1 in 2500 is the mathematic equivalent of 400 ppm which we are told is close to the point of no return.
From that assumption, they have constructed this;
Global Warming Contrived Explained For Non-Scientists
Fake mathematics, called radiative transfer equations, was contrived for calculating heat trapped in the atmosphere. As always, there was no way to remove the contradictions in contriving fakery; so there are numerous scientific contradictions in the logic of radiative transfer equations.
There is no Valid Mechanism for CO2 Creating Global Warming
A small amount of something cannot heat a large amount of something without extreme differences in temperature which cannot exist in the atmosphere.
Which leaves you with-
- Deny the ‘deniers’
- Accept their conclusions that man made climate change does not exist
- Read https://environment.gov.au/climate-change/climate-science-data/climate-science/greenhouse-effect
Before making a final decision, you would do well to consider the cost.
If you have grown accustomed to, and even grown fond of, Corona confinement, you will love Climate Change regulations. In fact, you will not even need a mask!
Why bring it up now?
- While stifling effects of the Corona isolation are fresh in your mind.
- Climate change has become an “of course” item in radical left conversation and is simply shrugged off by people who should never let that pass lest their silence conveys agreement with this absurd bogus science.
What’s the similarity?
On May 19, the Washington Post carried the following headline:
Global emissions plunged an unprecedented 17 percent during the coronavirus pandemic
That is a goal of climate change enthusiasts, only this time there would be no “reopening.” Unemployment in the twenties and millions of shuttered businesses would be a permanent fact of life in the U.S.
Between Corona and Climate Change, cause and effect are reversed, but the end result is the same. Self-isolation in response to the virus has drastically curtailed economic activity and diminished activity required by climate regulations will lead to isolation in a depressed economy.
The European Union has gone all in on this “theory” of global heating at a heavy economic cost illustrated by this graph from MGM Research.
The US GDP per capita is 1.7-times of that of the EU in 2018 . The chart shows the GDP per capita of the US and the EU. California has given us a preview of “life-without-light” with rolling blackouts resulting from their attempt to replace conventional power sources with renewables.
In “The Real Global Warming Disaster”, author Christopher Booker reviews Great Britain’s response to EU mandates to reduce CO2 emissions by 60 percent, principally through the use of wind farms. Wind turbines were rated at 25 percent of their name plate due to the vagaries of blowing wind and each wind farm was backed up by a coal fired generator running at idle speed so that its power output was immediately available when the wind died down. “Green Taxes” cost every household £1,000 annually.
In 1983, then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher used the notion of man-made-climate-change in negotiations with the powerful coal miners union. Seven years later, the U.N. weaponized it to collect carbon taxes from developed economies with the formation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Interestingly the UN never asked if man made climate change was possible but charged the IPCC with addressing the results, real imagined.
George Orwell’s, 1984, recognized that poor people, dependent on the government, were easier to control. The challenge was keeping them poor with the destruction of wealth and their answer was a remote war in some far away location. Climate change will do the same thing without the stigma of war. Beware of politicians promoting this bogus ‘science’.
On the jacket of “The Real Global Warming Disaster” is a quote by Professor Richard Lindzen, described as The World’s Leading Atmospheric Physicist and Climate Scientist in 2007, “Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree and on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age.”