HomeClimate Change Bullshit‘Climate Crisis’ Is a Fairy Tale

‘Climate Crisis’ Is a Fairy Tale

Author

Date

Category

Today’s ‘Climate Crisis’ Is a Fairy Tale

By Daniel W. Nebert

For the past 35 years, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has warned us that emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, predominantly carbon dioxide (CO2), are causing dangerous global warming.  This myth is blindly accepted — even by many of my science colleagues who know virtually nothing about climate.  As a scientist, my purpose here is to help expose this fairy tale.

The global warming story is not a benign fantasy.  It is seriously damaging Western economies.  In January 2021, the White House ridiculously declared that “climate change is the most serious existential threat to humanity.”  From there, America went from energy independence back to energy dependence.  Another consequence has been the appearance of numerous companies whose goal is to “sequester CO2” as well as “sequester carbon” from our atmosphere.  However, this so-called “solution” is scientifically impossible.  Life on Earth is based on carbon!  CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant!

Generations have been brainwashed for decades into believing this imaginary “climate crisis,” from kindergarten through college, and in mainstream media and social media.  Indoctrinated young teachers feel comfortable teaching this misinformation to students.  Dishonest climate scientists feel justified in spreading disinformation because they need governmental support for salaries and research.

The evidence contradicting the climate apocalypse is vast.  Some comes from analysis of Greenland and Antarctica ice, in which air trapped at various depths reveals CO2 levels of past climate.  Proxy records from marine sediment, dust (from erosion, wind-blown deposition of sediments), and ice cores provide a record of past sea levels, ice volume, seawater temperature, and global atmospheric temperatures.

From his seminal work while a prisoner of war during WWI, Serbian mathematician Milutin Milankovitch explained how climate is influenced by variations in the Earth’s asymmetric orbit, axial tilt, and rotational wobble — each going through cycles lasting as long as 120,000 years.

It is widely recognized that Glacial Periods of about 95,000 years, interspersed with Interglacial Periods of  approximately 25,000 years, correspond with Milankovitch Cycles.  Multiple incursions of glaciers occurred during the Pleistocene, an epoch lasting from about 2.6 million to 11,700 years ago, when Earth’s last Glacial Period ended.  Around 24,000 years ago, present-day Lake Erie was covered with ice a mile thick.

Within each Interglacial Period, there’ve been warming periods, or “Mini-Summers.”  For example, within the current Holocene Interglacial, there have been warmer periods known as the Minoan (1500–1200 B.C.), Roman (250 B.C.–A.D. 400), and Medieval (A.D. 900–1300).  Our Modern Warming Period began with the waning of the Little Ice Age (1300–1850).  Today’s Mini-Summer is colder so far than all previous Mini-Summers of the last 8,500 years.

How did CO2 get blamed for global warming?  French physicist Joseph Fourier (1820s) proposed that energy from sunlight must be balanced by energy radiated back into space.  Irish physicist John Tyndall (1850s) performed laboratory experiments on “greenhouse gases” (GHGs), including water vapor; he proposed that CO2 elicited an important effect on temperature.  However, it’s impossible to do appropriate experiments — unless the roof of your laboratory is at least six miles high.  Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius (1896) proposed that “warming is proportional to the logarithm of CO2 concentration.”  Columbia University geochemist Wallace Broecker (1975) and Columbia University adjunct professor James Hansen (1981) wrote oft-cited articles in Science magazine, both overstating the perils of CO2 causing dangerous global warming — without providing scientific proof.

Most of Earth’s energy comes from the sun.  Absorption of sunlight causes molecules of objects or surfaces to vibrate faster, increasing their temperature.  This energy is then re-radiated by land and oceans as longwave, infrared radiation (heat).  Princeton University physicist Will Happer defines a GHG as that which absorbs negligible incoming sunlight but captures a substantial fraction of thermal radiation as it is re-radiated from Earth’s surface and atmospheric GHGs back into space.

The gases of nitrogen, oxygen and argon — constituting 78%, 21%, and 0.93%, respectively, of the atmosphere — show negligible absorption of thermal radiation and therefore are not GHGs.  Important GHGs include water (as high as 7% in humid tropics and as little as 1% in frigid climates), CO2 (0.042%, or 420 parts per million [ppm] by volume), methane (0.00017%), and nitrous oxide (0.0000334%, or 334 ppm).  Water vapor (clouds) has at least a hundred times greater warming effect on Earth’s temperature than all other GHGs combined.

As atmospheric CO2 increases, its GHG effect decreases: CO2’s warming effect is 1.5°C between zero and 20 ppm, 0.3°C between 20 and 40 ppm, and 0.15°C between 40 and 60 ppm.  Every doubling of atmospheric CO2 from today’s levels decreases radiation back into space by a mere 1%.  For most of the past 800,000 years, Earth’s atmospheric CO2 has ranged between about 180 ppm and 320 ppm; below 150 ppm, Earth’s plants could not exist, and all life would be extinguished.

Today’s global atmospheric CO2 levels are ~420 ppm.  Even at these levels, plants are “partially CO2-starved.”  In fact, standard procedures for commercial greenhouse growers include elevating CO2 to 800­–1200 ppm; this enhances growth and crop yield ~20–50%.  As shown by satellite since 1978, increased atmospheric CO2 has helped “green” the Earth by more than 15 percent, substantially enhancing crop production.

If global atmospheric CO2 was ~280 ppm in 1750, and it’s ~420 ppm today, what’s the source of this 140-ppm increase?  Scientists estimate that human-associated industrial emissions might have contributed 135 ppm — with “natural causes” accounting for the remaining 5 ppm.

In Earth’s history, the highest levels of atmospheric CO2 (6,000–9,000 ppm) occurred about 550–450 million years ago, which caused plant life to flourish.  CO2 levels in older nuclear submarines routinely operated at 7,000 ppm, whereas newer subs keep CO2 in the 2,000- to 5,000-ppm range.  Meanwhile, ice core data over the last 800,000 years show no correlation between global warming or cooling cycles and atmospheric CO2 levels.

CO2 in our lungs reaches 40,000–50,000 ppm, which induces us to take our next breath.  Each human exhales about 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day, which means Earth’s 8 billion people produce daily 18.4 billion pounds of CO2.  But humans represent only 1/40 of all CO2-excreting life on Earth.  Multiplying 18.4 billion pounds by 40 gives us 736 billion pounds of CO2 per day.  This approximates the overall CO2 excreted by the total animal and fungal biomass on the planet.

Daily emissions from worldwide industry in 2020 were estimated to be 16 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.  If one metric ton is 2,200 pounds, then “total industrial emissions” amount to 35,200,000,000 (35.2 billion) pounds of CO2 per day.  This means that the entire animal and fungal biomass (736 billion pounds) puts out more than 20 times as much CO2 as all industrial emissions (35.2 billion pounds)!

Can any clear-thinking person comprehend the facts above and still create a company with idiotic plans to “sequester CO2” or “sequester carbon”?  Scientifically, “net zero” and “carbon footprint” are meaningless terms.  There is no “climate crisis.”

If you try to find these facts on the web, good luck!  Out of every 10 hits on any climate topic, you’ll be lucky to find one or two sites with truthful scientific data.

The door of a nearby classroom displays a poster of Abraham Lincoln with the caption: “Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”  It is advice that our 16th president surely would have offered — had he lived to see the rise of this global warming quasi-religion.

10 COMMENTS

  1. Good article and correct me if I am wrong but I think there is a typo

    “and nitrous oxide (0.0000334%, or 334 ppm).” should be 334ppb (334 parts per Billion). In other words, along with methane virtually fuck all.

    8

    0

  2. Good read, well done.
    The Abraham Lincoln poster will fuck up modern kids, they would read that poster and think that there was internet back then, as they have never known life with out it they think its always been there.

    4

    0

  3. Unfortunately, the ‘Climate Change’ zealots really and truly believe that they are ‘right’ and that, in their ‘superior’ minds, any doubters are, at minimum , fools.

    I recently had the unfortunate experience (as a ‘captive’ audience-member – no details) of listening to a well-known, very-highly qualified academic from an equally well-known university (No names, no uni, no location) who lectured those present at length about what he believed to be the ‘evils’ of western society and how said evils had been the cause of the phenomenon of ‘Climate change (CC)’ .

    This individual teaches on the subject (Although noticeably that is not his ‘major’) and in support of his diatribe presented all sorts of theoretical examples of what is about to happen as a result of CC; situations that in his mind totally justified his stand.

    We were lectured about the ‘likelihood’ that certain islands were going to disappear as the sea level rose , that Polar Bears were ‘Likely to become extinct’ as the North Pole ice melted (Ignoring the facts that the icecap is increasing in depth and that Polar Bears are actually increasing in number) together with a host of similar ‘gloom-type’ situations.

    However, it was very noticeable that , the cases presented were all theoretical and model based instead of ‘cold, hard, facts’ , that at it’s most basic what was being said was ‘Alarmist’ and very ‘Anti-Western’ (India and China were never mentioned) and THAT THE SPEAKER REALLY BELIEVED-IN WHAT HE WAS SAYING!

    And this from a uni-professor who represents himself as a ‘CC’ expert (And is paid on that basis) and presents (Indoctrinates?) his niave students with ideas about which they have little or no prior knowledge on the subject. It’s the ideal situation for any SJW and if his ‘lecture’ is any indication, he is certainly making the most of it.

    Interestingly, it was also very noticeable that at no time during his ‘delivery’ /diatribe did he give any indication that he was personally-aware that the fact that he is in a position of ‘privilege’ and lives extremely comfortably was as as a direct result of said ‘Western’ society, while the audience was never told about what HE personally was doing to solve the problem/s that he was presenting to his audience.

    The contradiction was evident to those who chose to notice and ‘Do as I SAY rather than as I DO’ seemed to be his mantra.

    I didn’t bother to challenge him after the meeting had ended; There seemed little point, but it had certainly been an interesting and enlightening way of spending 45 minutes.

    Thank you.

    6

    0

  4. Although fairies are spirits and can be both good and evil (depending on the story), in most cultures the fairy tale is a whimsical fancy which can also sometimes have a happy ending (such as sleeping beauty for example). In any event, fairies usually interact with people on a one-to-one level and not on a worldwide basis.

    I would postulate that the ‘Climate Crisis’ is a NOT a fairy tale. Rather, it should be described as a Demonic Delusion, as it is driven by a single evil entity which has hugely more power than a mere fairy or forest spirit. The ‘climate crisis’ is the work of Satan. It is certainly not a mere fairy tale.

    The ‘climate crisis’ is but one prong of Satan’s three pronged trident, namely:

    – The world is overpopulated and all earth’s problems are created by humans (climate crisis is one expression of this demonic delusion) and therefore humanity must stop breeding and expanding.

    – There is no such thing as objective reality and everything is subjective (for example the demonic delusion of trans where a person is encouraged to try to live out their sick fantasies regardless of the reality of gender)

    – The collective is the only thing that matters and the individual must obey the collective (freedom of opinion and speech are therefore regarded as dangerous and must be wiped out, by force if necessary).

    In conclusion, we’re not talking mere fairies here. Thus is something far more evil than your average forest spirit.

    8

    0

  5. The framing Climate Change narrative is still in play, just in small active progressive steps as well.
    .
    …. But a climate lockdown will not be an all-hands-on-deck event, such as with the start of the pandemic.
    .
    Those on the political Left and in the administrative state know that hitting Americans with one regulation, or tax, or ban at a time may not spark a sharp reaction.
    .
    Rather than mandating that you can’t leave your house, for example, you may slowly notice over several years that your work and personal habits have been restricted one step at a time. ……
    .
    …… Make no mistake, the Left will make climate shutdowns sound alluring.
    .
    And people will flood social media to virtue signal about how it’s “saving the planet.” …..
    .
    …… Allies in the corporate media will insist that the idea of climate lockdowns is just “misinformation” or a “right-wing conspiracy theory.”
    .
    However, the WEF and its members are openly gloating about the “advantages” of enforcing such attacks on liberty. …..
    .
    ….. The lockdowns of 2020 were ham-fisted efforts by both well-meaning and malicious politicians to grapple with the surprise of the first global pandemic in a century.
    .
    But the next round of restrictions may be planned with icy precision and little thought about their practical effects.
    .
    These will be framed …. ….. as policymakers need them to be.
    .
    Those who resist the “Great Reset” may be labeled “anti-government extremists” for not simply accepting the “New Order” and rolling over.

    https://slaynews.com/news/democrats-push-wef-climate-lockdowns-fight-global-warming/
    .
    And so it will be :— Individual — ‘‘Human Rights Are Fiction, Just like God”
    God is dead, Long live the new religiosity in Climate Change, in good Collective Health. 🤮

    4

    0

  6. ED, So 2 mums must have read your article here ,thrown his arms in the air and screamed I’m outta here,LMFAO who believes the fagg hasn’t already got a job ?
    Here’s what’s gonna happen he’ll chuck it in a few weeks before his new job starts and say he’s just been accepted for whatever cushy quango he’s heading to ,every person on this blog knows this is true as that POS could would never move to far from the government or semi government troughs.

    5

    0

Recent posts

Have Your Say

True Or False??

Have Your Say

Tuesday Fun

Recent comments

nasska on Have Your Say
Ross12 on Have Your Say
freethinker on Have Your Say
LTA1955 on Have Your Say
nasska on Have Your Say
freethinker on Have Your Say
I am a stupid boy on Have Your Say

Pike is our weekly review of the most popular posts and comments seen on YSB in the past week.
Hamilton
clear sky
7.2 ° C
7.2 °
7.2 °
79 %
2.3kmh
2 %
Wed
10 °
Thu
14 °
Fri
17 °
Sat
17 °
Sun
16 °
NZD - New Zealand Dollar
USD
1.6643
EUR
1.7933
AUD
1.0982
CAD
1.2163
GBP
2.0861
JPY
0.0107
CNY
0.2301
INR
0.0199