Why read this climate blog?

This blog is a summary of my climate change reading -- I've been following this subject since 1997.

There are many real environmental problems in the world, from China, to India, to the drinking water in nearby Flint, Michigan.

Real environmental problems seem to get local attention … while many people in the world focus on a harmless, airborne fertilizer called carbon dioxide.

Religious leaders often try to control people by claiming they will go to hell if they don't "follow orders".

I think their claims are nonsense!

Secular leaders often try to control people by claiming burning fossil fuels will turn Earth into 'hell' (if they don't "follow orders").  

I think that claim is nonsense too!

I hope I've not just offended everyone reading this post -- but I want you to know where I stand.

I am a libertarian, not a Republican or Democrat.

I am also not a scientist -- I don't do original climate research. 

I do have a BS degree and a Finance MBA. They are useful for a finance and economics blog I have written since 2008, but not for this climate blog.

This blog was launched in late 2014 after a feature article on climate change in my ECONOMIC LOGIC newsletter -- a newsletter I have written since 1981. A prior climate change feature article was back in 2007.

The attack on fossil fuels is an attack on economic growth, which has been based on inexpensive sources of energy for over a century.

Replacing coal with clean nuclear energy would make sense.

Replacing coal with highly subsidized, low density, intermittent sources of energy -- wind power and solar power -- would be an economic disaster.

And that potential economic disaster is the main reason I became interested in climate change.

The other reason I'm interested in climate change is the false demonization of a harmless airborne plant food called carbon dioxide (CO2).

Claiming CO2 is "carbon pollution" is nonsense, but has been an effective strategy, used by leftist politicians, to increase government control over people and their businesses.

As a libertarian since the mid-1970s, I had believed politicians had too much power BEFORE the coming global warming catastrophe hoax was invented to increase their power.

It should already be obvious to everyone who ever goes outside: 

Earth's climate in 2015 is perfectly normal.

In fact, our climate has improved since the cool centuries from 1300 to 1800.

In the 1960s leftists began "selling" their beloved socialism in a clever, indirect way: "Save the Earth Socialism".

The Earth doesn't need saving, or socialism -- central governments already have far too much power.



My most important conclusions 
from 18 years of reading several climate articles every week:
(1) Carbon dioxide is not the 'climate controller',

(2) The slight warming since 1880 (somewhere between 0 and +2 degrees C.) is good news for people,

(3) The increase of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air since the mid-1700s is good news for plants -- more CO2 is greening our planet,

(4) The claim that the future climate can be predicted is nonsense, and has been proven wrong by 40 years of inaccurate climate model predictions (meaningless computer games), and

(5) The false demonization of CO2 is a strategy used by left-wing politicians to gain power to control the private sector, and eventually tax corporations for their energy use.

In the 1960s leftists began "selling" their beloved socialism in a clever, indirect way: "Save the Earth Socialism". The earth doesn't need saving, or socialism -- central governments already have far too much power.



I try to communicate here with easy to understand language, in an easy to read format:
No math required.
No complicated science.
No convoluted sentences.
No scary climate predictions that never happen.
 
Perhaps most important: 
   There's a climate centerfold every month 
demonstrating how to dress as the planet warms.
http://onionbloggle2012.blogspot.com/