It's a FACT that Earth
had mild warming
in the past
three hundred years,
since the 1690s,
most likely in the
+2 to +3 degree C. range.
It's an ASSUMPTION that CO2 caused
any of the warming in the past 300 years,
not a fact.
It''s a FANTASY that CO2 will cause
catastrophic warming in the future,
well beyond any reasonable assumption
Much of Western society has been convinced
a climate change crisis is already in
progress.
But then Germans in the 1930's were
convinced that their own hard working,
relatively intelligent, and low crime rate
German Jews, were their enemy, and
should be exterminated !
The Germans were convinced,
without evidence just like the
coming global warming catastrophe
exists in many minds,
without evidence.
The climate change scaremongers
call carbon dioxide, the staff of life
on this planet: “carbon pollution.”
That belief is the mark of a
clueless science denier !
Environmentalists spread fear to raise money.
Politicians claim they can save the planet,
if elected, and given much more power
to control and tax private sector energy use.
The mass media LOVES scary predictions, and
character attacks on skeptics ( people like me ).
Scientists and science institutions take in
billions of dollars of government grants,
and government salaries.
Their claims that a climate crisis is coming,
which started in the last 1950s, create job
security for any government bureaucrat
scientist who calls himself a "climate scientist".
Businesses try to look, and act, 'green' because
half their customers falsely believe CO2 is evil.
Investments that would be money losers,
such as large wind farms and solar arrays,
get huge government subsidies.
There is currently a "pause" in global warming,
from 1998 through 2018, a period that had about
one-third of all human CO2 emissions created
since the beginning of the Industrial Age.
There have been 100,000-year "Milankovitch"
climate cycles, based on planetary geometry,
in the past 800,000 years, based on
Antarctica ice core studies.
We are currently in a 10,000 or more year-old
interglacial warm period, of one of those
100,000-year cycles.
There is no reason to expect our mild climate
Holocene Interglacial to last much longer.
Every species on Earth, including humans,
descended from ancestors that thrived
in climates with much higher CO2 levels
than we have today.
Without burning fossil fuels for energy,
the atmospheric CO2 concentration
would have continued to drop,
as they had for the past 140 million years.
Earth’s climate has fluctuated
between relatively long periods
of glaciation, and relatively short
periods of warm interglacial climates,
similar to today.
People would not be able to grow
much food, if CO2 levels continued
falling, to under 150ppm, thousands,
or millions, of years in the future.
Out current Holocene Interglacial
has already lasted longer than
some prior interglacials,
and is also cooler than
several prior interglacial periods.
The peak temperature in this Holocene
interglacial period was during the
Holocene Optimum, between 5,000
and 10,000 years ago.
The Little Ice Age, which was coldest
in the late 1600s, was most likely
the coldest period since the
Holocene Optimum.
Creating carbon emissions, assuming they
cause some global warming, should delay
the onset of a new 100,000-year ice age.
That's why I celebrate more CO2 in the air,
and hope it causes the mild warming it is
claimed to cause.
Because a warmer world, with a higher
level of CO2, would be a greener world
with more plant biomass, higher yields
of food crops and trees, and a milder
climate in high northern latitudes.
All three would be good news,
and all three have been happening
since 1975
And hopefully some warming will delay
the next major glaciation too.
The purpose of this report is to convince
you that "recycling" CO2 to the atmosphere,
that was originally in the atmosphere long
ago, is NOT even close to being harmful.
Adding CO2 to the atmosphere has actually
been BENEFICIAL in the past, and is most likely
to be BENEFICIAL in the future -- adding CO2 to the air
has been the best thing humans have ever done
( inadvertently, of course )
to improve the LONG-TERM ecology of our planet.
DETAILS:
CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas
in closed system, water vapor free,
infrared spectroscopy experiments,
performed in science laboratories.
That is the ONLY real science behind
the demonization of CO2.
Government bureaucrats with science
degrees, who wave their arms wildly,
like Democrat Robert Francis O' Rourke,
have been predicting a coming global warming
disaster since the late 1950s -- but wrong
predictions are NOT real science.
Their wild guess, always wrong,
always bad news, predictions
( fantasies? ) of the future climate
are climate astrology !
There is no way to determine exactly
what CO2 does in the atmosphere.
It's a reasonable assumption that CO2
may be causing some global warming.
Harmless warming, at worst.
The actual warming since 1940
has been mild, and could just as easily
had 100% natural causes, and no
man made causes.
Rather than guessing at the actual
effect of CO2 in the atmosphere,
I prefer a worst case assumption --
I just assume ALL the warming since
1940 was caused by man made CO2
-- that ACTUAL warming rate
has been under +0.8 degrees C. per century
= harmless, even as a worst case estimate !
The SHORT-TERM atmospheric effects
of burning CO2 can be negative.
Fossil fuels burned without modern
pollution controls cause REAL pollution.
That pollution irritated my eyes, and lungs,
when I attended graduate school in lower
Manhattan in 1976, and early 1977.
I couldn't wait to get out of there !
US air is much cleaner now -- and the US
environmentalists accelerated the clean-up.
Currently, fossil fuel-caused air pollution in
many Chinese and Indian cities is unacceptable.
But US environmentalists don't care about
THAT real pollution -- which is much worse than
pollution in US cities in the 1970s.
I have no problem with assumptions that
CO2 emissions result in some global warming,
but I do have a problem with people making
that assumption,who never mention there is no
definitive scientific proof of their assumption.
Real science has many "I don't knows" and
"we don't knows".
Real science is NEVER settled.
Real climate science can't predict the future
climate, other than expecting a 100,000-year
glaciation cycle.
Only junk climate science is "settled".
Well, the PAST climate
( historical global temperatures )
is NOT settled, believe it or not
-- historical temperature data
gets repeatedly "adjusted",
with almost every "adjustment"
creating more global warming
out of thin air.
In junk climate science,
the FUTURE climate
is falsely claimed to be "known"
with great certainty, while the PAST
temperatures keep changing.
Junk climate science scaremongers
only claim the future climate
will be bad news, and the
"scientific proof" of that is ...
" Because we say so,
and we have been saying so
since the late 1950s ! "
The junk science scaremongers
do get a grade of "A" for consistency
... to go along with their grade of "F"
for consistently WRONG climate
predictions !
The optimum CO2 level
for C3 plant growth
( people and animals eat mainly C3 plants )
for C3 plant growth
( people and animals eat mainly C3 plants )
is from 1,000 ppm
to 2,000 ppm
( ppm is parts per million ).
Greenhouse owners buy CO2 enrichment
systems to raise CO2 levels inside
their greenhouse, to at least 1,000 ppm,
to accelerate growth of their plants.
The CO2 level 18,000 to 20,000 years ago
is roughly estimated to have been 180ppm.
The 1750 level is roughly estimated
to have been 280 ppm.
The current outdoors CO2 level is 410 ppm.
CO2 has been above 1,000 ppm
for most of the history of life.
It makes no sense to call for a reduction
in the CO2 level.
There's NO evidence of coming climate
catastrophe ... and NO evidence of any past
climate catastrophe, from CO2 levels up
to ten times higher than today !
There's LOTS of evidence that rising CO2,
in the past 300 years, has been accompanied
by HUGE improvements in human health,
lifespan and prosperity.
The past 150 years have been the most
prosperous and productive 150 years
ever, for humans.
No one would have even noticed
the claimed +1 degree C. of global
warming since 1880, if not for
hysterical leftists bellowing that 'CO2
will end life on Earth as we know it'
... and in only 12 years, according to the
Republican's 'favorite' ding ding ding bat:
"Alexandria Occasionally Coherent" !
There are many people who don't care
about the past effects of CO2.
They do not care about reality.
They live in a fantasy world where
bad news is always coming, and only
they, allegedly, can prevent the bad news
from coming, with a
more powerful government,
more powerful government,
more regulations, and higher taxes.
Of course they would have to be in charge
of that more powerful government ( and a
more powerful government is something
they've wanted starting long before
CO2 became their latest boogeyman ! ).
To get the power they crave, leftists insist
that CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic
global warming warming in coming years.
They never mention the 78 years
of experience with rising CO2, since 1940,
accompanied by global warming of only
+0.6 degrees C. through the end of 2018
( using the more accurate, global UAH
weather satellite data since 1979. )
No one knows if CO2 caused any of the
warming in the past 78 years.
But we can assume that CO2 caused ALL
the warming as a worst case estimate.
A warming of +0.6 degrees C. in 78 years,
is +0.077 degrees warming per decade or
+0.77 degrees C. warming in a century.
If that warming rate continued,
and CO2 was responsible for all
the past global warming, that suggests
the planet would be only +0.77 degrees C.
warmer in 100 years -- harmless warming,
even with a worst case estimate.
In fact, CO2 is claimed to have a logarithmic
greenhouse effect -- every 100 ppm increase of
the CO2 level is claimed to have less of a
warming effect than the prior +100 ppm increase.
Scientists don't debate that claim -- there is
a 100% consensus -- well maybe 99.9%,
meaning future warming is more likely to be
at a SLOWER rate than past global warming,
not faster, if CO2 is causing the warming !
Claiming CO2 is a pollutant,
which is still done by the EPA
under President Trump, believe it
or not, is anti-science.
Scientific evidence is unanimous
that CO2 is essential to life on Earth.
If humans had not added CO2 to the air,
by burning fossil fuels, in some future
glaciation, CO2 was likely to fall
below 180ppm, stunting the growth rate
of food crops and other plants.
Human emissions are restoring
a balance to the global carbon cycle,
by recycling some CO2 back to the
atmosphere, from underground.
That CO2 was stored as plant biomass,
by photosynthesis, and as CaCO3 (calcium
carbonate) in limestone and deep ocean
sediments.
The vast bulk of carbon is sequestered
into carbonaceous rocks, mainly as CaCO3.
About 5% of human CO2 emissions are from
converting CaCO3 with heat into CO2,
and CaO (lime) to manufacture cement.
The imagined future BAD news from CO2,
is more than offset by the good news
from adding more CO2 to the air
-- significant greening of our planet,
per satellite photographs
used to estimate the amount of green leave
coverage at the peak of growing seasons.
Some people claim that the warming
is responsible for some of the greening ...
but the most significant greening has been
in areas that were already warm !
The current warming began about 300 years
ago (1690s) during the Little Ice Age.
Based on Central England temperatures,
there has been over +3 degrees C. warming
since the coldest years of the Maunder Minimum
( low solar energy period with few sunspots )
in the 1690s:
To be conservative, I have only claimed
+2 degrees C. of warming since the 1690s,
on this blog, but the chart above suggests
about +3 degrees C..
That means there was much MORE
warming from 1690 to 1880,
than from 1880 through 2018 !
Government bureaucrats, using very
sketchy, non-global measurements,
claim only +1 degree C. of "global" warming
since 1880, some of which they blame on CO2.
In summary, MOST of the warming since
the 1690s can NOT be blamed on man made
CO2 emissions.