character, its motions, the sources of energy that drive the system and the lubricants that facilitate its smooth working.  That’s the long route.

By contrast just a moment or two of observation of the working machine can be revelatory.

In a flash we observe that the machine has two wheels; you sit on the seat, grasp the handlebars and provide energy with your legs going up and down. We witness its performance over time. It might be just a minute long, it might contain the going round in circles part, the climbing the hill part or the free-wheeling part and perhaps the falling off part. But just imagine how little we would learn if the only part we saw was the front wheel and the handlebars with the hands hanging on.

Until 1996 when a 48 year history of the atmosphere became available in the form of reanalysis data a portion of natural world was missing from the field of view. That portion was the mid to high latitudes of the southern hemisphere where the global circulation of the atmosphere is determined. Unfortunately, the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change had already made up its mind that man was the agent of change and disaster was at hand.

Via reanalysis, we can now see the entire structure of the atmosphere. It is apparent that the nature of the atmosphere changes over time. Today, in 2015 we have nearly sixty eight years of data. But it appears that we need at least two hundred years of data to see the workings of the atmosphere through its shortest cycle of change.

The Earth system can be known via the results that it produces even though the  sixty-eight year period of observation is short…comparable to that where the bike rider  settles into his seat, takes his feet off the ground and starts pedalling.

We don’t have to travel into the Antarctic stratospheric vortex and measure the concentration of NOx that erodes ozone to know what the Antarctic vortex is doing. We observe the perennial deficit in ozone in the southern hemisphere by comparison with the northern hemisphere and the long cycle of change in Antarctic surface pressure. Ozone partial pressure, the temperature of the stratosphere, the kinetic energy imparted to the atmosphere, surface pressure, wind velocity and the evolution of the planetary winds are inseparably linked. If the tongue of mesospheric air over the Antarctic shrinks away, less erosive NOx is drawn into the stratosphere and ozone partial pressure increases, the air warms driving a further fall in surface pressure in a circle of self reinforcement that has headed in the same direction for the last sixty-eight years, the entire period of modern observational record.

To all those earnest chemists who will maintain that the ‘ozone hole’ is due to the works of man I would say, stand back.  Appreciate that the ozone hole occurs at that time of the year when the ozone content of the southern stratosphere PEAKS outside the perimeter of the ozone deficient polar vortex that is loaded with mesospheric air. Yes, it PEAKS. Think about the circular motion of the atmosphere over the pole and what governs the presence of mesospheric NOx that erodes ozone. Appreciate the fact that, in winter, the entire atmospheric column from fifty to seventy degrees of latitude is rich in ozone throughout most of its depth. At this time the high latitude stratosphere takes on the role that the troposphere seems to perform in determining the movement of the air. The stratosphere becomes the ‘weather sphere’. Outside the tropics rules of thumb that enable us to differentiate between a ‘troposphere’ and ‘stratosphere’ no longer apply. In terms of convection, neither surface temperature nor the release of latent heat of condensation can explain convection in high latitudes. That role belongs to ozone. It is ubiquitous, unaffected by cold traps, has a ready supply of energy to drive warming both day and night and that energy is at the very peak of the spectrum of long wave energy emitted by the Earth at 9-10 µm, virtually unlimited in its supply. Hence the warmth of the stratosphere and the vigour of a polar cyclone.

Why is the stratosphere warm? Is it primarily because the ozone molecule absorbs at 9-10 µm serendipitously at the peak of Earth energy emission rather than photolysis by very short wave radiation from the sun that impinges in the main at the upper margins of the stratosphere above 1hPa? Is the warmth of the stratosphere that varies little between day and night, much less in fact than the variation at the surface, not the result of the constant emission of long wave radiation from the Earth itself, day and night and via the transfer of energy from low to high latitudes, across the seasons? How can we account for the fact that the mid latitude stratosphere is warmer in winter than it is in summer?

Gordon Dobson, who developed the use of a spectrophotometer almost a century ago, to measure total column ozone, discovered that ozone distribution mapped surface atmospheric pressure with 25% less ozone in the core of a high pressure system than at its perimeter. Zones of low surface pressure exhibit the highest total column ozone. Plainly there is more ozone in the upper air, and the stratosphere is warmer when surface pressure is low.  A cold core polar cyclone is a warm core polar cyclone aloft.  Is it not the warming aloft that drives uplift?  Indeed, warming in the stratosphere is linked to the creation of polar cyclones. Palpably ozone drives surface pressure and the high latitude jet stream. Ozone variation is therefore linked to the annular modes of inter-annual climate variation and its northern hemisphere manifestation, the Arctic Oscillation. Why, where and how do variations in ozone occur and at what time? Dobson established the fact that there is a direct relationship between ozone and weather phenomena. That was a vital clue as to the origin of climate change. That all important ‘clue’ just slipped through the cracks. It was replaced with a particular notion that, while it has no relation to what we actually observe, is a better fit to the ideology of the age. We choose to believe what we desire to believe.

We establish the presence of a high pressure cell of descending air by measuring atmospheric pressure at the surface. There is a zone of high pressure centred on latitude 30° in both hemispheres. But where is the head of a high pressure cell located? Is its head in the stratosphere, and at what level?  How does that play out in determining the quotient of cloud that shelters the Earth from the rays of the sun? If ozone came and went on a 200 year time scale what would that mean? Would we not need 200 years of observation to properly describe the climate of any particular place?

The temperature of the surface of the Earth will vary if there is change in either the input side or the output side. Changes on the input side can account for both warming and cooling. In the 1960s the northern hemisphere cooled and Antarctic summers have been getting cooler for the last fifty years. Logic and observation are important.

At particular places the direction of the wind changes coming from a warmer or a cooler place, it contains more or less moisture and there is more or less cloud to shield us from the burning rays of the sun. Surface temperature is intimately tied to the global circulation of the air and the distribution of cloud. This in turn is governed by shifts in atmospheric mass to and from Antarctica. Ozone is inextricably linked to surface pressure phenomena and shifts in atmospheric mass from high latitudes.

So far as the ‘greenhouse effect’ is concerned, is this mental construct compatible with cooling? The temperature of the surface across the entire globe varies strongly in winter tied to polar atmospheric processes that are inseparably linked to the arrival of the polar night and the intensification of the stratospheric circulation in winter. Is the greenhouse effect compatible with warming that occurs only in winter, only in one hemisphere? Is it compatible with a hiatus in warming. Is it consistent with the cooling of the entire system that is evident in the last decade? At a very basic level, we need to answer this very simple question: Can air that is free to move constitute an effective insulator? Or is it better described as a medium for energy transfer from one place to the other just like the ocean, except that in the case of the atmosphere the ‘other place’ is in the vertical dimension……’space’ where that energy is dissipated, never to return.

Science could be described as the practice of critical examination of the validity of the interpretations drawn from data. The problem with ‘climate science’ as it manifests in the works of the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (I.P.C.C) is that it fails to offer a plausible explanation for the patterns of warming and cooling that we observe. In the 1960s and early 70s, the Earth warmed in the southern hemisphere while cooling in the northern hemisphere. Of what use is a brand of climate science that cannot explain the patterns of variation  that we actually observe?

Here is the ultimate kicker: The basis of the alarm concerning the way the globe has warmed over the period of record needs to be critically assessed at the most elementary level. Is the warming that has undoubtedly occurred beneficial or harmful? Looked at dispassionately, the tropics is the only location where the Earth is sufficiently warm in all seasons to enable photosynthesis to achieve peak rates of carbon assimilation. The remainder of the globe experiences temperatures that are sub optimal for photosynthesis for part of, or the entire year. Plants use carbon dioxide in the air to create complex carbohydrates that are the basis of the food chain upon which all species depend. Carbon dioxide at 400 ppm., from a plants point of view, is at a concentration that is very close to starvation levels. When CO2 concentration is enhanced, plants require less water and the entire planet greens. This improves the environment, a thoroughly desirable end. From the point of view of mankind, sitting at the head of the food chain, from the point of view of man as farmer, the Earth is cooler than is desirable.

What I offer in the chapters to come is a novel explanation of the real world of climate change. That explanation is grounded in the reality of temperature change as it is observed. If you are keen to see the book of about 30 chapters that I have written on this subject over the last year simply subscribe to this blog to receive it in serial form.

I want to make a difference. The sooner the better. Don Quixote is riding again and this time he is not tilting at windmills but building them at our expense. One would not mind perhaps if he did not have his hand in our pocket.

I need help to make a difference. If you could pass on the address of this blog to your friends that will materially help.

If there is anything that is unclear, obscure, badly expressed, poor grammar, lousy spelling or needs further explanation or you want to challenge my conclusions I want to hear about that too. Please email me erlathapps.com.au