Telephone: 0425 737 370

Tuesday, 9 July 2012
Dear Reader.

Today the big debate about ‘global warming’ (now changed into ‘climate change’ because the world hasn’t warmed as threatened by those promoting ‘global warming’ – as shown unequivocally by satellite observation since 1979) revolves around the ‘greenhouse’ theory and so-called ‘greenhouse’ gases, with carbon dioxide (CO2) as the most maligned ‘greenhouse’ gas both in the media and by some of our politicians. Indeed, CO2 is featured continuously as being ‘carbon pollution’! Wonderful!

Now here’s an interesting question: Guess which gas is not on the official list of pollutants published by the Australian Government? Perhaps you’ve guessed? Surely it’s not that ‘dreadful pollutant’ CO2 – is it?

Don’t believe it? Check it out for yourself – here:

Allow me to point out several indisputable facts about CO2:

We breathe it out;
It’s invisible;
Plants need it in order to grow – more of it make them grow faster and with less water needed, and the same plants retain the carbon and release oxygen back into the atmosphere for us to breathe in;
It’s heavier than air!

Now, if it’s heavier than air how come it is supposedly floating ‘up there’ causing a ‘greenhouse’ effect?

Think about it! (A technical answer is set out below)

Various records, notably including ice-cores from deep-drilling in Greenland and Antarctica, show quite clearly that increases in temperatures lead to increases in atmospheric levels of CO2 and, vice versa, decreases in temperatures lead to decreases in atmospheric levels of CO2. This is exactly the opposite to the claims made by people promoting ‘anthropogenic’ (man-made) ‘global warming’!

So, the question is: “What else can be the primary cause of climatic variations if it’s not CO2?”

Allow me to introduce my field of intensive study and research for over thirty years: magnetism and gravity, the atomic theory, and weather pattern records.

To begin with, it is necessary to consider this: the Earth is a giant magnet – which is why a magnetic compass works. The Moon is also a magnet, although it’s not as big as the Earth. And then there’s a much, much bigger one in our Solar System – the Sun! By comparison with the Earth and the Moon, it’s huge.

Let me assure you that I’m not alone in what I have to say because there are others who have studied these magnetic forces and have reached the same conclusion. And what is that conclusion? It is that there are cyclical changes in the interrelationship of the magnetic fields of the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun (and, by the way, with the other planets in the Solar System and, indeed, with the Sun’s and Solar System’s ever-changing position as everything orbits around our Milky Way galaxy – a process that takes about 125,000 years to complete just one orbit.)

Now here’s an interesting thing: not only are we on Earth orbiting around the Sun once a year, but we are constantly changing the position in Space of the Earth relative to the Sun’s Equator. This means that our position oscillates either side of the Sun’s Equator. This is a similar orbital cycle as to why our Moon oscillates between out Earth poles.

And what can we do about it?

Well unless you are very, very clever indeed or are, alternatively, off your head, the answer is: absolutely nothing!

So what has this to do with our weather and climate here on Earth?

It’s simply because our atmosphere reacts to changes in magnetic influences, particularly by the Sun and, to a lesser extent, by the Moon. These influences have been well-known and demonstrated for a long, long time by the twin tides in the oceans. And then there is the demonstration of the auroras – the Aurora Borealis in the Northern Hemisphere and the Aurora Australis in the Southern Hemisphere. These phenomena occur when there are severe magnetic ‘storms’ on the Sun and arrive to react within our atmosphere.
Again there is the question: And what can we do about it? To which there is only one answer: ‘Nothing’!

One part of my research has been into the true nature of magnetic fields, and to my surprise I might add – is that unlike the diagrams you will see in all the popularly-accepted textbooks, the shape of a magnetic field is quite different to that shown in all the conventional diagrams. Those diagrams show a shape like a rugby football; and I’ve discovered that the true shape is rather like that of a peanut, i.e., there is a narrowing in the centre indicating an intense magnetic pressure at this point.

Now think about this: “Why do you think that the weather patterns in the tropical regions of the Earth are so different to those areas to the north and to the south?” Check out: Figure 2-3 Gauss Meter readings of Magnetic Pressure,( p54) and note the difference of these readings at each pole face.

Don’t believe what I’ve just told you? Go and have a look at this little demonstration:

As part of my research into magnetism I have also looked at the question of ‘what is gravity?’ This could be rephrased as ‘where does it come from?’ To be brief, my research has shown that these two things – magnetism and gravity – are directly related to each other. And here’s another interesting question: “Do you know that the force of gravity is different in different locations, and even at different times of the day?” Almost no-one knows this, and yet the Australian Government has official publication from which you can check that what I’ve just told you is true. Check it out for yourself – here:

Now, I have worked out how to calculate these values geometrically! This seems mind-boggling I know, and it required a completely different approach in order to do this, aided by the fact that I was a design-draftsman for many years and thus I used this skill in a manner that made this research quite unique. The result has been that I have used this geometric process to make these calculations many times over, with my results agreeing with the official gravity values shown in the Australian Government publication. (The official calculations of gravity values were determined by a team of people working on each experiment within a three-hour time frame. And why is three hours relevant? Simply it is because of the rotation of the Earth.) So, perhaps I got it right then?

Here’s just one example (Colac, Victoria):  (diagram to be inserted)


It was as a result of this exploration of gravity and of ‘gravity values’ that I started to question why there are different gravity values. Indeed, this led to the search for what it is that actually causes this ‘thing’ we call ‘gravity’. What is it, in fact? This resulted in me starting to look at the Atomic Theory, and of the ratios of the nucleus of an atom and the electrons surrounding that nucleus of the different elements. This led ultimately to the discovery that the weight (mass) of an element is proportional to the ratio between the electron(s) mass diameter to its nucleus mass diameter.

I found that this ratio happened to be the very value that is accepted as the gravity value. (Indeed, I have calculated the gravity values of 103 of the elements in the Periodic Table as a result of this discovery.)

It was after this discovery that I was able to compare these ‘gravity values’ with accepted magnetic values and that both of these things have one thing in common: they result from the activity of electrons in all elements.
It was because of this that a profound truth has emerged: ‘gravity values’ and ‘magnetic values’ are virtually the same, something that seems to have been overlooked completely in conventional science.

And so, I can see that day coming that through our fast-developing technologies that the science-fiction fantasies of ‘anti-gravity’ flight will, like so many other things, become a reality at sometime in the future, and at the rate of technological progress, possibly in the not-too-distant future, at that!

The Real Cause of Climate Change!

So is it really some amorphous gases, such as CO2, that can drive changes in our climate – especially when the ice records show that the opposite is true? Or is it something else where all the records show there is a direct correlation: cause and effect?

In my opinion, based on years of study and research, is that there is only one basic cause: the interrelationship between the magnetic (gravitational?) fields of the Earth, the Moon, the Sun, the other Solar System planets, and our position in the galaxy. It is because these are all in constant movement, rather like a controlled ballet, that our climate is controlled in a purely cyclical way. And, once again, what can we do about it? Precisely nothing! (With due respect to our politicians who all seem to fancy that somehow they can control things!)

It is interesting to see that progress is being made in the ‘Cloud’ Experiment at CERN which originated from the work in Denmark by Dr Henrick Svensmark and his team who have explored the likely connection between cosmic rays from distant stars and the formation of clouds in our atmosphere and, indeed, even of the type and heights of clouds. It has been shown that the extent of cosmic rays reaching the Earth is regulated to a large degree by the magnetic strength of our Sun which varies from time to time.

Check out Dr Svensmark’s work here with “The Cloud Mystery”:

And the CERN experiment here:

It is perhaps interesting to note that before I discovered about the ‘Cloud’ experiment I had been studying barometric pressure patterns in the Geelong area and how they related to solar cycles. My observations have shown quite clearly that there has been a correlation between the recent solar cycle of about 11 years (the Schwabe Cycle) and the seasonal barometric pressures that determine whether we have wet or dry seasons, as well as the precise times these occur. It has been particularly interesting to note the changes in the barometric pressures and the times of the years in which these have occurred, It is the occurrences of low pressures that (traditionally) bring rain, and it is the lack of such lows that lead to periods of drought such as the most recent example of prolonged drought – now broken.

The most noteworthy observation has been that there has been a shift where the timing of these low pressure systems has altered in recent years so that these are occurring now some 150 days later than they were prior to 15th February 2001 which was when there was a supposed ‘switch’ in the Sun’s magnetic field (the ‘Heliosphere’). I’ve shown that the next ‘switching reactive effect to the Earth’s atmosphere’ will occur on or around 22nd December 2012, when again, our Earth leaves the Positive Magnetosphere and enters again into the Negative Heliosphere sector of the Sun’s heliosphere. (It’s a funny thing, but this coincides with the renowned ‘Mayan Calendar’ date for the end of an epoch. Could it be that the ancient Mayans had discovered something about magnetism that we are only just rediscovering?)

I must say that I have reached a separate conclusion as to why the Sun appears to ‘switch’ its magnetic polarity every 11 years or thereabouts – something that has been recognised generally for some considerable time now. My theory is that we are fooled into thinking that this is what occurs when the reality is that the Sun does not reverse its magnetic polarity but that what we observe from the Earth is caused by an optical illusion to do with our position in Space relative to the Sun’s Equator. In short, not only are we orbiting the Sun in our yearly journey around it, but also our position relative to the Sun’s Equator changes gradually over each 11-year period, just like an Archimedes screw.

Indeed, the Moon moves in a similar way, controlled by the same gigantic forces, and this is demonstrated by the regular cyclic way that out tides on Earth are related to the Moon’s gravitational ‘pull’ – or should this be ‘magnetic push’?

Here is the simple proof of the CO2 Molecule, how far can it float up into the still air atmosphere?

What has been researched and found to make it known that nature has total cyclic control of our climate, I had to establish an influencing factor of authority to show that CO2 in our atmosphere will never change our seasons or climate.

When mankind was blamed for introducing a system of life breathing out CO2 and saying that we were responsible for Climate Change, I saw RED, and immediately began to prove that humans were not the cause, for it was initiated by nature. With humans making any change to the countryside, taken place in past history, what happens? The human life changed without a whisper, because everything around them changed naturally, slowly at first, to correct the new environmental condition, they did not remember what happened last Tuesday.

Likewise, our seasons changed when Earth found itself in a new location while orbiting within the Sun’s Positive (Magnetic) Heliosphere polarities, that initiated a switching sensation to its atmosphere, for Earth found itself in a different environment position after the 15 February 2001 when in a previous Negative Heliosphere condition. This new environmental change slowly, affected the Earth by changing its environmental condition, yet, was not immediately noticed, until some astute scientist realized that something had happened to his environment, so began to look for the answer of why the Earth changed its seasons. Science observed that there was a constant rise of CO2, and established this constant rise with the relative constant rise of the human population, hence they associated these two facts and claimed a parallel of these two local factors was indeed, that link, and since the rise of CO2, and the Industrial Revolution, they claimed had initiated and caused the Climate to Change. They did not reveal to the world that CO2 was constantly rising many thousands of years, prior to the timed beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

This was the basis fraud for the original scare campaign from Mr Al Gore’s dramatic production: ‘The Increditable Truth’ and the IPCC’s claim that humans’ breathing out CO2, caused the Climate to Change.

They: (Mr Al Gore and the IPCC) for personal reasons, did not divulge any research of how or why CO2 is naturally assembled by the Sun and other outside cosmic influences. This process is described very briefly hereunder:

Our Sun produces many electrical radiated frequencies (Wave Lengths) ranging from, Ordinary Radio, Infrared, Visual Light, Ultraviolet Rays, Cosmic Rays, X-Rays and Gamma Ray and each one of these frequencies have specialized functions and responsibility to functions and its relative attractive movement, and here, we single out one, the ‘Cosmic Ray.’ Its discovery by Victor Francis Hess (1911) was again developed in 1932, by Carl David Anderson who found that when these rays smashed into lead particles, they produced a Positive Electron. With this new found energy source, further research was being made into why the ‘Clouds’ had an associated variation to these forces intensity factors and an Experiment at CERN that originated from the work in Denmark by Dr Henrick Svensmark and his team, explored the likely connection between cosmic rays from our Sun and distant stars, formatted clouds in our atmosphere and they found that Cosmic Rays did generate cloud changes and other activity. After observing the results of their research they found that when this Cosmic Ray entered our atmosphere, they smashed other elements within our atmosphere into countless places, and one of these elements stood out. It was the Neutron that accelerated to smash into a Nitrogen (N) element, that went on to smash into a Carbon (C) element, which changed into a Carbon 14,(C14) that continued on with its increased energy, to collect two oxygen (O) elements, eventually completing its final assembly as a CO2 molecule, then settled near the Earth’s surface. When evening fell, some of these CO2 molecules were sucked into the leaves of green trees, shrubs and grasses to re-generate their respective growth cycles and science observed this natural process as Synthesis, and during this process, it expels some of the CO2 back into the atmosphere with Oxygen.

This single descriptive truth was the base error of esteemed scientist’s judgement who recommended to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), of their approval fact that humans were associated to the rise of climate change and that the associated CO2 molecule contributed to this dramatic seasonal change. With statements like this from scientists who were correctly presenting these facts as they saw them, was to them, a truthful statement, and now, there are the challenges from those who have found that the original cause for the climate to change, are slowly finding their way of telling how Earth is changing these seasons by its orbital position, and that this explains why my proven theory with a new approach to understand how magnetism really flows, for with my new understanding of the magnetic flow is applied to Climate Change, it positively shows that humans can breathe freely, and that the IPCC claiming that CO2 influences changed climate, and lives of a free life cannot be justified.

Our world will serve the natural growth of prosperity, by changing the way we accept seasonal changes, for at last we now understand why our seasons have changed 150 days since 15th. February 2001.

While the initial challenge of the magnetic reactions are between the Earth’s Orbital positions reaction within the Sun’s Positive (Magnetic) Heliosphere began on the 15th.February 2001, I’m showing that the Earth’s reactive movement initiated these changes of seasons and that these reactions have had a supplementary switching effect, altering the Barometric Pressure systems, NOT CO2. No amount of CO2 has the ability to change the seasons we are currently experiencing, for CO2 to relocate our Earth’s orbital position within the Solar System, is totally, impossible.

This simple exercise below shows conclusively that CO2 cannot rise above 3.54Feet (1.8M) in still air.

The following work out shows a simple recorded exercise that positively demonstrates how my scientifically proven fact shows that CO2 is harmless and beneficial to the natural cycles of Earth and for the benefit of all life factors that makes our planet harmoniously consistent.

Introduction: These records herewith are from my science exercise books, 13 and 14, dated to: 12 May 2012.

Aim: To find at what altitude CO2 sits in our atmosphere, because of its atomic weight of 44, is a heavy gas.

The element of: Carbon Dioxide (44) – (CO2) is broken down to its element structure.

Carbon (12) – (C) = 9784812.418gw

Oxygen (16) – (O) = 9784750.62gw

Oxygen (16) – (O) = 9784750.62gw

(CO2) = 29354313.66gw / 3(elements)

Carbon Dioxide CO2 (44) = (a) 9784771.22gw.

Because of my close encounter having the same values, but with a different numerical value, applying my base principles shown in Section 6 of my book, ‘Climate Change Explained by Magnetism?’ ISBN9780646477220, shows that my theory of gravitywatson (gw) values answers have the same numerical values as previously accepted averaged constants of the past, while mine are co-ordinated to form the same accepted gravitational values, as the ‘C’ and ‘O’ values, but my use of gw values, are to be found in Appendix A (p155 and 156.), and are based on the magnetic emission values from all elements.

From the Commonwealth Publication, ‘Gravity Base Station network values, Australia’, Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology & Geophysics – Report 261-(p.38), derived sea level as (b) 9785075.8um-2 at the Equator, however, on consideration to accepting my theory values of gw, as having a true value at the poles and being accepted by science, chose (c) 9823836.3um-2 at Wilkes Hut.

The beginning of the new understanding: Now because of my accurate conversions shown in my book, I reversed the procedure and changed the identity to the conventional values, as follows:

(b) 9785075.8um-2 to (d) 9.7850758m/s/s. and,

(c) 9823836.3um-2 to (e) 9.8238363m/s/s.

Applying my new constant found in Book 13 (p 34 & 41), a constant of 0.75:1 was developed that simply conversed the measurement of height of the accepted Mercury values to metric, to the applied Barometric values, and this became a ratio of 0.75 : 1 and made a simple formula: Atmospheric Pressure ÷ 0.75 = (Metric Gravity values ÷ 2). This simple formula, graphically referred above, and fully illustrated in my power point presentation.

Now for the New Scientific Application: Applying the accepted atmospheric pressure value of:

(f) 14.7lbs/sq inch/0.75 = 19.6 ÷ 2 = 9.8m/s/s.
Reversing this process to establish the Atmospheric Pressure at sea level, as worked through in my exercise book 13 (p34), shows the atmospheric air has a value of:
(g1)(9.796549883m/s/s × 2) × 0.75 = 7.339912412lbs/Sq Inch × 2 = (g2) 14.67982482lbs/Sq inch.
(ie: 14.7lbs/Sq. Inch)
And (a) converted value of (9.78477122m/s/s × 0.75) = 7.3385683lbs/sq inch × 2 = (h) 14.67715683 lbs/sq. inch is where the CO2 sits in our atmosphere.

Applying (g2) 14.67982482lbs/Sq inch and subtracting (h) 14.67715683 lbs/sq = (j) 0.00266799m/s/s. (is the gravity difference within Earth’s atmosphere pressure at Sea Level)

Again from (Book 13 p41), there’s a total altitude value of (k) 278,870 feet, (52.81628788 Miles) being the neutral gravitywatson (gw) atmospheric height value sits, and averaging these to the relative air pressures, I found from above.

(k) 278,870 feet ÷ (h) 14.67715683 lbs/sq inch = (m) 18995.41223feet – (average)

(k) 278,870 feet ÷ (g2) 14.67982482 lbs/Sq inch = (l) – 18991.96077feet – (Average)

Establishing the Truth: Subtract (l) from (m) = (n) 3.45146 feet of CO2 ( in still air)

Proof of this Reality: Having seen a metal container of CO2 (Dry Ice) at Geelong with dimensions of 5’L x 3’W x 4’H, the top was open and internally had an open plastic liner bag in which the Dry Ice was contained. There was no closing seal within the container. At night, for security, they place a clamped cover.

This simple exercise answers the previous recorded studies referred to above showing how the CO2 molecule is naturally produced by the Cosmic Rays and shows how this is naturally happening in our everyday life.

A Period of Conjecture: There will be conjecture to my statements of applied different values to the same function, however, scientifically, it is worth remembering that the official acceptance, of these are harmonic averages associated with this whole gravity science study, as already mentioned above, for they are all based on averages, as is the case for determining the value of 9.80665m/s/s, is the averaged accepted Gravity value at sea level at 45 degrees Latitude, within both hemispheres.

My concluding and refreshing thoughts: If what has been claimed by the IPCC is a fact that CO2 is a heavy gas while in its singular state, a molecule, why has CO2 been applied by the IPCC supporting their claim that humans are responsible for this changed climate, because they are breathing out CO2 since the Industrial Revolution. My research information and the features shown herewith shows conclusively, that the Australian seasons have naturally changed by 150 days to 22 December 2012. For CO2 to change this status of seasonal change is totally impossible.

So if you have found this information either intriguing and/or enlightening now I invite you either to contact me, or perhaps I can refer you to my book “Climate Change; Explained by Magnetism?” and also to a number of recently published scientific papers, including one on sea levels.

Kind Regards

Thomas T. S. Watson
Ask for further information from:
Author of: A Fresh Approach to Magnetism (2006), Climate Change-Explained by Magnetism? ISBN9780646477220,(2009). Co-Author with Dr Alberto Boretti of the University of Ballarat: ‘Is New Zealand Globally Warming?’(2011) by InderScience Publishers, and ‘The Increditable Truth, Oceans are not Accelerating in Australia or in the World’, by Energy & Environmental Publishers (2012) and a financial nominee of “World Wide, Who’s Who” Researcher and Official U.N. I.P.C.C. Reviewer (2011)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *