Since this chapter is more of the same let me start with a statement from the previous chapter which is pertinent .
Phil Jones, a real supporter of the global warming group and head of Great Britain‘s University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) stated, ―the difference of warming rates for the periods 1860-1880, 1910-1940, and 1975-2009 is statistically insignificant …
and that there has been no statistically – significant global warming since 1995; that in fact global temperatures have been trending to the downside since January of 2002. ‖. Mr. Jones is one of the recognized experts who had been promoting the concept of global warming.
Carbon dioxide
The atmosphere is composed of approximately 95% water vapor, 4% carbon dioxide and smaller amounts of methane, argon, nitrous oxide and ozone . Carbon dioxide is produced by decaying plants, by humans and animals inhaling oxygen and then exhaling carbon dioxide and also produced when wood, oil, gasoline or any fuel containing carbon burns with a large supply of oxygen.
Greenhouse gases are gases in an atmosphere that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect..
Carbon dioxide is used by plants during photosynthesis to make sugars. Photosynthesis is a process that converts carbon dioxide into organic compounds, especially sugars, using the energy from sunlight. Photosynthesis occurs in plants, algae, and many species of bacteria, but not in archaea. Photosynthetic organisms are called photoautotrophs, since they can create their own food. In plants, algae, and cyanobacteria, photosynthesis uses carbon dioxide and water, releasing oxygen as a waste product.
Photosynthesis is vital for life on Earth. As well as maintaining the normal level of oxygen in the atmosphere, nearly all life either depends on it directly as a source of energy, or indirectly as the ultimate source of the energy in their food. The rate of energy capture by photosynthesis is immense, approximately 100 terawatts which is about six times larger than the power consumption of human civilization. ] As well as energy, photosynthesis is also the source of the carbon in all the organic compounds within organisms'
bodies. In all, photosynthetic organisms convert around 100–115 teragrams of carbon into biomass per year.]
So, with the above definitions we know that carbon dioxide is a fertilizer, is necessary for life here on earth and is part of the so called
―greenhouses gases‖.
With that knowledge it seems that we would want to increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the earth. However, climate scientists have claimed that those greenhouses gases form an umbrella over the earth and retain heat which leads to global warming. These are the same scientists that have claimed that global warming is a significant problem for us and that we must reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We have already established that there is no global warming but the claims about greenhouse gases needs to be examined.
Because the idea of our earth warming does not seem terribly bad, the environmentalists needed to find something that would make it bad. Since our atmosphere consists primarily water vapor, which is clearly not bad, the wackos had to find something else and the only other element of the atmosphere that is significant is carbon dioxide. That is still a problem for carbon dioxide comprises only 4
to 6 % of the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide still represents a problem for them for carbon dioxide is very, very beneficial for mankind.
Ian Pilmer, author of Heaven and Earth, states that atmospheric carbon dioxide is actually the lowest it‘s been for 500 million years and that the hypothesis that humans can actually change climate is unsupported by evidence from geology, archaeology, history and astronomy.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations Earth System research Laboratory at Mauna Loa, HI , consistently and reliably has measured CO2 for the last fifty years . They state that CO2 concentrations have risen steadily for a half century .
Walter Williams, Professor at Georgetown University, reports, ‖The earth has been cooling for ten years…the present cooling was not 11
predicted by the alarmists‘ computer models. Last March, more than 700 international scientists went on record dissenting over manmade global warming claims. About 31,500 American scientists , including 9,029 Ph.D‘s have signed a petition that reads, ―There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth‘s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth‘s climate.
―Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.‖ – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.
Dr.. Alan Carlin of the EPA wrote an analysis that noted that the global temperatures have declined over the last 11 years while carbon emissions have increased. His report says,‖ Fossil fuel and cement emissions increased by 3.3 percent per year during 2000-2006 , compared to 1.3 percent per year in the 1990‘s. Similarly, atmospheric CO2 concentrations increased by 1.93 parts per million per year during 2000-2006 compared to 1.8 in the 1990‘s. And yet, despite accelerating emission rates and concentrations, there‘s been no net warming in the 21st century, and more accurately, a decline .‖
Professor Syun-Ichi Akasofu, director of the International Arctic Research Center notes,‖CO2 began to increase exponentially in about 1940. But, temperature actually began to decrease in 1940 and continued until about 1975 . He notes that CO2 is not causing climate change. ―When the CO2 is increasing rapidly, but yet the temperature decreasing then we can not say that CO2 and the temperature go together.‖
MIT professor Richard S. Lindzen states, ‖atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide have risen over the past two centuries and that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas whose increase is likely to warm the earth (one of many, the most important being water vapor and clouds). But, - and I cannot stress this enough – we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to carbon dioxide or to forecast what the climate will be in the future.‖
Dr. John R. Christy, professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth system Science Center at the University of Alabama pointed out that carbon dioxide is not a ―pollutant‖ and that its beneficial effect on plant life ―is the lifeblood of the planet.‖
From an article in The New American by Dennis J. Behreandt we read,‖ Imagine a world without carbon dioxide. It would be a world without life. Plants of all kind would disappear…gone too would be herbivorous creatures,…and the great carnivores would disappear as well. Finally, without plants and animals man too would disappear.
―Fortunately, there is no shortage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the Earth‘s plant life continues to thrive. What would happen in a world in which carbon dioxide is increasing? Will plant growth benefit? Will crop yields improve? Will the Earth actually become greener? Even a rudimentary knowledge of carbon dioxide … would suggest that the answer to all of these questions must be yes.‖ ―With increasing levels of carbon dioxide, all sorts of crops, including wheat, can be expected to be more productive, increasing the food supply.‖
Dr. Robert Balling, the director of climatology at Arizona State University, claims that increased carbon dioxide, far from being harmful, is extremely beneficial. Dr. Balling notes that there are ―thousands of articles showing that elevated concentrations of carbon oxide will be beneficial for plants.‖ Dr. David Bellamy, a famed environmentalist, author and producer for the BBC and Dr. Jack Barrett, professor of physical chemistry at London‘s Imperial College have written,‖ It (carbon dioxide) is in fact, the most important airborne fertilizer in the world and without it there would be no green plants at all‖.
Dr. S. Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service has stated, ―…that any warming from the growth of greenhouse gases is likely to be minor, difficult to detect above the natural fluctuations of the climate, and therefore inconsequential.
In addition, the impacts of warming and the higher carbon dioxide levels are likely to be beneficial for human activities, especially for agriculture that thrives on carbon dioxide‖. ―If it (the earth) does warm, there will be numerous benefits. Agriculture will be aided because crops will grow faster and sturdier.‖
Dr. Arthur B. Robinson started a project known as the Oregon Project to object to the Kyoto treaty, signed by over 20,000 scientists.
In part, the project stated, ―The proposed limits on greenhouse gases (in the Kyoto treaty) would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of humankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will , in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth‘s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth‘s climate. Moreover, there is substantial evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth‖.
Dr. Timothy Ball of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project in Canada states, ‖Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide. This, in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science‖.
―I am convinced that the current alarm over carbon dioxide is mistaken...Fears about man-made global warming are unwarranted and are not based on good science.‖ – says Award Winning Physicist Dr. Will Happer, Professor at the Department of Physics at Princeton University and Former Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, who has published over 200 scientific papers, and is a fellow of the American Physical Society, The American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences.
It seems hard to believe that carbon dioxide has been selected as the ―villain‖ in the global warming debate. It does exist in the atmosphere and greenhouse gases do form a barrier over the earth that will help retain heat. However, that heat could be very 12
beneficial to the earth and carbon dioxide itself is very definitely beneficial – even necessary- for our existence and the fact that the global warming alarmists have selected it as a problem tell us more about their real objective.
Since the burning of oil, coal, wood and other fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide their real objective must be to reduce the amount of energy that is produced by that action. With all the above information it is hard to conclude that these wackos don‘t know that. It has been known for years that carbon dioxide is beneficial so this is not a newly discovered revelation. What is new is their claim that it is bad. Are these ―scientists‖ stupid, deliberately trying to stop the development of energy or just ―looney tunes‖?
The production of carbon dioxide does not lead to global warming and the above statements from scientists should establish that fact.
If it did, since the globe is not warming, there would still be no need to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide. As established above carbon dioxide is beneficial to plants and mankind so their objective is something else. That seems hard to believe but logic leads us to conclude that these alarmists either do not want the production of energy or do not want us to industrialize our world. Are these environmental alarmists really this far gone? Or, is it possible that there is another motive? Money?