I refuse to use the re-branded “climate change” that is actually global warming or more precisely anthropogenic global warming. The hypothesis was that increased CO2 from human activity leads to an increase in global mean temperature. When global mean temperature paused and then started to fall global warming was re-branded as climate change. Now any undesirable weather is my fault - and yours, but it’s not John Kerry’s or Bill Gates’ or Al Gore’s fault. It’s brilliant marketing but I am still refusing to participate.
I took a deep dive into global warming many years ago. I assumed the CO2 story was true but my wife kept telling me it was a scam. She had encouraged me to do some research on multiple occasions but it wasn’t until one of our kids brought it up that I did. What I found was shocking. Let’s say the global warming argument is built on a pile of rocks. I started turning over the rocks and under each one I found a lie. Not a mistake, an outright lie. The entire COVID PSYOP was built exactly the same way, it was the exact blueprint.
I watched a recent interview on GB News where Neil Oliver was talking to an AGW proponent (maybe better described as a propagandist). One of the most basic rocks someone interested in AGW can turn over is the foundational argument/hypothesis that atmospheric CO2 increases temperature. This is true, but only partially. For those wanting to take a close look at the physics of this hypothesis, I can recommend Michael Van Biezen’s 61 part Earth’s Atmosphere playlist on YouTube. Give yourself at least a few weeks to go through it all and once you’ve finished do it again. I’ll do the TLDR below.
CO2 captures/absorbs/reflects infrared light at very specific wavelengths, mostly around 4.3 and 14.9 μm but also (less significantly) around 2.0 and 2.7 μm. That is it. These bands also partially overlap with water vapor, especially the bands around 2.0 and 2.7 μm. Removing all CO2 from the atmosphere would not totally prevent IR from being absorbed at these wavelengths as water vapor would do some of the work. Water vapor makes up about 0.4% of our atmosphere. CO2 makes up about 0.04% of our atmosphere.
As atmospheric CO2 increases, the bands around 4.3 and 14.9 μm absorb more and more CO2 up to the point of complete saturation. Once the point of complete saturation is reached, no more CO2 can be absorbed. The relationship is not linear, it is logarithmic.
The heating effect of CO2 occurs mostly in the first 20 ppm then decreases logarithmically. At around 200 ppm the wavelengths that absorb CO2 are saturated. Additional atmospheric CO2 will not be absorbed, thus no additional heating can occur.
Proxy data assembled from ice core samples show our planet near a 400 million year low in atmospheric CO2. Drops in CO2 correlate with mass extinctions. Increases in CO2 correlate with increased planetary life. Increased CO2 is beneficial for plants. Plants given more CO2 will grow with less water then plants at a lower CO2 level. More atmospheric CO2 will not cause global warming, it will not cause climate change. More atmospheric CO2 is a good thing for the planet.
Good article. Historically, every period of warming was followed by an increase in CO2. Not preceded
fkkn right
'gun violence'
'the pandemic'
THEIR words