YOU are a carbon based life form. When you die your carbon goes back into the environment making you part of the global warming problem. Deal with it, you are part of the problem. You are carbon so if carbon causes warming then you have to live forever, holding on to all your carbon so you don’t add to the problem and – don’t forget not to breath.
In fact, all life on earth is carbon based. All life on earth uses carbon. All life on earth releases carbon into the environment when it dies.
All the carbon in all life forms was once atmospheric Co2.
The carbon being released today was released previously. This has happened a million times over and over because we live in a closed system. All the carbon in organisms originates from Co2 in the atmosphere. All the carbon in the oil was once in the atmosphere. We aren’t creating new carbon, we are just releasing it back for reuse. We are just recycling.
A forest of carbon
Each year in the United States alone, where fire fighting techniques are excellent, 4 million to 5 million acres of trees burn in forest fires. Trees hold an enormous amount of carbon and when burned produce C02 just like oil does. How much Co2 comes from just US forest fires?
“The carbon content of woody matter (stem, branches and roots) and that of leaves is approximately 50% of their biomass where one ton of carbon equals approximately 3.67 ton of Co2” (IPCC)
Co2 has been in much higher concentrations than today, such as in the Cambrian period. Plants do best in terms of growth with levels of C02 much higher than we have now. Which means they can uptake much more of the stuff and grow better. Which is what happened in the Cambrian.The high concentration of Co2 then lead to the rise of massive flora which in turn lead to the massive sauropods. This is because plants consume carbon. There was so much carbon then that plants thrived. With so much to eat the herbivores evolved to take advantage.
Just do a little research on plant growth. Aquarium keepers who have live plants in their tanks inject Co2 into the water, green house keepers inject Co2 into the green house. The levels of measurable Co2 are commensurate with the plant growth. We aren’t creating Co2. We are releasing it. Plants appreciate this and the earth is experiencing a greening. Co2 is a fertilizer. Plants have been evolving to get by with less Co2 because the levels have been dropping for millions of years. Warming, is good. Co2 is good.You don’t just have to ignore science to fear global warming, you have to ignore good old fashioned common sense. You have to ignore, your own ignorance.
Is it possible to have too much Co2? In theory it is of course but we know that plants and animals grew to incredible size in an environment with 18x the levels we have today. No climate scientist is saying we could ever reach those levels.
If there were no Co2 in the atmosphere all life on earth would end.
For most of all the earth’s history Co2 levels have been higher than they are today. What makes now so special? What makes today’s Co2 worse that all the Co2 of all of history? Taken as a running total we are living in a low Co2 period when compared to the past. Belief, not science, is what makes today’s C02 a danger.
Are people dumping tons of C02 into the atmosphere?
That’s a question that sometimes is debated. One side says yes we are, the other side says not we aren’t.
It doesn’t matter if we are. Th earth has successfully functioned with much higher levels of Co2. Much higher. During those times there was incredible plant growth and massive herds of giant herbivores.
But even if we are, nothing has to be done about it.
Warming is Good
The thing to fear would be an ice age. Machines would stop, electricity couldn’t function, crops could not be grown, transportation would stop, animals would die.
Warming, on the other hand would – well – make things warmer. How warm? How high will it go?
We are about 44 degrees Fahrenheit away from the low of the last ice age and the temperature has been going up since then, but for some reason this current warming trend is seen as being human caused. They say it’s going up faster than ever. How high will it go? Well, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, “Temperatures are projected to rise another 2 to 11.5 degrees F (1.133 to 6.42 degrees C) over the next 100 years.” What is going to happen? Ice…will melt. Which, it’s been doing since the last ice age – without our help of course.
Even if this happens and the seas rise and people on the current coasts have to move to the new coasts melting ice and warmth means more farm land, longer growing periods, and more freshwater to water the crops with. Even by their own predictions the increase in global temperatures aren’t enough to “scorch” the earth. First off, there’s a huge difference in their own prediction “2 – 11.5” degrees, that’s hardly accurate. That’s like playing the lotto scratches. You can win anywhere from $1 to $ 5000. Wow! $5000! See, that’s right where everyone goes with that one and the same is true of those estimated temperatures. Wow! 11.5 degrees!
The hottest recorded temperature was in 1922 in El Azizia and was 136 degrees. Of course that’s not the average for that locale, but rather the extreme, but for sake of illustration we’ll use that. Using the EPA’s numbers that would be 138 or 147.5 in 100 years from now. That’s the hottest place on earth though. What about normal places?
According to NOAA, “The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for April 2016 was 1.10°C (1.98°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F)—the highest temperature departure for April since global records began in 1880.”
So an average in April of 56.7 is, according to them, hotter than previous averages. That brings us to 58.7 – 68.2 using the estimated rise caused by global warming in 100 years. Run in fear!
What about the flooding?
There really is no telling just what would happen if all the ice on earth melted and made it to the sea. Of course with the climate models mentioned above that wouldn’t happen anyway. The vast majority of ice on the earth is in the Arctic and the Antarctic. The Antarctic is a land mass covered with ice. So if it melted completely that would contribute to the overall volume of fresh water on the planet. The Arctic on the other hand is ice floating in the water, which means due to the laws of displacement the oceans have already compensated for all that ice. You can perform that experiment in your own kitchen. Take a glass of water and fill it half way. freeze that, fill it the rest of the way. Let it sit. The ice will melt but the volume of water in the cup will not increase. Any ice that is in the ocean will not, cannot, alter the level of the ocean when it melts because it already has through displacement.
The Antarctic ice is constantly moving to the sea now. Great pieces have always broken off and melted. If this speeds up (that being a relative term) it would still be an incredibly slow process. Over the course of hundreds of years (if warming alarmists are correct) the sea levels would rise from this ice. But it would happen so slowly that mankind would simply adapt like we always have. There genuinely is no cause for alarm. Even if we say there is warming it doesn’t matter.
Warming happens, period, if man is speeding it up, so what? Even by all the climate models this isn’t going to be a fast, terrifying, disaster movie kind of change. Even by all the predictions of the climate fortune tellers it’s going to happen slow enough for us to simply move away from any rising seas.
We’ve done it before without the benefit of the technology we have today. We did it on foot. We did it in boats made from sticks covered with animal hide. We did it when the earth was frozen and we did it when it warmed up again. We did it when we were primitive cavemen. What on earth makes people think we can’t adapt now when our ability to do so is so much improved over eons now passed by?
Future Telling Robots Can’t Tell the Future
The entire thing is based on predictive computer models. Think about that for a moment. That’s nothing more than future telling robots. Like all robots they can only base their outcome on the input of data. No human is able to enter the amount of data for a complex closed system like the earth. It’s impossible to factor in everything.
These models are doomed to be inaccurate from the onset. But people want to enact policy, harmful policy, because of them.
“When did “skeptic” become a dirty word in science? When did a skeptic require quotation marks around it?
To an outsider, the most significant innovation in the global warming controversy is the overt reliance that is being placed on models. Back in the days of nuclear winter, computer models were invoked to add weight to a conclusion: “These results are derived with the help of a computer model.” But now, large-scale computer models are seen as generating data in themselves. No longer are models judged by how well they reproduce data from the real world—increasingly, models provide the data. As if they were themselves a reality. And indeed they are, when we are projecting forward. There can be no observational data about the year 2100. There are only model runs.
This fascination with computer models is something I understand very well. Richard Feynmann called it a disease. I fear he is right. Because only if you spend a lot of time looking at a computer screen can you arrive at the complex point where the global warming debate now stands.
Nobody believes a weather prediction twelve hours ahead. Now we’re asked to believe a prediction that goes out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds?” – Michael Crichton
Enter the Bureaucrats
Politics and economics drive climate change promotion around the world. It’s a means to make money and a means to gain power over people. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is reality. This is what’s been seen and something for which there is so much evidence that one has to work hard to miss it. Even self proclaimed climate guru Leonardo DiCaprio recently commented on how much money there is to be made.
Climate Change is a Religion
I know that the Church of Climatology doesn’t care about science no matter how much they cry that they do. For them science is more akin to their bible than anything else.
The fact that Co2 is the foundation of all life doesn’t matter to them. The fact that it is cycled and recycled over and over since the beginning of time doesn’t matter to them. The fact that there is no new carbon on the earth doesn’t matter to them. The fact that Co2 levels have been much higher yet plant life and animal life grew to incredible size doesn’t matter to them. The fact that volcanoes and forest fires spew out more C02 than we do doesn’t matter to them. These and many other facts associated with climate change simply don’t matter.
They ignore the fact that it’s happened before. They ignore the fact that even if our activity is making it happen faster it would still be happening so slow that we could adapt with the benefit of our technology which is beyond any age of man. All the ages of cold and heat which man has lived through was done with stone, bone, and hide.
Michael Crichton was a great author. His untimely death most certainly made me sad. He made his personal feelings about global warming clear in lectures he gave on the subject. These lectures are still one of my favorite reads. One introduces the idea of global warming as a religion, and idea which time has demonstrated how right Crichton was and the other was discussing how some bad scientific thinking created unwarranted belief in global warming. This second is called, “Aliens created global warming”.
Crichton was a Harvard educated scientist and medical doctor. It was his understanding of science that alerted him to, what to him, were the obvious flaws in man made global warming.
“Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it’s a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths.
There’s an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there’s a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe.
Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday—these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don’t want to talk anybody out of them, as I don’t want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don’t want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can’t talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued.These are issues of faith.
And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren’t necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It’s about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them. Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not.”
The idea of how bad the science behind global warming is seemed to really annoy Crichton, perhaps even haunt him in an academic way.
You don’t just have to ignore science to fear global warming, you have to ignore good old fashioned common sense. You have to ignore, your own ignorance.