little is said of the fact that a U.S.-led attack on Syria would be a attack on the entire world. This attack would release lethal quantities of CO2, an indiscriminate killer already known to cause at least 300,000 deaths every year, through an increasing amount of floods, droughts, hurricanes, heat waves, wildfires, and more.
By 2030, carbon-induced climate chaos could kill 500,000 annually.
CAGW - when scientists treat common weather phenomena as unusual.
To me it sounds like the increase in CO2 is spawning BS(Bad Science) by the keystroke. And by 2030 some people will be so dumbed down they will believe anything. Did the writer of that story ever think to look at the data for extreme weather events before keying the article? Does he know where to go to find out information on hurricanes, tornadoes, drought, floods and fire? Did he think to search the online newspaper archives for past articles on storms of our grandfather’s past? Did he scour the journals where papers on climate science are published before inserting his/her foot in his/her mouth?
Would you like facts with that article?
Weather events of the past didn’t wait for 2030 to kill 500,000. How about the 1931 flood of the Yellow River in China? That one didn’t require CO2 induced climate chaos to wipe out two million people. CO2 was well below the mythical atmospheric tipping point of 350 ppm. So if CO2 is so powerful at generating ‘dirty weather’ how come that record still stands? How come more precipitation hasn’t fallen from ‘an atmosphere on steroids’ as our contemporary air has been described. What was the atmosphere ‘on’ back in the day when the Yellow River flooded and covered an area of 60,000 square miles?
The error in the above article is the assumption that bad weather is caused by human induced CO2 and that more CO2 means more frequent occurrences of severe weather.
So, where are the storms?
Hurricanes and tornadoes are at record lows. Studies indicate that modern droughts are less frequent and last a shorter period of time than droughts of the past. The same turns out to be true of floods as well. Nasty as these natural events are they occur in periods of both lower and higher concentrations of CO2. Does this not indicate that CO2 has nothing to do with the climate? Is that not the conclusion to draw?
And notice that while I continue to refer to CO2 the climalarmists have switched to carbon in an attempt to misdirect their readers to black soot which is easier to demonize because skeptics keep pointing out the inconvenient fact the we exhale CO2 and that a rumour mill has it that fruits and veggies love the stuff. It is more difficult to convince people that an invisible trace gas essential to life on earth is implicated as the modern devil incarnate which must be resisted at all costs. Hence the misinformation conveyed in the switch to carbon. But if the sacrifices you are going to be asked to endure is because black soot is the problem then it is an easier sell. But make no mistake it is CO2 that is the prime target. Reducing our carbon footprint is all about reducing human emissions of CO2.
Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere is setting world records for the amount of hyperbolic nonsense being spewed about the weather by the MSM and the mouths of political activists.
Global Climate Models may assume that CO2 is the driving force behind modern day climate change but Mother Nature doesn’t agree. Mother Nature is invalidating GCM predictions and therefore she herself is a CAGW denier.
CO2, a trace gas essential to life on Earth, is plant food. We exhale CO2 and help to feed the flora. In return they slip us oxygen of which we are rather fond in a mutually beneficial and amicable symbiotic relationship.
Bonus: plants grow better, stronger, faster because of the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 has benefits and Pandas are grateful.
CO2 is green. We need more of it not less. CO2 has been exhaled during the creation of this post. No living thing was harmed. Some even liked it. Let the plants dance.
No comments:
Post a Comment