By | February 4th, 2020 | Climate|303 Comments @ CFACT
Most of us are well aware that 97% of scientists do not believe that mankind controls the thermostat of Planet Earth. After all you could not get 97% of any group to agree on anything. In fact the percent of scientists who are confident that man’s use of fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide has an insignificant effect on our planet’s climate is likely close to slightly above or below 50%. Of those who are outspoken on the issue, such as yours truly, many have come to make up a cottage industry. These are folks who cling to some vague numerical answer to the question of how much is the effect of carbon dioxide, even though they admit it to be insignificant.
A cottage industry is defined as a disperse group of manufacturers making a product in decentralized locations. Presently the most popular cottage industry is represented by the web platform ETSY, one that helps homemade craft workers sell their products on the Internet.
Unfortunately the diverse but vocal Luke-warmers sell their calculations through the media to a near scientifically illiterate public who are led to believe that any small numbered impact of carbon dioxide on our atmospheric temperature is proof that it is actually significant, and, regardless of how small, it just could lead to the end of the world as we know it in about 12 years or are we down to eleven now?
While well meaning and primarily really competent scientists, the Luke-warmers are inhibiting our ability to set the world straight as to the delusion that folks embrace. That burning fossil fuels and emitting carbon dioxide is a terrible thing. In fact, Earth has been starving of carbon dioxide for a very long time and precipitously close to the 150 part per million (ppm) of the gas. This, where plants begin to die followed by the animals that depend on the plants and ultimately us, Homo sapiens. Of course, we depend on both plants and animals to survive. Before 1945 only 280 ppm of carbon dioxide existed in the atmosphere, going back thousands of years. With the industrial revolution that followed we have climbed to 410 ppm of CO2 and the Earth is happily greening very significantly.
Rather than be thankful for this molecule, which provides for life on our planet, some in search of power and often money desire to change our political and economic system by demonizing it.
They wish us to adopt Socialism, open our borders, redistribute our wealth and form a New World Order where collectivism rules and individual freedom is dramatically reduced. They tell us that the world could run on undependable expensive wind and solar energy. I think they really know it can’t be done but recognize it would subjugate the world’s population to near total government control, passing out energy as they choose, which is their plan.
They rely, not on physical evidence, but mathematical equations that are called models of how this complex system of our climate works. The well-intended Luke-warmers do expose some of the fallacies of these models but generally refuse to declare that the emperor has absolutely no clothes.
In consultation with Astrophysicist Willie Soon and Tom Wysmuller, formerly of NASA, I chose the following twelve variables which, simple logic, says must be considered when attempting to predict future temperatures and climate impacts on our planet. It turns out that all of these are variables we can only guess at because we do not fully understand any of them. They include:
We all know there is a bevy of folks building climate models which appear to be scaring the public to enlarge government to save them from seeing their planet destroyed. There are however many sound scientists that recognize the absurd exaggeration of carbon dioxide’s emissions impact on our planet. But they also work with mathematical models to show how tiny the impact is of carbon dioxide on our Earth. They are often called Luke-warmers. The problem is that by their professing carbon dioxide’s impact as being small they are giving the proverbial “inch” which allows the alarmists to take a “mile”.
Author
Most of us are well aware that 97% of scientists do not believe that mankind controls the thermostat of Planet Earth. After all you could not get 97% of any group to agree on anything. In fact the percent of scientists who are confident that man’s use of fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide has an insignificant effect on our planet’s climate is likely close to slightly above or below 50%. Of those who are outspoken on the issue, such as yours truly, many have come to make up a cottage industry. These are folks who cling to some vague numerical answer to the question of how much is the effect of carbon dioxide, even though they admit it to be insignificant.
A cottage industry is defined as a disperse group of manufacturers making a product in decentralized locations. Presently the most popular cottage industry is represented by the web platform ETSY, one that helps homemade craft workers sell their products on the Internet.
Unfortunately the diverse but vocal Luke-warmers sell their calculations through the media to a near scientifically illiterate public who are led to believe that any small numbered impact of carbon dioxide on our atmospheric temperature is proof that it is actually significant, and, regardless of how small, it just could lead to the end of the world as we know it in about 12 years or are we down to eleven now?
While well meaning and primarily really competent scientists, the Luke-warmers are inhibiting our ability to set the world straight as to the delusion that folks embrace. That burning fossil fuels and emitting carbon dioxide is a terrible thing. In fact, Earth has been starving of carbon dioxide for a very long time and precipitously close to the 150 part per million (ppm) of the gas. This, where plants begin to die followed by the animals that depend on the plants and ultimately us, Homo sapiens. Of course, we depend on both plants and animals to survive. Before 1945 only 280 ppm of carbon dioxide existed in the atmosphere, going back thousands of years. With the industrial revolution that followed we have climbed to 410 ppm of CO2 and the Earth is happily greening very significantly.
Rather than be thankful for this molecule, which provides for life on our planet, some in search of power and often money desire to change our political and economic system by demonizing it.
They wish us to adopt Socialism, open our borders, redistribute our wealth and form a New World Order where collectivism rules and individual freedom is dramatically reduced. They tell us that the world could run on undependable expensive wind and solar energy. I think they really know it can’t be done but recognize it would subjugate the world’s population to near total government control, passing out energy as they choose, which is their plan.
They rely, not on physical evidence, but mathematical equations that are called models of how this complex system of our climate works. The well-intended Luke-warmers do expose some of the fallacies of these models but generally refuse to declare that the emperor has absolutely no clothes.
In consultation with Astrophysicist Willie Soon and Tom Wysmuller, formerly of NASA, I chose the following twelve variables which, simple logic, says must be considered when attempting to predict future temperatures and climate impacts on our planet. It turns out that all of these are variables we can only guess at because we do not fully understand any of them. They include:
Rather than be thankful for this molecule, which provides for life on our planet, some in search of power and often money desire to change our political and economic system by demonizing it.
They wish us to adopt Socialism, open our borders, redistribute our wealth and form a New World Order where collectivism rules and individual freedom is dramatically reduced. They tell us that the world could run on undependable expensive wind and solar energy. I think they really know it can’t be done but recognize it would subjugate the world’s population to near total government control, passing out energy as they choose, which is their plan.
They rely, not on physical evidence, but mathematical equations that are called models of how this complex system of our climate works. The well-intended Luke-warmers do expose some of the fallacies of these models but generally refuse to declare that the emperor has absolutely no clothes.
In consultation with Astrophysicist Willie Soon and Tom Wysmuller, formerly of NASA, I chose the following twelve variables which, simple logic, says must be considered when attempting to predict future temperatures and climate impacts on our planet. It turns out that all of these are variables we can only guess at because we do not fully understand any of them. They include:
Luke-warming: The climate campaign's cottage industry 1
1- changes in seasonal solar irradiation
2- energy flows between the ocean and atmosphere
3- energy flows between the air and land
4- the balance between the Earth’s water, water vapor, and ice
5- the impact of clouds
6- understanding the planet’s ice
7- mass change among ice sheets, sea level, and glaciers
8- the ability to factor in hurricanes and tornadoes
9- the impact of vegetation on temperature
10- tectonic movement on the ocean floor
11- the differential rotation between the earth’s surface and the planet’s core
12- the solar system’s magnetic field and gravitational interaction
Because these variables are not well understood, if they are considered at all, they require a model maker to make educated guesses as how they relate to each other and their individual impacts on climate. More specifically: How do they impact the Earth’s thermostat?
Understanding our ignorance regarding all of these variables should convince anyone that mathematical modeling predictions are without merit. Solutions to sophisticated mathematical equations prove nothing if they have little relation to physical reality.
Regardless of these facts, the government has poured billions of dollars into the coffers of academic institutions to churn out useless predictions based on the equations they think simulate a system so complex it is truly beyond comprehension. More than 100 climate models are financed by the United States government, none of which agree with each other. None have accurately predicted anything as to our climate over the past 30 years of their operation.
With these facts in mind it is no surprise that Willie Soon calculated, a few years ago, that if we actually knew all the variables involved in a reasonable mathematical climate model it would take a supercomputer 40 years to reach an answer to a question we posed.
We have thus far failed to educate our politicians, our students of science, and the public in general about the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on mankind.
Governments across the world appear willing to destroy their economies to support a terrible hoax.
In an appeal to our reader’s common sense I have constructed two charts. The first one below shows how much man-produced carbon dioxide exists in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas relative to all such greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. The second chart shows how much carbon dioxide exists in our atmosphere relative to all other gases in our atmosphere. Each chart has 10,000 dots, each representing one ten thousands of the whole of greenhouses gases in the first chart and one ten thousands of the atmospheric gas in the second chart.
On the first chart you can see that while Carbon dioxide makes up 3.6% of all greenhouse gas, man’s contribution of CO2 from factories power plants and automobiles is only 0.12% of all greenhouse gas. On the second chart you can see that total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere makes up four ten thousandths (.0004) of all atmospheric gases, but man’s contribution is only one ten thousandths (.0001).
We all know there is a bevy of folks building climate models which appear to be scaring the public to enlarge government to save them from seeing their planet destroyed. There are however many sound scientists that recognize the absurd exaggeration of carbon dioxide’s emissions impact on our planet. But they also work with mathematical models to show how tiny the impact is of carbon dioxide on our Earth. They are often called Luke-warmers. The problem is that by their professing carbon dioxide’s impact as being small they are giving the proverbial “inch” which allows the alarmists to take a “mile”.
A side issue is the gas Methane (CH4). Yes, it is (correctly) claimed to be even more heat trapping than CO2, and farmers in France, Netherlands, and Germany have taken to blocking roads and engaging in strikes protesting proposed regulations curtailing its production from fertilizer and animal waste. Yet Methane is less than 2 parts per million, and has stayed there without any appreciable increase since the 1800s. Why doesn’t it increase? The reason is that it is immediately attacked by atmospheric Oxygen, which breaks the C component into CO2 and the H4 into 2H2O (water vapor). So essentially, Methane breaks down nicely into “plant food” and water to nourish them!
It is time that we all stop fighting alarmist numbers with our small numbers. The only number that matters is ZERO. That is, in fact, the real impact of man made carbon dioxide on global average air temperature and consequently on the Earth’s climate. We are not in a battle over numbers. We are in a battle to protect our way of life. If we lose this battle, the alarmists will take us back to life as it was in the 19th century, but much worse, as they will have installed a government capable of controlling every aspect of our lives.
Author
No comments:
Post a Comment