Atmospheric Inference Response (AIR)

[Earthlink]

Earth's Living Things:

Since all Life on Earth exists in the Biosphere, I think this would be a good place to start this thread and mission. The number of Earth's Living Things is in rapid decline, and if we continue to ignore this, there will all too quickly come a time when there will be nothing left to add to this folder. Therefore, we're going to need a team of people dedicated to just this, the Atmosphere.

If you, or anyone you know, may be interested in helping with this project, please contact me here. The more the merrier.

The aim of AIR is to take control of and regulate the composition of the Atmosphere. Whether through emissions or methane release or both, the composition of our atmosphere has changed in the past 4 decades more than it has at any other time, and it has already crossed the line into being uninhabitable. When the first of any species anywhere succumbed to the change in the composition of the Atmosphere, that definition became valid.

AIR fully aims to bring noticeable change to the quality of all Life here, wherein even the sky above you will be made a deeper shade of blue through the actions of this project. Since Oxygen is blue, and is the reason for the blue-ness of the sky, by cleaning out the pollutants and re-enriching the level of that element in the sky, the sky will look a deeper shade of blue when this project is completed than it does today, if you are young, or will be restored to that deeper shade of blue you once knew, if you are older.

Warm Regards and Thank You for your time,

[Alekahn2]

Posted by Earthlink (here)
Earth's Living Things:

AIR fully aims to bring noticeable change to the quality of all Life here, wherein even the sky above you will be made a deeper shade of blue through the actions of this project. Since Oxygen is blue, and is the reason for the blue-ness of the sky, by cleaning out the pollutants and re-enriching the level of that element in the sky, the sky will look a deeper shade of blue when this project is completed than it does today, if you are young, or will be restored to that deeper shade of blue you once knew, if you are older.

Good day Earthlink. You may want to look into the Tyndall Effect or as it is known to physicists ~ Rayleigh scattering. Many scientists believe the sky is blue because of the way in which the Earth's atmosphere scatters light from our star, not because of the color of (liquid) oxygen.

I admire your mission though, as we industrious humans have most certainly wreaked havoc with the atmosphere. All the best to you.

[Earthlink]

Well, what you're pointing out is actually a very big problem here these days.

Who is responsible for collecting all of the books which have dated and no longer relevant information in them, or should they just remain in circulation with the ability to then mis-inform any new readers of the dated and no longer accepted material(s)?

When we discover something new which renders past "beliefs" fictional, how do we update all of our data sets at the same time?

Anyway, I am a physicist, and I'm well aware of the old theory as to why the sky is blue, but as you've stated above it is a flawed theory because it depends on our atmosphere doing the same thing that a clear prism does to the entering light, as in, "blue because of the way in which the Earth's atmosphere scatters light from our star"

Our atmosphere is the wrong shape to "scatter light". For all intents and purposes our atmosphere is akin to a single piece of flat glass, and does not, in fact, scatter the entering light; that concept was borrowed from the way light behaves going through irregular shaped clear mediums, as in the cover of the Pink Floyd album Dark Side of the Moon, and when passing through uniform mediums such as a flat piece of glass, there isn't any of this scattering.

In any event, more proof as to why this theory is flawed exists in light itself: the visible light spectrum, to our naked eyes, goes from infra red to ultra violet. This theory above asserts that because blue light waves are shorter and red light waves are longest, (if our atmosphere actually scattered light in the first place, which, it doesn't) the blues do more bouncing around and give the hue of a blue sky, however, blue is not the colour we would see in the sky were this true, the sky would be violet, since it is the violet shades which are the shortest of the short, not blue.

Many scientists accept many things these days, many of which are biased by industrial practices, like the growing and sale of tobacco products for example, and, all are not huntsmen who can blow the huntsman's horn.

peace

*edited* cognitive dissonance:

many will read this and then rather than just accept that the old is bunk, and never should have been accepted so widely, they will actually try to reason why even though violet light waves are in fact the shortest, it is still the blue which bounce around more?!?! and they may even conjure a reason as to why blue is able to break the laws of physics, just to support what was already accepted by their ego.

[Earthlink]

This is why this forum fails, for me, and why I'm not going to participate here much longer either. All are not huntsmen who can blow the huntsman's horn, but that never stops them from blowing it anyway, and frankly, it sounds horrible, discordant, and incessant.

[Alekahn2]

Posted by Earthlink (here)
Well, what you're pointing out is actually a very big problem here these days.

Who is responsible for collecting all of the books which have dated and no longer relevant information in them, or should they just remain in circulation with the ability to then mis-inform any new readers of the dated and no longer accepted material(s)?

When we discover something new which renders past "beliefs" fictional, how do we update all of our data sets at the same time?

Good day Earthlink.
Excellent points you've made. Firstly, allow me to say that what I edited out of my above post was that the scientists of our world may indeed be in error around such "beliefs".

The reason I responded to your post was this. Some years back, I taught at an independent alternative elementary school and was pointedly asked on more than one occasion, "why is the sky blue?". The first time I was asked this by a 5th grader (11 yrs. old), I honestly had to say to him that I didn't know, but that I would investigate it and get back with him to discuss.

I was studying color theory at the time, being a painter (definitely not a scientist), and was reading Goethe's Theory of Color and Kandinsky's theories as well. I was (and am) asking what is the nature of light? It is a difficult science, the science of color (and thus of light).

I am in agreement with you Earthlink, that much in the modern scientific viewpoint is heavily biased and will in the near future be shown (proven) to be inaccurate and misleading. Your posts are of interest to me and I will take them in and ponder your thoughts.

Just wanted you to know that not all of us are bound tightly (beholden) to the standard explanations given us by current scientific models to be ceaselessly regurgitated. I for one, am not.

One day, I hope to truly understand what seems like a simple query. Why indeed is the sky blue? Still a mystery it is for me. Thanks for your responses.

Peace to you.

[Earthlink]

Well, Gold is an element, and it has a colour. So is Silver, and Iron and Lead. And Oxygen: it's blue, and very likely why water and oceans are blue too. Nitrogen appears colourless, and Hydrogen, I'm not sure of its' colour, but diamonds which are almost pure Carbon in composition, seem colour-less as well.

As to why colours exist is things? I'm not sure yet, and I've never actually thought about why the different colours appear in white light. I know that colours play a very important role in the reproductive process of most plants, and that flowers, even though they don't have eyes like ours to see things, still produce spectacular images in colour all over their flower petals.

I'm sure there's a very good logical reason as to why the sky is blue, and my current belief is that it reflects the colour of the element Oxygen that is in it. Remember, a glass of water will seem to be any colour if you add just one drop of food colouring into it, so, I believe the same is true in the sky, and water.

So, other than the shade of blue that has lightened during my lifetime (falling O2 level in our atmosphere) is there anything else of this post that you think is pertinent?

[lizfrench]

I want to be part of the AIR project, what can I do to get started?

[Earthlink]

The method we need for this is described in Post 7 here.