Study: Not CO2, but CFCs cause global warming

Not the alleged culprit carbon dioxide, but CFCs have been causing global warming since the 1970s. So suggests new research from the University of Waterloo in the journal International Journal of Modern Physics B was published on May 30, 2013.

CO2 known greenhouse gas, but ...
Research of the nineteenth century physicist Svante Arrhenius, who discovered the infrared blocking effect of carbon dioxide at an early stage, already showed that carbon dioxide generates a greenhouse effect. According to him, a doubling of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, from 350 ppm to 700 ppm at the time, would lead to a warming of four to eight degrees. At the moment, the carbon dioxide content has risen to 400 ppm; one degree of temperature rise is attributed to this by the scientific community, including climate dissidents such as Henrik Svensmark. According to mainstream climate scientists, the real greenhouse effect is much greater. However, climatic observations show that the temperatures have not increased further since 2002, and according to some even have decreased, while the CO2 content is still rising. What is going on?

Lu's CRE theory has been shown to accurately predict temperature fluctuations on the Earth's surface by approximately 97%. Source: Lu.

Narrow radiation window as an outlet valve
The earth is constantly exchanging energy with the environment. The main source of energy is solar radiation, mainly visible light, which is absorbed and released in the form of infrared radiation. The reason that the earth is fifteen degrees warmer than, for example, the moon, and that the temperatures on earth drop very little at night, is the presence of greenhouse gases. The most important are carbon dioxide (blocks IR radiation with a wavelength greater than 13 micrometers) and water vapor (blocks IR radiation with a wavelength between 5-8.3 μm and 11-17 μm). The lion's share (80%) of the Earth's heat radiation is therefore emitted in the small wavelength range between 8 and 13 micrometers. When this narrow window is closed, the soil turns into a pressure cooker and the temperatures on Earth rise quickly. A higher temperature means that shorter-wave radiation is emitted, and at the same time more water vapor is released into the air due to evaporation - precisely the greenhouse gas that blocks short-wave radiation. In theory, this can cause global warming to get completely out of hand. The fear of many climate scientists.

CFCs block 'window'
However, blocking radiation in the narrow window between 8 and 13 micrometers is exactly what chlorofluorocarbons, once used en masse in refrigerators, do. As a result, even a small amount of CFCs can have a major influence on the climate. According to Lu, this is exactly what is happening and the rapid increase in the amount of CFCs in the atmosphere explains the temperature increase until 2002. Because, Lu argues, the concentrations of other greenhouse gases are already 'saturated', ie an additional increase does not produce an additional greenhouse effect, and that of CFCs not yet, an increase in the CFC content will have an even greater impact. However, due to the worldwide ban on CFCs, the concentration of these unpleasant substances is slowly declining. Lu argues that this is the reason why the increase in the surface temperature on Earth is stagnating. He also points out that carbon dioxide, generally seen as the culprit for global warming, did not begin to decline until 800 to 1,000 years after the onset of the Ice Age. Incidentally, ozone (O3), the gas that protects life on the earth's surface against harmful UV radiation, is also a powerful greenhouse gas in precisely this area. According to Lu, this explains why temperatures in Antarctica dropped sharply and the ice grew in the years when the hole in the ozone layer was the largest.

'Near-perfect correlation between CFC content and temperature'
“The climate in the Antarctic stratosphere has been completely controlled by CFCs and cosmic rays, with no CO2 impact. The change in global surface temperature after the removal of the solar effect has shown zero correlation with CO2 but a nearly perfect linear correlation with CFCs - a correlation coefficient as high as 0.97. ”, Professor Lu concludes. [1]. According to Lu's cosmic-ray-driven electron-reaction (CRE) theory, cosmic rays determine how quickly CFCs and ozone are broken down. According to Lu, a period of intense cosmic rays coincided with the advance of CFCs, which explains the deep hole in the Anthropic ozone layer. The supporters of the mainstream global warming theory will probably reply to Lu viciously, as is usual in the climate world. However, it is clear that the discontinuation of the use of CFCs did not happen a year too soon.

Qing-Bin Lu, Cosmic-Ray-Driven Reaction and Greenhouse Effect of Halogenated Molecules: Culprits for Atmospheric Ozone Depletion and Global Climate Change, University of Waterloo, International Journal of Modern Physics B Full. 27 (2013) (preprint here)

45 thoughts on “Studie: Niet CO2, maar CFK’s oorzaak opwarming”

  1. Acid rain, the CO2 story & now again the CFC story is only meant to knock people's money out of their pockets through taxes
    I don't believe this nonsense, the use of CFCs or propellants has been banned since 20 years ago, so the story is bullshit.

    1. There are indeed enormous environmental and environmental damage and nature was dying and the fish did indeed really die from the acid rain that came from Europe in Scandinavia and the trees died. Also the agent orange / roundup / wolman salts / lead / mercury pollution / poisoning is enormous.
      But like any political program (most falsely and artificially constructed as robberies and means of power), this has been brought to a head and turned into an industry in an atmosphere of 30 years of laisses faire with several decades of coercion and money extortion. Think of environmental taxes and energy taxes and of the looted and robbed poor people taxes for drafty houses because the draft strips have been stolen by these successive governments and their non-watertight legislators. One of them again today

      1. I agree with you Fons, the industry created by capitalism simply does not have the main agenda of collaborating with nature or promoting development in harmony with it, it is about profit. Shunned only means to be able to achieve that profit, even if it is at the expense of nature, and ultimately also at the expense of humans.

      1. Looks like the address is good. I also do not understand why the link does not work, but the article can be found via Google.
        This new study comes with interesting results, yet I don't just believe the findings. The influence of CO2 on temperature is not denied even by climate skeptics, but according to this article there is no relationship at all between CO2 concentration and temperature. That's strange. Also, I don't understand this passage that much: "Because, Lu argues, the concentrations of other greenhouse gases are already 'saturated', ie an additional increase does not produce an additional greenhouse effect, and that of CFCs does not yet, an increase in the CFC content will have an even greater impact." It is new to me that CO2 above a certain concentration has no additional influence on the greenhouse effect.

    1. Again with the vague uncontrolled documentaries? Get it right: just because beautiful pictures flash by does not immediately make it true. In your hunger for conspiracies and alternative opinions, you forget that it is really about the truth. As soon as there is a documentary that paints an alternative picture, you hopefully immediately use it as proof. Maybe you don't even realize you are being cheated on with pseudo-scientific nonsense everywhere?
      That documentary you quote is horribly badly put together. Lies, deceit, selective quotation, etc. All to persuade people who are not willing to go into it deeper.

      1. Lukas I offer a possibility, which can be viewed, one can then draw conclusions from it if one looks at everything critically, I think I think you very resolutely reject certain other things that have been put forward, which you refer to as a reproach towards others. does not shy away from making judgments according to certain unfounded assumptions which otherwise does not seem to be based on very solid arguments. Because it is an open discussion and should remain and still fulfill your urgent wish. look again and also critically weigh the possibilities. Furthermore, I also immediately place an answer addressed to the article, otherwise it only seems to be a bit personal and that is not my intention at all.

      1. I continue to find it very difficult to separate the interests of the sources from the outcome of certain studies lucas, perhaps because I see the broader picture of what has an outcome that is dismissed by some and by all kinds of interests and motives as nonsense. Remember me further substantively from commenting on the article. Furthermore, I had already posted a relevant comment as indicated earlier in a comment, By coincidence the same link that you have provided, so our thinking is not always in conflict with each other . :-) That response has been stopped for some reason for some reason, it could be that the server is sometimes a bit overloaded or for whatever reason. This is indicated.
        Your response is awaiting approval.
        May 31, 2013 at 2:57 pm · Reply   

        1. Ah look there you have it again: real sources are unreliable because they have all kinds of interests. Only those who support your opinion are reliable, even if they are not widely accepted in science.
          Sorry, but there is no discussion whatsoever with such an opponent. Any evidence I can possibly provide is worthless in advance because it does not support your opinion.

        2. Only the proponents of your opinion are reliable ””
          With all the perils that could be very true in the meantime. Remember that one of them took off € 35,000 this week because he wanted to look at a sore knee in Haren. And despite the desire to be a notary scholar, he too has been known as extremely unreliable, even criminal. The learned gw community (yes a real village already) is known to shut up disputing scholars / colleagues Worldwide and chronically.

  2. Read my personal experiences and you will understand why the CO2 story is crazy.
    Air pollution is the cause of climate change. Unfortunately, they couldn't knock money out of the taxpayers' pockets. The polluters did not want to pay and invented the CO2 lie.
    Sounds familiar? The bankers are now doing the same again with to big to fail.

  3. A very delicate subject where opinions seem to be strongly divided, but here too one should look very critically at all possibilities. Here is a substantiated counter-opinion regarding the CFC concentration:
    According to Forbes, certain things could even point to the crime of the century:

    According to this climate researcher, there is no solid evidence that CO2 levels are subject to human behavior. Tests have been conducted showing that there have been peaks that were even higher when modern humans did not exist.
    The thought and connection certainly lead to these findings. It seems a little strange that the sun is often or so much disregarded in important climate issues.
    The fact that the CO2 concentration can fluctuate in short times can also indicate the storms and activities on / from the sun, which in itself is also subject to cycles, according to this study by NASA 23Sept. 2008
    According to Nasa the Sun's output is suddenly dropping and it is already “13% cooler”. This is hard science and not a computer model

  4. Rik Kleinsmit

    CFCs, like methane, are much better at retaining heat. Of course, since the ban on CFCs as a propellant in aerosol cans and as a coolant in refrigerators, CFCs are much less common in the atmosphere, but relatively speaking, the effect of CFCs is indeed greater.
    CFCs thereby deplete the ozone layer. Because that ozone layer filters ultraviolet light, the ozone layer protects us from too strong ultraviolet radiation.
    I've had it with all those conspiracy theories.

  5. I would like to see the climate also give people the solutions instead of just pounding the problem very hard. 

    With the documentary Green Gold, Tegenlicht shows that we can restore completely eroded ecosystems and if you have good vegetation again, a lot of CO2 is captured from the air and stored in organic material. 

    In China, among other things, an area the size of Belgium so restored and also projects in South America, Africa and the Middle East.

    The solutions for these environmental problems are simply already there, it is high time that we started implementing the solutions from the problem phase. 

    1. Yes, simply stop globalization and allow third world countries to stop producing and terminate the mafius oil and banking sector that is solely self-interested or put them under receivership. And of course send existing learned order home. Otherwise nothing will ever improve.

  6. In line with that idea, new trees are also planted when trees are felled for use in industry and for the paper industry, but if one were to plant cannabis in those large empty fields of cannabis, many applications of the product could be used in humans. It has many vitamins in the seeds and also nutrients. Can be used as food, and a source for making paper, textile, rope, etc., but also as medication and one could also reduce the Co2 content because the plant has in addition to all those other applications also have a very high CO2 absorption, and the advantage that it grows very quickly.

  7. There is an interesting opinion about CFCs in the commemorative merger book nrc + Handelsblad. On page 188 is an article claiming that the CFC political madness was invented by Du-Pont because their Freon patents had expired and new refrigerant gases had to be put on the market!
    Furthermore, about the fact that CO2 in a window would absorb IR radiation: this opinion is very bold because it is an extremely narrow frequency range, more like a dip of 17 µm in the spectrum: slightly different than H2O that absorbs entire bands between IR and far in the shortwave range! See page 33 in the book: “Air pollution and weather” edition KNMI, Staatsdrukkerij.
    Moreover, it is often not stated in the absorption of IR by CO2 that this absorption tip has nothing to do with gas conductivity or with faster spinning electrons, but everything with the extension of the extremely long electron paths of carbon: that is why CO2 quickly emits the absorbed IR again. if 14µm stronger: that is the CO2 laser !!! Even more: from the Martian atmosphere we can otherwise easily measure their emitted IR at 14 µm and despite their 98% CO2 it never gets warmer than + 17 ° C there.

    1. everything with the extension of the extremely long electron pathways of carbon ””
      The carbon blankets of Werled air traffic do 90% of all heating and barely 10% of all global logistics. They want to double that in the next 20 years. No political agenda or social problems have penetrated this.
      Sailant is that the global warming scientists have never mentioned these influences yet this had to be discovered with the wtc attack with the usa air traffic being forced to stay on the ground for two days.
      They have also kept silent about the Russian weather data and data about the South Pole.
      Much worse is that for 43 years they have been hiding Clean CO2-free Geothermal heat from 180 ° C at 5 kilometers right under our butts in favor of the oil and gas industry whose profits do not belong to Us. A horticulturist is already running all the way at 72 ° C at a depth of 2.1 kilometers and also provides the entire Village with everything with it.
      But hey again waste and pollute useless billions in gwtech and with taxes and the alternative energy sector. Hundreds of billions have already been stolen from their businesses (including utilities and cars) and trucks with trucks.

    2. Well, imagine that the switch from coal to gas, which has caused water nuisance in recent years, since water is 1 of the combustion products of natural gas? It also underlines that this did not cause warming, apparently given that the temp had not risen for 16 years after the switch from coal to gas…. But maybe it is a burden otherwise.

  8. 1801:
    All seasons are too cold. This continues through 1810.

    Cool summer.

    Probably too cold
    So every 100 years it automatically gets cold :)

  9. Like CO2, CFCs contribute to the greenhouse effect. There is not one single factor that explains all warming since 1800. Part is due to CO2, another part to CFCs and part can be explained by natural variation.
    It is a pity that with this position you are labeled a climate skeptic and are not taken seriously.

    1. But it is climate skepticism, only at a higher level. The reasoning:
      1) CFCs provide global warming
      2) Less CFCs are injected into the air
      3) This has prevented the global temperature from rising
      conclusion: global warming is no longer a problem.

      1. A more annoying problem than global warming is the acidification of the oceans due to carbon dioxide. Even if the temperature rise due to carbon dioxide remains within limits, this problem continues to play a role.

        2. You are mistaken. CFCs> carbon> air traffic what they want to double over the next 20 years, the CFC blankets are laid and 90% are responsible.
        With the two days alone that US air traffic was kept on the ground because of the WTC attack, the global temperature already dropped 1.8 ° C in those two days. What if they had been standing just a little longer, since disappearing from the sky from 8 to 12 kilometers altitude naturally takes a little longer than emissions from ground traffic?
        So the deception is twofold> they write all their environmental crimes on our account and they go through with that burden on the environment the trees and the World as if nothing can harm them. That is truly double billions of profits in all areas for them and not for Us who have to pay ALL of that from them.
        If one starts looking at what kind of disaster their industrial exports to low-wages and third world countries are, then these are immediately very dangerous elements for everything and everyone because the spirit of “after them the flood” is very present in such actions and scavenging!
        Their geomilitary and geopolitical actions and deeds also show that they are cheating in all areas and the environment and energy taxes are at most further looting and robbery, as all the activity indicates that they apparently want us to fuel their oil for another hundred years. And again keep silent about the clean geothermal energy because building wind turbines has already made a real industry and thus cancer that wants to continue to be fed. They also let all taxes flow away via budgets and subsidies to companies of their families and never see you again, just as Mercedes has been heavily cheated for several decades with subsidies and hydrogen technology. Let alone the billions of robbing utilities that have all been theirs since the looting privatizations by the banks and nobility. Privatizations… a truck with which the rock shields possessed the whole of England two centuries ago and with blunt robbery deception and Murder turned out to be the mastery of all the property and possessions of peoples.
        Worldwide, an intensive discouragement policy in favor of the bankster and oil industry has been implemented and imposed in very devious indirect ways when costs and prices represent revenues too high and too low and with tax threats obstructing regulation and legislation and sowing poverty, also with, among others, those energy and environmental taxes. as a result of which the citizen becomes completely incapable of building a better road on his own initiative.
        3. the temperature had not been rising for 16 years. And so it was lied to for 16 years. The conversion from coal to gas did! An exchange of carbon monoxide and sulfur for the extra CO2 and extra water vapor from the natural gas and that did not lead to an increase in temperature to put that very expensive CO2 trick of science once again.
        "" Is the acidification of the oceans by carbon dioxide. "
        To me, a source such as the industrialization of low-wages and third world countries seems to be more of a cause than any co2. The ports around those countries are already dead far out to sea. In Thailand, thousands die every year from China's flares for their bio oil fields. In the south of Europe, all the sea areas are dead and marine life is affected. These countries appear to have an unscrupulous yield spirit without an eye for consequences. The coal and oil industry in those countries, let alone wood combustion, is of course still thriving, as is the case in large-scale consumer China. They still have an entire coal province above Beijing. So the more they produce for us, the more coal that has to be excavated. Take away all achievements and efforts because of some money grubbers who shipped our / their industry to China under the pretext of globalization etc to disrupt the population there and get rid of their culture and existing infrastructure as they did and mine us with their Romans and Christianity as well because the profit is gone before they move on to greener pastures of life elsewhere. And from all the works and efforts, the profits only eventually flow into those one banker pockets, which is a true mystery of centuries. And they leave nations dislocated and destitute: That is called if they are still alive. That is the banking economy and culture of scorched Earth and Nations.

      3. The whole co2 trading construction is also an accounting fraud and further aggravation of all environmental pollution as this provides FALSE data for polluting countries. Also, with pre-established legal immunity and irrecoverables, that co2 trading has already grown into multi-billion dollar scams and robberies.
        Again double pollution and double costs and damage with greetings from all those states, those people trafficking eucommsie and legislators! Their parliamentary questions #O Do you have a bonus for them?

  10. Nevertheless, it does not seem to me to be ruled out that geo-engineering (chem-trails) can be completely ruled out regarding the cause of global warming.
    Below a following link to support and further explain the theory about the possibility of influencing the climate via chem-trails / geo-engineering, this block that I wish to highlight from an article by VOS (Volatile Organic Compounds) from the Vlaamse Milieu Maatschappij VMM which reads, among other things:

    Aliphatic and olefinic compounds

    Aliphatic and olefinic compounds are usually harmless, with a few exceptions. Methane (CH4), for example, is a simple, non-toxic compound that enhances global warming. And promotes ozone formation in the free troposphere.
    Another example is ethylene, which causes premature ripening and rotting of fruits. The Belgian strawberry culture has a say in this… It is a colorless and odorless gas that is used in the production of polymers.
    Finally, certain unsaturated hydrocarbons, such as isoprene and terpenes, play an important role in photochemical smog formation.
    It is remarkable that these substances originate from nature, namely from plants. However, that does not make them any less harmful.

    The possibility exists that the gas methane was used to realize warming, the following video:

    It could be further investigated by own research that cases presented might have the possibility that it could serve a certain agenda. some tangible evidence of a possible wish / plan to bring the world population back to a certain number. To illustrate that possible theory a bit, although it might seem off-topic in this topic but because of the connection with climate warming to each other to connect / link; I would also like to contribute the following video to explain that: Plans To Depopulate The Earth 80% For Future Man's Survival (full)

    1. And yet no geo-engaging project can compete with world air traffic and the industrialization of low-wage and third world countries. These are all spider theories that rub the banksters in our faces so that we do not see through their hushed up and hidden poisoning and contamination of their industry and country policies. Like what they did with their roundup and woolman salts and chemical waste in the fuels of seagoing ships, let alone the methyl lead in the gasoline for decades. Everything cancerous first order. Also concealed. Of course, they would like you to go hysterically looking for crazy silver iodide-sowing professors and keep an eye on every exhaust gas from airplanes like a mad dog.

      1. In this respect, the Story of environmental whistleblower Ad de Rooij is of course an extremely illuminating subject about what those deceivers really are all about to disguise. The suffering and fate they brought to him on top of that is an important sign, as well as their silence about those matters.
        Or consider what they do to so many whistleblowers. And they all touch on true and important matters. If you hear them complain about someone on TV libel slander criminalize sniff and honor, then you will soon see who they want to kill for their own sake. That's how I came across my best whistleblower friends from them. If the TV appreciates someone it is usually a crook beast and villain and if they kill one a hero and good guy. Exactly so with Nobel Prizes… a racial-political crime weapon, partly for the financial elitist-racial monopolization of science and power. Fascist is not on their foreheads as they usually do to their victims. School systems to trap the natives financially educationally separated in the lowest classes of their own countries / society defenseless and kept poor.

    2. No professor can compete with the already natural methane production either. Only the decomposition processes of wood already exceed any human influence of methane and would burn wood / leaves / grass / crop / poo in order to bypass the methane decomposition cycle would be a stool.
      An all-burning power plant has even been developed with ZERO harmful emissions. Unfortunately sabotaged because of self-interest, as a separation process that made unseparated and even cheaper garbage collection possible has been sabotaged and is concealed. The latter “cheaper” did not suit some self-interested parties!
      There are spirits that earn from your suffering and the more suffering they can cause, the more you pay them and preferably chronically organized as an industry so that you have to remain sick and dependent for life, as that industry naturally wants to see a profit. Much is based on that. One death the other the bread is their nature and philosophy. For example, the roundup based on agent orange that they spouted lavishly through the streets for years caused resounding seas of allergies and cancer, among other things. Many people in Vietnam look like swampthings because of that junk and so do their offspring. What about us? Of course your doctor is happy with so much carving and a second Porsche.
      Immerse yourself in the psychopath in the Munchhaus syndromes, the schizophrenic, the borderline, the starvation, rape and war trauma, and don't be more surprised about the country lines.

      1. They also dumped 6000 tons of agent orange on Somalia, which resulted in those 10 million starvation victims, so they are also waiting for those consequences.

  11. I totally agree, Fons, it is the whole picture that you paint here, it is much bigger than just the environment, the system is rotten by a few who run the whole thing, the 'invisible' ghosts behind the curtains of the world stage. The greater the crime, the greater the worship. It seems to me to be a collaboration of a cult that causes chaos through elements in the air and on the ground, which seems to have a certain agenda.

Leave a Comment