I've been expecting something like this to eventually turn up.
As I pointed out in the first of my articles on This Divine Land (or did I?), the diseases, if, in fact, it was diseases, that wiped out the native Americans (in the case of Squanto's tribe, there's some suspicions that one or more of the neigboring tribes played a role) may very well have arrived from elsewhere.
How does this video support my hypothesis?
This documentary almost proves that different strains of Syphilis appear to have hit both Europe AND the Americas before Columbus' first voyage was ever even conceived.
How can that be?
Simple.
There are two ways.
First, the Marco Polo scenario.
Marco Polo's family just traced the connections backwards along the Silk Road until they arrived in China. Prior to this, China was as legendary to Europeans as Atlantis or the Garden of Eden. The traditional secrecy merchants usually shroud their sources in couldn't prevent some knowledge of that distant land from filtering through, especially as each leg of the relay ferrying the goods to Europe will have been able to speak one another's languages, and even spend some time in one another's company, just as Marco Polo's adventures showed us. Still, no one had ever made the entire trip in one journey, so no one had any direct knowledge, at least no one who could or would try to capitalize an his journey the way Marco Polo did. In a very real sense, Marco Polo's family discovered China for Europe every bit as much as Columbus discovered the Americas for them.
Likewise, it's now clear, that there was also relay trade betwee the Americas and the rest of the world long before Columbus, as the Book of Mormon makes clear, Thor Heyerdahl proved feasible, Balibanova's mummies proved beyond doubt, and Gavin Menzies as much as chronicled. But Europe had at least heard rumors and legends of a distant land to the east, and this because of relay trade on at least a periodic basis between China and Europe over various routes for millennia. Trade connections with the Americas were apparently kept more secret by a combination of distance, language, and shifting politics on both sides interrupting relations.
The point, though, is this: There was trade all up and down both the east and west coasts of the Americas, and trade, just as today, is the primary vector for spreading diseases globally.
If a chinese presence on the west coast of the Americas preceded Columbus by seventy years, as Gavin Menzies asserts, then they would would have certainly also brought with them the diseases for which China has long been famous. (You do know that our flu strains originate there, don't you?) Now, with seventy years to cross the Rocky Mountains via relay trade among the natives, it's entirely likely that Syphilis would have mutated into other strains. Then there might well have been two strains running amok in Europe.
By the way, Columbus most likely did not die of Syphilis, but, according to a forensic pathologist I was reading many years ago, of reactive arthritis contracted from the birds he kept with him in his cabin for safe return to Spain.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Hammer
Here's some more about the illegal computer called The Hammer that you probable ought to know.
The seven dwarves, and their satellite coterie have already been taken off line (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), so The Hammer probably isn't operational any more either, but I'm still trying to confirm that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Water
I just tried to melt an icecube in my microwave. I nuked it for a full minute at maximum power. What happened? The microwave wasted a minute's worth of electricity. That's all. It had absolutely no effect on those two tiny tablespoons of solid water.
That's just the nature of solid water and microwaves.
Liquid water is quite another matter.
I nuked 1/4 cup of liquid water in the same microwave, at the same power-level, and the water started boiling at 40 seconds, vigorously by 1 minute.
What's the point?
Microwaves are radar. Radar passes right through ice as if it weren't there. Not so water, even in its gaseous state. This is why satellites can use radar to map Antarctica, but not the ocean floor. This is also why radar can see clouds, but not humidity, not water vapor.
This is also why water vapor is the only real greenhouse gas.
Infrared is close to microwave/radar, and is equally ignored by ice, but absorbed by water, both liquid and gas. This is why humid air feels so much colder below about 70 degrees Fahrenheit, and warmer above 70. That water near our skins will either absorb heat from our bodies, or impart heat to them. And not just our bodies. Pretty much everything experiences this energy transfer.
Why?
Because liquid and gaseous water is such an excellent conductor of heat. That's why we use it as a coolant in our cars. It absorbs heat readily, and releases it just as readily. This is similar to how a cold porcelain toilet rim will really wake you up even on warmish days, so you lower the lid for more comfort. That wood or plastic lid absorbs heat from your body far less readily, especially when the temperature of that porcelain is lower than your body's temperature.
That's thermodynamics for you.
So, where am I going with this?
This is another example of how difficult it can be to be a house-bound researcher. I'm conducting experiments with our family microwave, for crying out loud. In the kitchen no less. Anything more exotic than that, I have to get from someone else, and I have to trust them.
So, what do I need?
I need data. I need infrared images of both the day and night sides of the earth for an entire year. I need satellite and ground-station temperature, humidity, and location data for that same year. I need to overlay the two data sets, and corellate them.
Why?
I suspect that I can show something that I can't find anywhere else. Yet. And that is that the higher the absolute humidity in a region of the atmosphere at any altitude corellates directly with a reduction of infrared radiation from the earth on the daylight side, and an increase on the night side.
We've all seen this before. Well, I have, anyway. And that is that cloudy nights are generally warmer than clear nights. This is especially pronounced in arid regions. We would regularly see 100 degree temperatures in Santa Clarita, CA at around 1400-1500 PDT, but, twelve hours later, the ambient air temperature would have often dropped as much as 50 degrees. And, when you're accustomed to 100 degree days, you suffer hypothermia during 50 degree nights. In fact, the only place I ever got hypothermia in my life was camping with our ward Boy Scout troop on the Florida panhandle, the hot-n-humid Gulf Coast.
But, in cloudy Germany and western New York, surrounded by the Great Lakes, nighttime temperatures rarely dropped more than 30 degrees below the daytime highs, and then only when a cold-front was moving across us. I still recall sleeping under the stars on my grandmother's front yard with nothing more than a thin sleeping bag.
Wait! You said stars. Didn't you mean clouds?
No. When the air is humid enough, you don't need clouds to achieve that greenhouse gas, blanket effect. Clouds will do it, too, but humid air is only part of the equation resulting in clouds.
So, what am I saying?
I'm saying that we can coordinate satellites and ground-stations to view in realtime when humidity is trapping heat during the day, and releasing it at night.
Currently, weather services have to guesstimate this information based on recent temperature and humidity levels, and projected humidity levels and other factors, like barometer and wind.
If we could see this happening in real-time, it would go a long way toward dispelling any notions of carbon-dioxide behaving anything like water vapor, comprising only a tiny fraction of the atmosphere by volume, and that fraction, pound-for-pound, absorbing less than half the infrared heat from either the sun or the earth that water does.
In fact, what we have here is a self-balancing system. As the oceans absorb more heat, ice melts, and ocean water evaporates. Everyone forgets that part.
What do I mean?
I mean that too many people are screaming about melting glaciers and polar caps raising the height of the oceans, but they forget that the same heat also increases water evaporation from the oceans. And that means more clouds.
But you said humidity and clouds aren't related.
No. I said they are not directly related. Humidity is only part of the equation. Cosmic bombardment is required, too.
But here's the rub. As people freak out about the decrease in white surface at the poles to reflect away sunlight, they forget that the oceans have been evaporating more, making clouds more likely, and those clouds are closer to the equator where they reflect twice as much sunlight as at the poles. Moreover, being water vapor, they absorb the infrared, which continues the process of warming the oceans, and evaporating even more seawater at night.
It's a self-balancing system.
With one caveat.
It's only self-balancing above a certain temperature.
Eh?
Reverse the scenario I just painted for you. Let the temperature drop just a couple of degrees on average globally. Less seawater evaporates. Less humidity in the air means less heat-retention at night. Fewer clouds mean less rain on land. Dryer air over the oceans means stronger sea and land breezes. This leads to desertification of coastal areas, such as we see around the Mediterranian and on our own southwestern coast, all the way down past Mexico. This same effect is why the Pacific coast north of San Francisco, and all the way up well into Alaska is classified as a rain forest. Lower the temperature a bit more, and that Goldilocks zone will move north from Monterrey to Portland. The ice caps' average sizes will grow about 10%, but so will glaciers, further depriving the atmosphere of moisture. The lack of humidity will give us desert-like nighttime temperatures over a wider area, like even here in Indiana, as night skies grow clear AND dry.
And it's getting pretty important to know. Below a certain threshhold, the system becomes a runaway. Archaeologists have found such times before. Just look up The Late Bronze Age Collapse, when the Nile dried up. The earth was actually going through a cooling period. And the Pharaoh of upper Egypt was so proud that his management prevented anyone from starving to death one year ... just one year ... that he actually had it carved on the wall of the palace.
Lower Egypt wasn't so lucky.
Oh, by the way, guess when the Late Bronze Age Collapse happened. About 1200 BC. That puts it just about the time of the Exodus, when Egypt suffered those awful plagues that Immanuel Velikovsky so brilliantly illustrated for us.
By the way, did you notice? That Wikipedia article mentions the effects of atmoshperic water vapor on temperature. But it neglects to mention the oceans' effects.
As global temperatures cool, ice mass increases, and oceanic volume decreases, depriving coastal areas of water, inland areas of rain. More importanly, it decreases the thermal inertial capacity of both the atmosphere AND the oceans.
And temperatures are dropping, as shown, not only by actual measurement, but by the Milankovitch Cycles, too: We are entering another period of glaciation.
And, then again, maybe that's why I'm unable to find that data.
I included that one above to show how they trick us. Look at that first chart again. Does it show warming or cooling? Hint: It's reversed. Today is on the left, not the right. It shows us warming up out of the last ice age, and then steadily cooling.
By the way, almost all those temperatures are guesses. They guesstimate based on atmospheric gasses trapped in trees, ice, sediments, rocks. It's pretty clever, but it's still just a guess, and still prone to the same logical fallacy that Peter pointed out: Assuming that things in the past were like they are today, slow, gradual, steady, and even the same sunlight, all of which is completely wrong. And so are their temperature guesses.
Betcha wonder what on earth I put that one there for, eh?
The natural state of this earth is much warmer than it is now. Both poles show evidence of a tropical past. So, where did all the ice come from?
I'll tell ya later.
But it relates to global cooling, and Galatians 4.
As above, so below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~