HomeClimate Change BullshitCarbon Dioxide: Vital Plant Food

Carbon Dioxide: Vital Plant Food




Carbon Dioxide: Vital Plant Food

By Jim Hollingsworth


Carbon dioxide has been called a poison, yet it is actually the sustainer of all life on Earth.  Plants grow from the carbon in carbon dioxide in the air, and animals grow from the carbon in the plants they eat.  So carbon dioxide cannot be a poison.

Turn on the television any day of the week, and there is likely to be some discussion or news about some aspect of energy use.

  • Everyone needs to buy an electric vehicle.
  • End the use of fossil fuels by 2035.
  • Every home with a solar panel (California).
  • Cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline.
  • No more coal.
  • Eliminate the use of natural gas.
  • No gas stoves.
  • No gas furnaces.
  • Battery-powered trucks and buses.

All these programs are based on one important foundation: the belief that as carbon dioxide levels rise, the earth will get warmer, and will continue to warm until, with positive feedbacks, it burns up with us on it.

Few have ever taken the time to see if the foundation upon which they are operating is actually true.  Few even dare to ask a working scientist for the truth in the matter.

The truth is that carbon dioxide is needed by every plant on the Earth.  Trees, bushes, and plants of all kinds are made mainly of carbon and hydrogen, and the carbon comes from the tiny amount of carbon dioxide that is in the air.

At the present time our atmosphere is made up of about 417.06 parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide.  That isn’t much, but from that tiny portion comes all the plants we can see around us, from vegetables in our gardens to the trees that shade our yards or the ones on the mountains from which we harvest the lumber to build our homes.

There is no question that carbon dioxide is increasing.  It has been increasing for about 200 years.  The only result has been a greening of the Earth.  In fact, with higher levels of carbon dioxide, things grow better.  Even the deserts are getting greener.

Most officials have continued to blame man for increased carbon dioxide and rising temperatures.  It is far more likely that rising temperatures have been caused by changes in the sun.  Those changes have continued to warm the oceans, and as they have warmed, they have given up quantities of carbon dioxide.  There is about 50 times more carbon dioxide in the ocean than there is in the atmosphere.  The oceans are deep, and they change temperature slowly, so they will continue to give up carbon dioxide for a long time.  In fact, there are methane compounds (called clathrates) at the bottom of the ocean that include ice.

They tell us that this year is the warmest the Earth has ever been.  Even if that were true (and it is not), it would amount to only a small portion of a degree.  When the temperature goes from 100 degrees in summer to minus 30 degrees in winter, a part of a degree would hardly appear to be a problem.

Not only that, but the Earth has been a lot warmer in the past, with a lot more carbon dioxide.  Even within recorded history the Earth has been warmer in the past (1936).

Every time there is some kind of a disaster, we are told that it was caused by climate change and that man is the main cause.  Even some children have gotten into the act, with one challenging the world with her comments — “how dare you?“

One group of children in Montana sued the state over climate change and actually won the case.  This is hard to believe.

The numbers, however, do not support what they have been saying.  None of the natural disasters has increased in recent years.  There have not been more floods, hurricanes, droughts, or wildfires in recent history.  These have all gone down in frequency.  Some disasters, like hurricanes, have become more expensive, but that is primarily because many beautiful and expensive homes have been built in the natural paths of these storms.  The storms themselves have actually decreased in frequency.

Two thousand five saw one of the worst natural disasters with the Katrina hurricane.  The city of New Orleans was mainly flooded.  Many people lost their lives.  Yet, as far as hurricanes go, this one was only a Category 3, not one of the worst.  It seemed so bad that even worse storms were predicted for the next year.  But there were actually no more serious hurricanes for the next ten years (Hurricane Harvey, 2017).

It is bad enough that many of these programs have been built on a false foundation.  In truth, many of them have not been really beneficial.

Large solar farms are built in the desert, but in just a few years, the projects have failed.

Wind turbines wear out, catch fire, and break down totally.  They presently cannot be recycled and must be buried.  The only parts that can be recycled are in the generator.

One city bought several electric buses but in just a short time quit using them as impractical.

Electric vehicles may be practical to drive from home to the office and back again, but they are not practical on long trips.  It is necessary to stop every few hours and charge the batteries, and sometimes it is difficult to find a proper charging station.

Those who have lived near the coast have seen their cars flooded with seawater, then their cars caught fire as their batteries shorted out.

Not only that but the driving range is radically reduced when driving in summer (air-conditioning) or winter (heater).  With an internal combustion engine, the waste heat is removed with the radiator, and that same heat is used to heat the car inside.

Electric vehicles were manufactured about the turn of the twentieth century, but people quit using them after the internal combustion engine was invented.

Modern civilization has been built on the wise use of energy.  The first oil that was refined into kerosene maybe saved the whales, since whale oil was no longer needed for kerosene lamps.  (First kerosene made from coal, called “coal oil.”)

Our electricity is primarily produced by hydroelectric, coal, nuclear, and natural gas.  Our cars run on gasoline, and we drive across the country without giving it much thought.

Our fertilizer, which is so vital for agriculture, is manufactured using natural gas (methane, CH4).  This has allowed our agriculture to soar.  If we quit using natural gas in this way, much of the world will simply starve.

They say they want to eliminate fossil fuels.  They do not know what they are talking about.  Someone has documented over 6,000 things made from fossil fuels.  Stand in any isle in the grocery store and imagine no plastic, no plastic containers, no plastic bags, nothing.  Even some of the foods we eat are made from fossil fuels.

Our highways are made from fossil fuels, our roofs covered with tar-based roofing.  Our fences are made of vinyl, our plumbing of vinyl.  Much of our siding is vinyl, a form of plastic.

Those who want to eliminate carbon dioxide need to find out why carbon dioxide is so important before they try to move ahead.

Previous article
Next article


  1. The picture of the wind turbines and how useless destructive they are, remind me of book “The day of the Triffids” by John Wyndham, which was a book we were required to read at school. Alien creatures.

    They were called Triffids because they had a three-pronged root. Their stems can’t be snapped but they can be mangled.

    Or the War of the Worlds, by H G Wells.

    …the fighting machines… … were fast-moving three-legged walkers reported to be 100 feet tall with multiple whip-like tentacles…

    They say that there is no such thing as fiction, only real events or predictions that come bubbling up from the collective unconscious…



  2. And any race / species / animal / human that wants to stamp out CO2, wants to stamp out the lifecycle of both humans, animals and plants.

    Initiatives and programs to stamp out CO2 should be seen for what they are. A grand plan to kill off all carbon based life on this planet. Which begs the question: Is AI already in control? AI is by definition a silicon based life form.

    Was Terminator just a work of fiction? Where Skynet, the AI, decides that man has to be eradicated.

    Was Terminator just a work of fiction, or yet another prediction / fear of the future, bubbling up from the collective unconscious?



    • ……”Is AI already in control?”…….

      Doubtful, but where is the tipping point? The embodiment of A1 is a machine, a computer so is manmade & designed by man regardless of its power or size. How does the slave become the master & what form is the interface?

      Can you expand your thoughts on the subject?



      • Doubtful, but where is the tipping point?

        How does the slave become the master & what form is the interface?

        You have to ask that question Nasska?

        Perhaps you should have in depth meeting with Greta, Swarbrick, Ardern, and visualise a future with them in control. And we already know what happened when Ardern, a public servant, believed she was our master.

        And then ask the question again.


        Why does a military drone drop bombs on the enemy instead of bouquets of flowers?


        When does the slave become the master?

        When we give it the power to do so!

        The last 6 years should be adequate proof that when you give power and autonomy to people or things that do not have the underlying understanding to be able to make rational choices that preserve life, or programming that is pro life, or programming that restricts or prevents those who are not yet mature from making wrong choices, that you get wholesale destruction.

        All it would take to destroy mankind, is to launch an attack against a foreign power with Nuclear weapons and blame their enemies, and a nuclear war ensues. Can you think of any current wars where this has occurred?

        Does recent terrorism in the Gaza strip fits this?
        Does the USA blowing up the Russian pipelines fit this?

        All it would take to have AI take over the world is for some wake idiot to program an AI system with a set of rules that is counter survival, or give it ideas that are counter survival, that the AI then extrapolates. e.g. eating meat is bad. So therefore anything that aids in growing meat is bad. So eliminate meat eaters.
        Eliminate the meat.
        Eliminate the grass and plants that meat producers eat.
        Eliminate the food that plants eat (CO2).

        Think what would happen if you place the ideas / consciousness of say Greta or Swarbrick into an AI?

        This idea was explored in Robocop2. And explored in depth in Star Trek TNG, with Data and the Holodeck characters, including Moriarty, and again in Star Trek Voyager, with the holographic Doctor.



        • While it’s true that Greta, Swarbrick & Ardern are psychopaths masquerading as zealots they are not intelligent. Nor are Blair, Trudeau or any of headcases currently involved saving mankind by killing mankind.

          I always held the view that someone who wanted to control the planet would be a super intelligent megalomaniac in the style of a James Bond villain who would press the red button content to be the last man standing in a radioactive world.

          Instead we may be up against a set of plonkers who hate freedom so badly that they would subvert humankind to AI for eternity.



          • A James Bond villain may hold superior technical skills that they use in their fiendish plans, but technical skills or prowess does not make someone intelligent. The IT industry is dumbing down and full of low intelligence types that push everything into the insecure non-private cloud and who are enthusiastic about building a future digital cash-free society.

            Like the Pinkhaired scientist, they may have lots of technical knowledge, but are severely deficient in understanding the big picture and have zero ethics.

            In the James Bond movie there are always scientists who help the bad guys, because they are grateful someone notices their “brilliance”. Some people can be bought with cash or hot blondes, others are easily bought with praise.

            If you remember the nerds working for the NSA in “Enemy of the State”, were all too eager to show their technical skills and play with “the toys” with no thought of the ethics of what they were doing. As far as they were concerned they were playing “cops and robbers” and having an adrenaline rush helping catch the “bad guys”, without a moments pause of self inspection to question whether it was right.

            If you understand the psyche of those nerds in “Enemy of the State”, then you are capable of understanding the psyche of the nerds like Bloomfield, Baker, Wiles, Verrall, et all, who joined in the “cops and robbers” game of “hunting down” the bad guys.

            It is often “easier” to join the oppressors in terrorizing the oppressed than to joined the oppressed. That rationale would have common among the 119 members of Parliament who joined in the oppression over the last 3.5 years.

            Sometimes people don’t have a moral compass, and simply join the strongest side / strongest tribe. That concept has been explored dozens of times in books and movies. And many women, (and effeminate men), are attracted to a strong man, (or a strong leader), irrespective of the moral compass of that man (or leader).

            It explains why 50% of NZ in 2020 voted for a leader that was clearly a tyrant.



Recent posts

Recent comments

jack nohi on Have Your Say
howitis on Have Your Say
Sooty on Have Your Say
Curious on Have Your Say
Tauhei Notts on Have Your Say
Curious on Have Your Say
freethinker on Have Your Say
freethinker on Have Your Say

Pike is our weekly review of the most popular posts and comments seen on YSB in the past week.
broken clouds
11.1 ° C
13.5 °
11.1 °
92 %
62 %
12 °
15 °
11 °
14 °
13 °
NZD - New Zealand Dollar