December 2023
« Nov    

Debunking Climate Change bunkum – again and again and again

(Monday blog)

Is CO2 really a significant part of the Earth’s atmosphere?

Here’s a rather important graphic:

It shows the proportion of man-made CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. The man-made CO2 is that tiny little section in the lower right-hand corner.

The Greenies and Ecoloons and Extinction Rebellion cultists like to try to terrify us with charts showing a massive rise in CO2:

But CO2 is just a trace gas that makes up so little of the atmosphere that it can only be measured in Parts Per Million (ppm).

It’s true that CO2 in the atmosphere has increased from around 370 ppm in 2000 to 412 ppm today. So that’s 42 more ppm in 20 years – about 2 ppm per year. If you had a salary of say £30,000 and I was to generously give you a 2 ppm pay rise each year for 20 years, you’d be getting about £0.06p more a year – 0.5p more a month – salary increase. Probably you wouldn’t consider a 6p a year pay rise particularly significant. Yet the Warmies want us to believe that a minuscule annual increase of 2 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere will destroy all life on Earth.

This truly is lunacy.

The chicken or the egg – which came first?

Here’s another rather important chart:

(to see the chart more clearly, left-click on it and then left-click again)

It shows the temperature (the blue line) and the atmospheric CO2 concentration (the red line) for the last 420,000 years taken from Antarctic ice core sampling.

The crazy Greenies (one of whom, it has been reported, occupies an important but unelected position in 10 Downing Street) and the mainstream media claim that the Earth’s temperature is now being driven by rising levels of atmospheric CO2. So here’s the inimitable Tony Heller explaining that the opposite is actually happening – that levels of atmospheric CO2 are a function of the Earth’s temperature – the more the Earth warms mainly due to increasing levels of solar activity and Milankovitch Cycles the more CO2 is released into the atmosphere and then when the Earth cools mainly due to falling levels of solar activity and Milankovitch Cycles the more CO2 is absorbed by the oceans:

(you have to scroll down a little to see the short video)

It’s rather worrying that, when we finally emerge from the catastrophic economic and social destruction caused by Xi Pingpong’s Chinese plague, the moronic Greenies will destroy what little is left of our economy due to their crazed but deliberate, politically-motivated misunderstanding of science.

4 comments to Debunking Climate Change bunkum – again and again and again

  • A Thorpe

    You can debunk man-made climate change ad infinitum but nothing will change. Our education system and media are churning out the propaganda endlessly. The children take it home and indoctrinate their parents and grandparents because they don’t have the ability to understand and explain basic physics. It isn’t difficult to see why when world famous scientists like the late Stephen Hawking and TV glamour boy Brian Cox both promote it. Then add in David Attenborough and all the influential celebrities. A few days ago Charles was telling us we were in the final hour to save the planet. Science is essentially about putting forward a theory and then finding the empirical evidence to support it. It is impossible to do experiments on the atmosphere to isolate the effect of CO2 and we cannot set up a laboratory experiment. Mathematical models are not experiments. We don’t need them because the physics used to support the claim are fundamental wrong. Science is being used against us because of our ignorance and unwillingness to learn.

    We are seeing exactly the same with the supposed science associated with Covid policies. There is no evidence to support wearing masks. All the supposed evidence is laboratory measurements of droplet transmission. We need trials of masks when we are living our normal life. It is claimed masks prevent us spreading the virus if we have it, so a trial must include people who have the virus going out in masks. Such a trial will never be done. It also needs a separate trial to prove masks prevent us getting the virus and that means people on the trial have to come into contact with people having the virus. There are so many variables that a trial would have to involve thousands of people and take months to get any statistically significant data.

    The same applies to vaccine trials. Apart from the time it normally takes to develop a vaccine, the trials normally take years. The Pfizer trial had almost 44,000 with only 95 in total from both vaccine and control group having symptoms of the vaccine. What is that supposed to mean? We want the vaccine to prevent us being hospitalised and prevent death, The flu vaccine doesn’t even do that and it has been available for years. We don’t even know how many people on the trial were exposed to the virus. We are told a UK trial is starting and results will be available in weeks and a vaccine available in weeks. Safety checks on vaccines normally take years.

    This morning Boris gave us a message telling us it did not matter that he had antibodies from his earlier infection and the main thing is that we must isolate if we have been un contact with somebody who might have been infectious. What then is the point of the vaccine which is to give us the antibodies and carry on with normal life? Boris is an idiot who understands nothing. We are all being fed more scientific nonsense just like climate science.

    I can see no sign that the human race in general has any capacity for rational thought. We have gone through belief in many gods to a single god with no supporting evidence, we have witnessed human sacrifices to appease the gods, poking about in animal entrails to predict the future, and the belief in witchcraft. Science has brought advances but it has not improved our ability to think rationally and look for evidence. Our knowledge is now so vast that nobody can understand more than just a fraction of it but that should not stop us demanding evidence, but as history shows this is our weakness. Science could have made us more vulnerable because we now think we should be able to control everything, as the climate and virus nonsense reveals. We have never really left the dark ages.

  • William Boreham

    What a tragedy that Christopher Booker died, he’d be having a field day right now with Bumbling Boris’s (and his floosie’s) green agenda.
    It has been calculated that Ed Milliband’s lunatic Climate Change Act will cost the UK consumer £720 billion over the next 30 years, if there is still a UK by then. Just one example of the wasted billions that we consumers will be forced to subsidise, (below) leaving this country with the world’s most unreliable, sporadic and expensive source of energy of any of the world’s ‘advanced’ economies. The loss already of 10% of our GNP due to our cack-handed response to Covid will put the final nail in our coffin.

    Meanwhile China, the epicentre of Covid, has actually seen an increase in their GNP this year while consuming 3664 million tonnes of coal annually and still building a new coal plant every two weeks.

  • Ed P

    It might be only 2ppm per year, but that’s actually an increase (in the 2000 figure) from 370 to 372, i.e., 0.54%. Still totally insignificant of course, but the Green-nuts would seize on incorrect claims.

  • Stillreading

    We know we’ve reached the end of the road when our Police and the Leader of the Opposition “take the knee” to commemorate an American career criminal probably killed during the commission of his latest crime and our Government is eagerly adopting the religious doctrine of a developmentally retarded autistic Swedish schoolgirl. (Oh! I forgot! She doesn’t go to school does she? Can’t hack it presumably.) Physics? What’s that? Oh yes! That’s the subject where GCSE candidates are increasingly asked in exams to state their “opinions” on the “in” topic – “climate change” or whatever the “topic of the year” may be – rather than produce from their very limited understanding and memory bank scientifically proven evidence to support their infantile assertions. I know because I have relatives who are having to teach this stuff to whatever the acceptable examination standard of the day may be. They ensure the kids they teach produce appropriate responses not because they think it is what they should be teaching, but in order to get the youngsters up to exam standard, ensure OFSTED approval and, ultimately, keep their jobs.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>