Climate Craziness of the Week

This is too ridiculous to even comment on, so I’ll just let the image do the talking and provide a link:

The entire evidence for the title of the linked news story above:

Smoking produces two green house gasses that are altering our atmosphere and are directly related to climate change; it is just one more challenge for the world to over come.

Tune in next week when birthday cake candles are blamed for global warming because they produce carbon dioxide and soot.

h/t to WUWT reader Tom T

FULL DISCLOSURE: Both of my parents died from smoking related illness, so if anybody wants to suggest that I support smoking because of this post, leave it unsaid. – Anthony


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Have these people gone completely crazy?

Phil's Dad

So where was this picture taken?
REPLY: Stock photo CD that I have a license for, plus a NASA image -A


Didn’t algore once claim that cigarette smoking is a major cause of global warming?

Barry L.

Reminds me of an old post at World Climate Report:
Global Warming: Bad for Good and Good for Bad


This example of the danger of CO2 obsession lowering the intelligence level of the obsessed has been floating round awhile.
It is a pitiful example of how ignorant many AGW believers are.
And I just lost a beloved sister in law to lung cancer two weeks ago.
And no, I never hoed it or harvested it or cut it or dried it.

Phil's Dad

First Chilian miner on the way up as I type.


Heh. I was listening to a local AM station and they were talking about how cow farting creates “one humungous” cloud of greenhouse gases. I wondered how the farts all got together to create a single massive cloud. But then they upped the ante by stating dandruff causes global warming and that we should help the environment by using dandruff shampoo. And, yes, all the dandruff gets together to make a huge cloud, too. Now, I’m figuring that we are all dead if the secondhand smoke creates ANOTHER giant cloud and meets up with the farts and the dandruff clouds creating the Perfect Storm. Life as we know it will end because of a massive secondhand dandruff fart storm. And then I realized I was being silly. Smugness will kill us all before secondhand dandruff fart storms.


“Smoking produces two green house [sic] gasses [sic] that are altering our atmosphere and are directly related to climate change; it is just one more challenge for the world to over come [sic].”
I’d say, given the outrageous stupidity of the article, the world needs no further challenges. We have nothing to fear but stupidity itself.


Just one more attempted justification for anti-tobacco legislation, oh wait we already tried something similar, via the 18th amendment. You know how it is about people (or nations) doomed to repeat unlearned history. Even though it’s insane, few will be against it, because who wants to appear pro-smoking
“Probably” tobacco causes cancer/emphysema but this is for the all inclusive product in which there are many things that don’t really belong there, such as cadmium, arsenic, weed killers, pesticides including benzene and others. Because tobacco was, until recently, exempt from FDA regulation and no government entity really cares about making safer tobacco, the sources of these compounds have never been thoroughly investigated (though in many cases rather obvious). It would be interesting to see cancer and emphysema rates among organic and non-organic tobacco users compared.


Well, if they use that idea as a way to convince people to stop smoking, I’ll look the other way.

Tom in Texas

Phil’s Dad says:
October 12, 2010 at 7:56 pm
First Chilian miner on the way up as I type.

Thanks for the heads up. Got to watch it.


Hate to burst the bubble, but this isn’t a real news article – it’s search engine spam engineered to get a high rating on Google and drive ad and click-through revenue. By linking to it, WUWT only boosts the rating higher, but it’s nothing more important than junk-mail.
It’s of interest only as a good example of the genre – as can be seen from the first paragraph:
“Smoking is the practice where a substance is burned and smoke is inhaled, tobacco the main offender is followed by, opium and cannabis.”
That alone will generate hits for combinations of [opium/cannabis/tobacco] and [smoked/inhaled] let alone all the various other keywords elsewhere on the page.


and how about carbonated soda drinks? They contain CO2!!!!

John S

When are there going to be calls to ban carbonated soft drinks, because they release “greenhouse gasses?”
(Or have they already, but I just missed it?)

Flim Flam

Six hundred things that cause global warming !!!!!
some examples ….
Britain’s bananas, British monsoon, brothels struggle, brown Ireland, bubonic plague, Buddhist temple threatened, building collapse, building season extension, bushfires, butterflies move north, butterflies reeling, butterfly saved, carbon crimes, caribou decline, camel deaths, cancer deaths in England, cannibalism, caterpillar biomass shift, cave paintings threatened, childhood insomnia, Cholera, circumcision in decline, cirrus disappearance, civil unrest, cloud increase, coast beauty spots lost, cockroach migration, cod go south, coffee threatened, and etc, etc.


give me a minute i need to finish this Cuban before i finish the reply


And I supose that growing the tabbacco is not a co2 sink…..


Barry, thanks for the link and the good laugh. How true it is, and I never put two and two together before. Will have to use that one….HOBO

Michael D Smith

Sorry, I have you all beat!
CO2 now causes ALIENS!!!,
Is someone keeping track? I’m going to start selling the stuff. It seems there is nothing it can’t do! Ahh, yes, the carbon debit market, it must be worth a FORTUNE!

Cassandra King

Give these whackjobs an inch and they will take your liberty and freedom and control of your life from you. These people want it all and little by little they are getting it.
You may say the little things do not matter, that these little things will not add up to the eventual enslavement of all of us but that is exactly what will happen if we give these people the elbow room to do it.
This is how they operate with small incremental steps as they pick on issues of concern in order to exploit those concerns and use them to further the pursuit of their end game.
There are people attracted to government who truly believe that you are not fit to govern your own affairs and be master of your own life, you need authoritarian control and guidance and rules with a central state structure to create an ever stricter and ever more tightly controlled existence, you thought your life was your own? The people who have been carefully crafting the foundations of the new mother state do not think so. According to the principles of this new order you belong to the state that cares for you, you are part and parcel of the machine in the making and as a cog interacting with other cogs they own every aspect and detail of your life. The state is your mother and your father and your priest and your master, you live by the states grace and you die in the states care.


Sounds like Mandia could be the author…

Charlie A

Don’t forget to properly account for the aerosol effect from the smoke. Especially from those birthday candles that tend to sputter and smoke for a while after blowing them out. 🙂
This might offset the CO2 effect.

Hank Hancock

What are these people smoking?


People that say things like this make you think how dangerous life can be. You could be driving down the highway at 55 miles per hour and they could be in the other lane going 55 miles an hour in your direction.


What are they smoking?
Gore Lites!


Michael D Smith says:
You do realise you have mixed up the cause and effeect there, right? Michael Crichton quite clearly demonstrated that aliens cause global warming:


Do they realize how religious this is all sounding?
One has to believe that cigarette smoke affects a significant portion of the atmosphere, in order to affix blame on Global Warming.
Next up: The invention of fire as the original eco-sin.

Olaf Koenders

Hi. I’m Irv Zimmerman from the American Cancer Society [wheeze]. I used to smoke about 20 packs of cigarettes a day [wheeze]. But since I lost one of my lungs [wheeze], I cut my smokin’ in half [wheeze, koff].. 😉

Patrick Davis

“Phil’s Dad says:
October 12, 2010 at 7:56 pm
First Chilian miner on the way up as I type.”
Yes, and apparently, the miners were arguing over who should be rescued first.

Mike Flynn

Is it faintly possible that the heat from the combustion of the tobacco, paper etc., and that from the match actually produces both the “warmth” in global warming, and CO2 as an inevitable product of burning carbon based compounds in oxygen.
CO2 is a result of warming, not a cause.
Quit burning stuff, less heat. As for me, I like my food cooked. Haven’t figured out how to cook my food without heat, so I guess I’m doomed to contribute to “global warming”.
My care factor? Zero.

Lew Skannen

In addition to cigarettes producing CO2 it should be noticed that any oceans out there which are not properly covered with plastic covers will allow deadly H2O to enter the atmosphere.

What causes ALL human contributions to C02?
Fix that, and you’ve solved the problem…

Hum, I wounder how much excess CO2 is produced when one rides a bicycle or jogs, I wounder? I think I will claim that is the first cause. It’s easy, I’ll just pull that out of my magic bag of facts. I get them when I trip out on my magic carped. (it’s powered by some real good stuff man)


If anyone would actually look at the stated intent of these whackos, elimination of human existance, or at least a great diminshment thereof, and an end to what is called civilization is their goal.

John Trigge

Whilst reading theese comments and wondering why breathing is not being blamed for global warming (expired air is arounf 4% CO2, I understand), the local news for Adelaide, South Australia is that we have BELOW average temps for our start of Spring

Christopher Hanley

Smoking was thought safe behavior until doctors (men + women of science) began to notice a strong correlation with serious diseases and warned of the health risks (notably lung cancer).
Human CO2 emissions are just like tobacco smoking, seriously damaging the planet’s ‘health’ — so the familiar argument goes.
The analogy fails, because lung cancer was a very rare disease prior to the widespread uptake of smoking.
The correlation is compelling:
On the other hand, there is no strong correlation between human fossil fuel use and ‘global warming’:
And periods of warming can hardly be considered rare, let alone a planetary ‘disease’ — quite the contrary:


I am sure that just the Carbon cost of Copenhagan was more than all the smokers in one year, in the BBC press coverage it was calculated to be the same a the annual CO2 emmisions of a small 3rd World country.
So why no paper on that !!!!!!!


I wonder when they will ban pork-n-beans. Afterall, it does get a bit windy around the house after a good meal. And let’s not forget the heat trapping gases I emit on a frequent basis (Nitrogen, carbon dioxide, methane and hydrogen).
Perhaps Gore and crowd should go after Mel Brooks for his scene in Blazing Saddles.

Patrick Davis

“Mike Flynn says:
October 12, 2010 at 10:55 pm”
Haven’t figured out how to cook my food without heat, so I guess I’m doomed to contribute to “global warming”.”
Well, actually, you can. You can “cook” without heat, afterall, it’s just a chemical reaction. Get some fish and some lemon/line juice, squeeze the juice liberally over the fish. Leave for a while, 24hrs is best. Fish is done to perfection. You’re out of luck if you want rice with that however.


I am convinced the USA is responsible for global warming / climate change / global climate disruption.
All you have to realise is sales of coca-cola and other fizzy drinks containing the evil CO2 have increased exponentially in the last 100 years. Ergo, the USA’s manufacturers of fizzy drinks are responsible.
I have therefore submitted my application for funding to the authorities and I am expecting a big fat cheque any day now
I don’t have any data to back up my claims, but i am a climate scientists so you must trust me and ban all sales of fizzy drinks worldwide. Oh, btw I’ve just opening a new exchange where you can buy and sell credits to allow people to drink the evil fizzy drinks, if anybody is interested

Jason F

Usually I agree with the posts here, I guess if you are pro AGW this had to happen sooner or later I’m surprised it has taken so long.
For me my observation is there seems to be hysterical arm flailing whenever anyone takes a pop at smoking and tobacco for whatever reason from the majority in this case on both sides of the debate.
It seems to me that this is the one sacred cow worshipped by all sides.
From an AGW point of view there is CO2 in distribution, lighter fuel, smoking itself and then there is the methane produced.
From the sceptic side it’s more evidence of pro AGW hysteria and they miss a trick pointing out pro AGW hypocrites who smoke i.e. Leonardo DeCaprio.
From my point of view I find it queer in the extreme that there is such support for such a vile blight, smoking kills more people than climate change (I know not difficult) it pollutes the air and causes cancer . Pro AGW have to take the view that smoking is a direct contributor to the greenhouse gases of the world, those pro AGW smokers that preach to me that I should cut my CO2 (no pressure) contribute more to the problem they preach than I as a non-smoker. Sceptics who smoke argue that smoking contributes nothing to climate change because greenhouse gases contribute such a small amount and while I agree with this stand point for reasons I’ve mentioned you miss a trick because for the pro AGW camp calling out the smokers is pointing out the hypocrites directly – worse than blueberries.

Geoff Sherrington

I once smoked, but I never exhaled.
That’s about as silly as the article.
Burning cigarettes produce CO2, but growing tobacco uptakes CO2. If you let crops rot in the fields, they produce CO2 about equal to what went into their growth.
There’s confusion between cyclic and irreversible processes again.

L Nettles

My name is Louis and I release two types of greenhouse gas…

Smoking … at least wood smoke from open fires could quite conceivably have an effect on global temperatures. There is certainly strong evidence (before the wikipeida mafia got hold of it) that global dimming due to air particulates was a major cause of cooling, and therefore with its reduction due to the clean air acts in the 1970s was a major cause of warming (… not a fact you’ll find in wikipedia!!)
Still, if I’m honest, there’s not much more evidence for “particulate-reduction induced warming” than for CO2 induced warming … unless you read the environmentalists writing on “Smoke” induced nuclear winters, when it seems inevitable that a little bit of “smoke” in the air means we’ll all die a long lingering death from the result of manmade induced global climate change.

Pops says: “Didn’t algore once claim that cigarette smoking is a major cause of global warming?”
I believe it was during his presentation at the United Nations. Never heard of him making the statement again.

son of mulder

The extra greenhouse gases from smoking are more than offset by the greenhouse savings due to premature death from smoking. So smoking must be a good thing if you’re an eco-nutter.

John Marshall

The picture was taken on the Moon. Obviously global warming has formed enough atmosphere there to enable ignition of a cigarette without wearing a space suit.

arthur clapham

These people should be be confined in a home for the bewildered, at once!!

Ken Harvey

The skeptics on this thread are skeptical only regarding CO2. There seems to be no skepticism when it comes to smoking. The science is proved – proved by the statistical analysis of questionnaires.
Smoking may indeed be bad for one, or for some, but there is no evidence for that which would pass the scientific test. Smoking was very good indeed for the late Sir Richard Doll who through his 1950 theory got himself a professorship, a knighthood and a lifelong source of taxpayer money.

amicus curiae

someone else queried the difference between Organic Tobacco and commercials effects.
Yes I also have wondered as once when I did grow some chem free it sure was Nothing at all! like what we buy, almost not worth lighting up, it was that different.
and isnt it passing strange?
Tobacco is the ONLY product that somehow manages to NOT have to include an ingredients list on the pack- world wide.
now why? is that so:-)