Friday Funny: ‘Carbon Extraction’ Only Way to Stop Climate Crisis

OMG OMG OMG Hair-on-fire article in the The Sunday Times

Dangerous climate change will be avoided only if vast quantities of carbon dioxide are sucked out of the atmosphere, a landmark report due to be published tomorrow will conclude.

With warming already standing at 1.1C, even rapid decarbonisation — such as a wholesale switch to renewable energy and everyone giving up driving and flying — may now not be enough to avoid breaching the 1.5C threshold.


Luckily we have Josh to respond to such hysterical hyperbole.

Head on over to Cartoons By Josh and peruse his work.

And while you’re there, perhaps purchase a pint fer the young lad.

4.9 26 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Bell
April 8, 2022 6:16 am

Like a dog chasing its tail, any and every green scheme need fossil fuels to power it. The fact that greens do not see that is typical fuzzy-thinking liberal idiots showing off their idiocy.

Reply to  John Bell
April 8, 2022 6:18 am

Like a dog chasing its tail”

Th Ouroboros that is green wokery

Reply to  John Bell
April 8, 2022 7:05 am

Indeed. Building and operating the mines and factories needed to make, and then building, a million windmills would produce huge amounts of CO2.

See my

David Elstrom
April 8, 2022 6:16 am

Exactly! As the great Thomas Sowell has remarked, there is a limit to the injury a truly stupid person can do, so if you what things destroyed catastrophically you need someone who thinks he’s really, really smart.

Bill Powers
Reply to  David Elstrom
April 8, 2022 7:44 am

Mindless drones are more dangerous than rabid dogs.

william Johnston
Reply to  Bill Powers
April 8, 2022 8:02 am

Only because it is legal to shoot rabid dogs.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  Bill Powers
April 8, 2022 10:37 am

foxes – dogs – fogs – doxes = all the same innit

Enquiring minds wanna know who it bit…

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Peta of Newark
April 8, 2022 6:53 pm

I imagine TWITter is all abuzz about Fox and being rabid.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  David Elstrom
April 8, 2022 5:54 pm

“so if you what things destroyed catastrophically you need someone who thinks he’s really, really smart.”

That describes Joe Biden. Dump as a rock, but thinks he is the smartest guy in the room.

April 8, 2022 6:17 am

What could possibly go wrong?

If I were climate modeller I would tell you what could, might, may, possibly, potentially, likely ad nauseam, go wrong – up to 2100

Right now prophecies of 6 weeks to 6 months are a bit iffy

Reply to  fretslider
April 8, 2022 9:24 am

Prophecies of 6 DAYS are marginal at best.

April 8, 2022 6:18 am

Sorry? 1.1ºC already exceeded?

I damn well hope so, we’re still emerging from an ice age.

The planet has never been as cold with atmospheric CO2 simultaneously as low as it’s ever been, without being in a full blown ice age.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  HotScot
April 8, 2022 10:45 am

For the 2nd year in a row, Leez Frogzlegs Plonk Producers est feeling El Froide

Maybe someone is trying drop a hint????

Otherwise and what is blindingly obvious, don’t be going making deserts

BBC Headline: “French winemakers fan flames to save 2022 crop
Ice si vouze plaiz – portez votre own Potte de Smudge

Rich Davis
Reply to  Peta of Newark
April 9, 2022 10:08 am

My goodness Peta, you do speak French like a native! Native of some country that doesn’t speak French, that is.

El Froide, very nice. Isn’t this some kind of Schaden-froide? Avin’ a giraffe at the expense of the poor cheese-eating surrender monkeys?

¡gracias beaucoup por das Lachen!

jeff corbin
April 8, 2022 6:20 am

We can genomically modify (via Crispr/CAS9) all life forms on earth into unique universal, non-carbon based life forms that derive their energy from temperature transition and star light. It would be very sad, no burning of lovely Nicaraguan tobacco.

Reply to  jeff corbin
April 8, 2022 7:54 am

Not sure why the down votes on an obviously sarcastic comment on the proposed solution in search of a problem.

william Johnston
Reply to  jeff corbin
April 8, 2022 8:05 am

Being a nonsmoker for over 30 years, may I asume the Nicaraguan tobacco you reference has some magical qualities?

Leonard E Herr
April 8, 2022 6:30 am

At this point, if someone was to tell me the people pushing this stuff are actually demons sent up from the seventh level of hell by old scratch himself with the express purpose of bringing as much misery and death to the human race as possible I’d have to ask myself: “what would they be doing different is this was true?”.

Gary Pearse
April 8, 2022 6:41 am

Do they not know that as you remove CO2 from the atmos, the oceans will outgas more CO2 to replace most of it? It’s time to start listing and publishing shaming of these “experts”. Can PhD’s be retracted under extreme display of ignorance?

John Bell
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 8, 2022 6:58 am

I think there are 50x as much C02 in the oceans as in the atm. Think about that!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  John Bell
April 8, 2022 5:45 pm

Also, it will slow the Greening of the planet by sucking out CO2 that otherwise would be sequestered by the biosphere.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 9, 2022 10:40 am

Of course it’s an idiotic idea to k!ll the crops, but you’re mistaken about ole ‘enry an ‘is Law.

If they waste a metric schist ton of energy, they might in principle reduce the excess partial pressure of CO2 that currently acts as the driving force for ocean absorption of CO2. You know, the cause of ocean marginally-less-alkaline-ization (moronically dubbed ocean acidification by the eco-commies).

The oceans won’t net outgas until the excess CO2 is removed from the atmosphere and then some. So you’d be right to say that it’s impossible to lower atmospheric CO2 much below the point of equilibrium because the ocean will outgas to restore the balance, but not to say that anything pulled out will be immediately replenished.

That would only be true if we didn’t have excess CO2 in the atmosphere. (Some of my regular interlocutors will jump in here and claim that we do not have any excess CO2, but we’ll have to agree to call each other wrong-headed dullards).

It’s also bizarrely innumerate of them to think that they can reverse the imbalance that has taken centuries of fossil fuel burning to produce, or that it will make any significant difference to the weather.

oeman 50
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 8, 2022 8:11 am

Ignorance of Henry’s Law is no excuse!

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 8, 2022 11:38 am

I’ll go further and bet they think the oceans are a great place to store what they suck out of the atmosphere. It’s a great business model for rent-seekers once you get the idiots in government on board to fund the tail-chasing exercise…

Rich Davis
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 9, 2022 10:56 am

Trolling for down-votes, let me rush in where angels fear to tread…

As long as they do not attempt to sequester more CO2 than is currently excess in the atmosphere, dissolving it into 3C deep water would indeed be how I would pursue that fool’s errand. Of course it only makes sense to pump just below the thermocline to get to the adequately cold stuff.

The premise for doing such an incandescently stupid thing is where you should direct your fire. (The idea that a bit of plant food will lead to Earth-in-flames).

Don’t give them ammunition to call you technically-challenged by incorrectly claiming (ok, implying) that sequestration is impossible.

A lot of things that should not be done are still possible.

John VC
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 8, 2022 5:41 pm

they sure don’t make scientists like they use to–guess it has something to do with the everyone needs to go to college lie.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  John VC
April 8, 2022 10:42 pm

Here in the UK the Labour/Socialist blood-sucking lawyer lead Guvment drove that theory by insisting all young people went to college/university in some bizarre attempt to equal-up society, then we had to encourage Poles, Checks, Slovakians, Hungarians etc to send their plumbers, electricians, carpenters, brick-layers, as we had mysteriously developed a shortage of such important skills, I guess that’s what happens in the world of the blind when the one-eyed man is king!!!

M Courtney
April 8, 2022 6:56 am

If the official line is that we have to do this anyway, there is no point in doing anything else to combat AGW.
We may as well carry on using cheap fossil fuels as the scrubbing will need to take place
later, regardless.
When is later?
When it’s urgent and the technology has developed. So, a lot later.
If people stop panicking about risks from this action and looked what is being suggested… It’s actually a very good thing.
This is the excuse the politicians need in order to back out of the green trap they’ve walked themselves into.

CD in Wisconsin
April 8, 2022 6:59 am

If the alarmists want to suck GHG’s out of the air, don’t stop at CO2. Water vapor is more plentiful and more potent in the atmosphere than CO2, is it not?

If you are going to wage war on plant life, don’t do a half-a** job of it. Keep up the good work Josh.

April 8, 2022 7:07 am

The trouble is that people want to eat, heat, exhale and do lots of other planet damaging activities including flying and driving. So just stop everything you are doing. At once.


Reply to  tonyb
April 8, 2022 7:29 pm

HA! The last people to stop doing all that will be the Greenie Alarmists.

It’s all of us “other people” who are supposed to make the bloodletting sacrifices. They’ve done their part by piously warning us of excoriating us for OUR sins against Gaia.

They have purchased their exemptions (indulgences) via their piety and public wailing and gnashing of teeth. Their hair shirts, Teslas, and face masks are just a bit of whipped topping on the virtue signaling cake.

Mindless idiots and parasites, they are and out to k!ll us unbelievers. SPIT!


April 8, 2022 7:28 am

OT: Moderators please note that on Firefox, even incognito, right after the page loads, it goes blank and displays only “function(e,t){return new S.fn.init(e,t)}function(e,t){return new S.fn.init(e,t)} ”

adding the word “kill” to force moderation

Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 7:28 am

Well I guess that’s not being moderated anymore…

Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 9:46 am

Invoking an early Godwin’s law reference should guarantee moderation.

Try n@zi. Or H!tler.

John Garrett
Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 8:58 am

Thank you for reporting this.

I had the same problem this morning and have gone to a different location and device to ascertain whether the problem was website-related or browser-related or device-specific.

Now I know.

P.S., I was using Firefox this morning. The device I am currently using has a different browser and is working (hence this post).

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Garrett
April 8, 2022 5:59 pm

I had the same problem with connecting to WUWT this morning using Windows and Firefox.

I tried using an iPad and Firefox and everything worked just fine.

Now, some hours later, I have come back using Firefox again and everything seems to be back to normal.

Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 8:59 am

Yes I’ve got that with al wuwt posts.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 10:52 am

Same here – It happened after yesterday’s Firefox update
The page does briefly appear then resort white with that technical guffage – on my 2 lappies – both Windows 8.1

I did venture into Internet Explorer to ‘try figure’ what was going on..
The page loaded OK but none of the ‘reply’ buttons worked
(This is coming from Opera)

The whole rest of the interweb seems OK – has WUWT been hacked?

Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 3:59 pm

I use Firefox and it did that with me about 20 minutes ago. But now everything is fine.

Reply to  TonyG
April 8, 2022 4:52 pm

It was doing that this AM (Pacific Daylight Time), but I’m reading this right now on FireFox with no problems.

Reply to  TonyG
April 9, 2022 1:58 am

Same with me all day yesterday using Firefox and Windows 10 but fine now.
Has a hacker been at work?

Mark BLR
Reply to  TonyG
April 9, 2022 2:27 am

Same thing happened to me with both Pale Moon and Firefox browsers under Linux all of yesterday afternoon (European time).

OK today …

April 8, 2022 7:35 am

What a nice piece of artwork!!!

Just to keep up with things, this morning, it is snowing lightly, mixed with rain, in my AO. And I thought winter was done and gone!

Have a nice weekend, all of you!

Reply to  Sara
April 8, 2022 8:23 am

Rossendale, northwest England currently a mix of snow and hail. Spring is in the air, not quite.

April 8, 2022 7:46 am

And what happens when we “breach the 1.5 deg C threshhold” – really, I wanna know what happens at 1.5 deg C warming … since 172 years ago that hasn’t already happened at 1.1 deg C warming that has already happened by 2022.

I mean, besides the fact that today’s human population is enjoying the greatest food production, the highest standard of living, the longest life expectancy, and the greatest overall health condition of any population of humans since our ancestors came out of the trees a couple million years ago.

Or just as compared to all of the above as it existed in 1850.

What is that magic switch, and what does it turn on, or off? That magic switch has in fact, to date, produced the greatest most marvelous human condition of all time.

Their insane solution of attempting to strip carbon from the atmosphere is in search of what particular problem?

oeman 50
Reply to  Duane
April 8, 2022 8:14 am

At 1.51 deg C we all vanish a puff of blue steam.

Reply to  Duane
April 8, 2022 8:17 am

The idiotic Paris Asscord was done without knowing any value for climate sensitivity. That’s what you get from blowhards who have yet to find out that there are things called calculators in existence, and they can be used to do very simple arithmetic, like dividing by 2 for example.

Reply to  Duane
April 8, 2022 11:03 am


Tom Abbott
Reply to  Duane
April 8, 2022 6:07 pm

“And what happens when we “breach the 1.5 deg C threshhold” – really, I wanna know what happens at 1.5 deg C warming … since 172 years ago that hasn’t already happened at 1.1 deg C warming that has already happened by 2022.”

We hit 1.1C above the average in 2016, according to the climate charlatans at NASA Climate and NOAA. Since that time the temperatures have cooled and we are now at 0.6C above their average.

The year 1998 and the year 2016 are statistically tied for the warmest year in the satellite era (1979 to present).

Hansen shows that the year 1934 was 0.5C warmer than 1998 (and 2016), and is therefore over the 1.5C alarmist “tipping point”.

So what happened after we hit the tipping point in 1934? Things got cooler, that’s what. Temperatures cooled 2.5C from the highpoint of 1934 to the lowpoint in the late 1970’s.

Climate Tipping point: Been there, done that. No catastrophe. Much ado about nothing.

Dr. Bob
April 8, 2022 7:47 am

Good thing that China and India are doing their best to prevent this (lack of CO2) from happening.

Ron Long
April 8, 2022 8:11 am

Eco-terrorism in reverse, anyone?

April 8, 2022 8:51 am

What do they want us to do suck it in and convert it into……. oh, more CO2?

April 8, 2022 8:55 am

When I open WUWT in Firefox and try to “read more of this post” I then get a message:-

function(e,t){return new S.fn.init(e,t)}function(e,t){return new S.fn.init(e,t)} 

It opens OK in Microsoft Edge!

Anybody any ideas.

April 8, 2022 9:43 am

Warming at 1.1 degC.

Nothing bad has happened, quite a lot of good.

Why on earth would we worry about another 0.4 degC?

I mean, it might be enough to grow grapes as far north as York in England.

You know, like the Romans did 2000 years ago

Doc Chuck
Reply to  ThinkingScientist
April 8, 2022 2:26 pm

Also never forget that the increase in the globally averaged high and low temperatures during such recent times as it has even shown to have taken place is in no way the same as a troubling increase in the similarly averaged highs themselves, but for the most part is instead a moderation in the depths of the component lows (to the particular comfort of the planet’s higher latitude dwellers), necessarily resulting in a modestly elevated average of the two. So the whole basis for this freak-out that calls upon gobs of our hard-won treasure for an unsustainable low-concentration alternative energy harvesting effort requiring the dedication of huge acreages, fossil fueled initiation and sustenance, not to mention the abject cession of personal freedoms (where they may yet be found) is in fact the simplest mathematical slight of hand that nonetheless eludes both incompetent leadership and the easily led innumerate desirous of the illusion of some contrived virtue! Cybernetics had little to do with it except for diverting window dressing. This was quite certainly bound to arrive at its present disordered state, with in many ways worse to come of such vanities, even beyond recent bumbling responses to a viral contagion readily survived by a super-majority without predisposing vulnerabilities.

John Hultquist
Reply to  ThinkingScientist
April 8, 2022 10:01 pm

 To set fruit, tomatoes need nighttime temperature of >55°F (13°C). Where I live that happens so late in the spring that the fruit needs a warm sunny fall to ripen. I can buy good wine and table grapes, but store-bought tomatoes are pretty but not very tasty.

April 8, 2022 9:46 am

I think we are breathing far too frequently. I’m quite sure that if we all cut back by just a few hours a day, this supposed CO2 problem that we’re now facing would run its course.

Reply to  Art-Kingston
April 8, 2022 9:47 am

Ark B is required.


Ireneusz Palmowski
April 8, 2022 9:50 am

North America will continue to experience very strong temperature changes.comment image

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Ireneusz Palmowski
April 8, 2022 11:52 am

Yes, aka “weather, not climate.”

Just like all the rest of the weather they blather on about as if it had anything to do with humanity’s pittance of CO2 emissions.

Ireneusz Palmowski
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 8, 2022 12:19 pm

Note that these cold fronts result from stratospheric intrusions, i.e., circulation in the lower stratosphere. Anyone who links this to an increase in CO2 in the troposphere is a liar. image

April 8, 2022 11:33 am

Know Your Enemy…

comment image

AGW is Not Science
April 8, 2022 11:34 am

The elephants in the room, of course, are that:

  • They pulled the meaningless 1.5 degree “threshold” out of their nether region;
  • Said “threshold” being “crossed” will not cause any “catastrophe” to occur;
  • There is no empirical evidence that any of the increase in temperature they have supposedly quantified with crap for “data” is caused by any atmospheric CO2 increase (assumptions and speculation don’t count);
  • There is no empirical evidence that the supposed increase in CO2 levels (again based on crap for “data”) has been caused by human CO2 emissions (assumptions and speculation don’t count);
  • There is no empirical evidence that atmospheric CO2 “drives” the Earth’s temperature at all (assumptions and speculation don’t count);
  • The climate getting warmer will not make the weather worse – quite the opposite, if anything (based on, you know, actual science; again, assumptions and speculation don’t count).

So there’s that.

P.S. WUWT is not currently working on Firefox

Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 8, 2022 4:57 pm

It is working just fine at 16:57 PDT.

Rich Davis
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
April 9, 2022 3:50 pm

You made 6 points (quite a herd of elephants!)

I agree wholeheartedly with all but one.

First, before getting into that, what does empirical evidence mean? According to Wikipedia (I know…feel free to substitute a reputable source for the definition)

Empirical evidence for a proposition is evidence, i.e. what supports or counters this proposition, that is constituted by or accessible to sense experience or experimental procedure.

So things we measure, observations of the real world, right?

Do we not have physical evidence that CO2 concentration is about 120 ppm higher than it was 100 years ago? Even if you limit the timeframe to the Mauna Loa Observatory, is it not established that there has been a measurable long-term rise far larger than the range of seasonal fluctuation?

Do we not have production records compiled for tax purposes that show, within a small measurement error, how much CO2 has been emitted by fossil fuel and cement production over the same timeframe? Isn’t it much more likely that any error will reflect lower than accurate numbers due to tax evasion, rather than an over-reporting?

How is it that those measurements are mere assumptions or speculations, rendering them “crap”? You should not conflate these measurements with the sort of scientific malpractice that generates a global average temperature anomaly. I don’t disagree that the temperature record is “crap”.

The fact of the matter is that the empirical evidence is extremely strong that it has been the slow accumulation of our emissions that has increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The rate of our emissions is consistently about double the rate of CO2 rise. Thus nature is a net sink overall, gobbling up about half of what we emit. Small errors in accounting for production or timing are trivially small compared to the rate of emissions. Due to tax evasion, our true emissions are probably even higher than reported.

If your litany of elephants in the room omitted this error, it would be much more effective and persuasive. Espousing blatant error discredits many a true fact.

Why is it that so many skeptics cling to the idea that our emissions didn’t cause a rise in CO2 despite the compelling evidence? It seems like a case of accepting the lie that an enhanced greenhouse effect from higher CO2 concentration will be dangerous, and therefore wanting to shortcut the argument by saying that CO2 rise was a natural phenomenon.

I say, empirical evidence shows that the enhanced greenhouse effect is small and the implied temperature increase can reasonably be expected to be overwhelmingly beneficial. To the extent that a couple of centuries of fossil fuel burning may raise the average temperature by one and a half to two degrees, that’s something to celebrate as an additional benefit of fossil fuels. Far from a sin of emission, it is an externality that the developed world has bestowed on the world that is responsible for increased agricultural output. By rights we ought to be compensated for our past contributions.

Tom Abbott
April 8, 2022 5:52 pm

From the article: “With warming already standing at 1.1C,”

No. Warming stood at 1.1C back in 2016. Today, in 2022 the warming stands at 0.6C. It’s getting cooler, contrary to what this article implies.

Robert of Texas
April 8, 2022 7:23 pm

Plant more trees. Problem Solv-Ved.

Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2022 5:59 am

You don’t even need to plant any trees . The current issue of the house magazine of the CBA (Council for British Archaeology) recommends leaving sites to self seed, which they will do with amazing rapidity. The site of an old farmhouse that we finished excavating in 2016 in Greater Manchester now has a forest of 3-4 m saplings growing from what was a cobbled farm yard – just 6 years on a pebbled, not ideal, surface. Bit of a nuisance in fact because I want to go back and do a bit more work there.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Robert of Texas
April 9, 2022 4:01 pm

Sure, but what problem?

Bruce Cobb
April 9, 2022 3:12 am

It’s a tough, tricky problem, carbon is. Sort of a carbonundrum.
A day without WUWT is like a day without sunshine. I wonder if the bug fixed itself, or if someone fixed it. Something to do with Firefox, I guess. My wife could get it fine, but she uses Chrome.

Tom in Florida
April 9, 2022 4:22 am

Just use Brawndo, it’s got electrolytes, that’s what plants crave.

John R. Doner
April 9, 2022 3:55 pm

Fortunately, the oceans contain 45 times as much CO2 as the atmosphere, and the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is in an equilibrium with that in the ocean. Trying to remove any noticeable portion of CO2 from the atmosphere only results in near-full replacement from the ocean. But of course, the folks who stand to get rich from these schemes don’t want to hear that.

Gunga Din
April 9, 2022 10:20 pm

It always bugged me a bit when CO2 is referred to as “fertilizer”. CO2 is not their “food”.
It’s what they breathe.
Then they exhale O2 which we breathe.
Mess with either exchange, everything loses.

Ireneusz Palmowski
April 10, 2022 6:20 am

Strong temperature drop across the western US.comment image

April 11, 2022 1:16 am

Good cartoon.

Little known fact, CO2 levels are important in anaesthetics, ICU and emergency medicine. Low CO2 will kill animal life in general but humans in particular. These CO2 removal devises are unlikely to get the atmosphere that low, but if one is built near me, I’m leaving the area.

It’s not just plants. CO2 is essential for all life.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights