Hindered Science

A broadly accepted piece of misinformation tells that Earth is charged negative (so far so good), but that her atmosphere is electrically charged positive (wrong).

I have questioned a retired meteorologist on why he believes in a positively charged atmosphere. He explained that the atmosphere has been shown to be positive by repeated measurements for decades. We come to find out that he refers to voltage measurements taken between Earth ground and atmospheric potentials at various altitudes! That appears to be what has led him as well as a distinguished professor in Florida to make such statements about the electrostatic condition of our atmosphere. The poor fellow explained measurement technique simply as saying it was done using balloons, rockets and kites. Those measurements were simply voltage-drop measurements taken from effects of the Fair Weather Current flowing through the resistance of the atmosphere. Since I begged to differ despite the amazing fact that NASA scientists agree with him, he dismissed me as a pseudo-scientist and went his way.

Unhappily, it seems that when meteorologists post the ion density measurements obtained from rocket samplings, they determine the conductivity of their air samples by providing their own current supply through the samples and measure the resulting voltages. Since such conductivity varies with ion density (of either polarity), then they merely presume their ions to be positive because of their accustomed blunders and estimate those negative ions from their charts of conductivity versus positive ion concentrations.

This brings up the issue of pseudoscience. Pseudoscience will prevail in meteorology by brute force long beyond my time. Great store is held in that technology for the length of time that an item of misinformation has endured. Much like the business of antique furniture, a century of endurance is a premium milestone in the criteria. I must bow to the drive-by denigration from established science.

The nominal +100 volts per meter of elevation experienced by meteorologists measuring atmospheric voltage with respect to Earth ground tells unthinking scientists that they sense a positive charge upon the atmosphere. Actually, such a voltage gradient would not exist as a static condition because it would establish a field of attraction that would move charged particles until the field becomes nullified. Hence, voltage-divider action is being manifested by such samplings of voltage drop due to negative Fair Weather Current (FWC) flowing along the resistance of the atmosphere. Rising electrons demonstrate the earth's negative charge. The less negative potential appraised by such measurements are merely positive with respect to the surface of the earth which is known to hold a concentration of negative ions. Were it not for the prevailing negative bolts of lightning and negatively charged rain, there would be very much less FWC, and most of the globe's negative charge would reside upon the surrounding shell of electrons that reflect short-wave signals so well.

It was amazing to me that a meteorologist challenged the point of a forum discussion of this effect and another friendly scientist considered it irrelevant. To date, how can we not rate meteorology as a pseudoscience?