Gregory Wrightstone
Author of Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You To Know
The purveyors of climate doom will not tolerate the good news of our planet thriving because of modest warming and increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, a recent scientific paper concludes that an optimistic vision for Earth and its inhabitants is nonetheless justified.
Widely accepted data show an overall greening of Earth resulting from a cycle of natural warming that began more than 300 years ago and from industrialization’s additions of CO2 that started in the 19th century and accelerated with vigorous economic activity following World War II.
Also attributed to these and other factors is record crop production, which now sustains 8 billion people—ten times the population prior to the Industrial Revolution. The boost in atmospheric CO2 since 1940 alone is linked to yield increases for corn, soybeans and wheat of 10%, 30% and 40%, respectively.
The positive contribution of carbon dioxide to the human condition should be cause for celebration, but this is more than demonizers of the gas can abide. Right on cue, narrators of a planet supposedly overheating from carbon dioxide began sensationalizing research findings that increased plant volume results in lower concentrations of nutrients in food.
“The potential health consequences are large, given that there are already billions of people around the world who don’t get enough protein, vitamins or other nutrients in their daily diet,” concluded the The New York Times, a reliable promoter of apocalypse forever. Among others chiming in have been The Lancet, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the National Institutes of Health.
Of course, such yellow journalism lacks context and countervailing facts —elements provided in “Nutritive Value of Plants Growing in Enhanced CO2 Concentrations,” published by the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia.
Any deficiency of nutrients from the enhancement of plant growth by elevated carbon dioxide “are small, compared to the nutrient shortages that agriculture and livestock routinely face because of natural phenomena, such as severe soil fertility differences, nutrient dilution in plants due to rainfall or irrigation and even aging of crops,” says the paper.
And while there is evidence of marginal decreases in some nutrients, data also show that higher levels of CO2 “may enhance certain groups of health-promoting phytochemicals in food crops” that serve as antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds, says the paper, which lists seven authors and more than 100 references. The lead author is Albrecht Glatzle, a member of the Rural Association of Paraguay and a former international researcher of plant and animal nutrition.
Among other points made by the paper are the following: Throughout a majority of geological history, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been several times higher than today’s, which are less than optimum for most plants; atmospheric warming from even a quadrupling of CO2 concentrations would be small compared to natural temperature fluctuations since the last glacial advance more than 10,000 years ago.
Having virtually no scientific basis, the “green” movement’s hostility to carbon dioxide seemingly ignores the gas’s critical role as a plant food. As the paper notes, “CO2 is the only source of the chemical element carbon for all life on Earth, be it for plants, animals or fungi and bacteria — through photosynthesis and food chains.”
The so-called greenhouse effect of carbon dioxide— perversely exaggerated to support climate fearmongering— is a life-saving temperature moderator that keeps Earth from freezing over.
The obvious benefits of CO2 is “an embarrassment to the large and profitable movement to ‘save the planet’ from ‘carbon pollution,’” write the authors. “If CO2 greatly benefits agriculture and forestry and has a small, benign effect on climate, it is not a pollutant at all.
More CO2 is good news. It’s not that complicated.
Gregory Wrightstone is a geologist; executive director of the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va.; author of “Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know” and “A Very Convenient Warming: How modest warming and more CO2 are benefiting humanity” and a co-author of “Nutritive Value of Plants Growing in Enhanced CO2 Concentrations.”
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
___________________________________________
Disastrous phenomena claimed to be caused by increasing CO2 can be shown to have occurred before, have been happening right along or simply not true. Prima facie evidence says CO2 is not a problem, and attempts to claim otherwise involve convoluted logical arguments that don’t make sense.
When it comes to CO2 and climate change we are being systematically lied to by organizations that have other goals that have nothing to do with climate.
Yes, more CO2 is good news. It’s not that complicated, and claims to the contrary are complicated and not true.
The most important thing for life is oxygen in the stratosphere, which absorbs the sun’s deadly UV radiation. Earth’s magnetic field protects against galactic and solar protons.
Therefore, we should focus on the production of oxygen through photosynthesis and not worry about the increase in CO2 by an average of a few molecules.
Exactly correct
By a fortunate evolutionary event, the oxygen produced by photosynthesis forms a filter in the outer reaches of the atmosphere that absorbs the most energetic and harmful UV radiation, with wavelengths below 240 nm (in the UVC band [wavelength 100-280 nm]
That means we need more CO2 ppm for more greening of the planet and less desert areas
Important Role of CO2 for Flora and Fauna Growth
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
Plants require require at least 1000 to 1200 ppm of CO2, as proven in greenhouses
Many plants have become extinct, along with the fauna they supported, due to a lack of CO2
As a result, many areas of the world became arid and deserts.
The current CO2 needs to at least double or triple
Earth temperature increased about 1.2 C since 1900, which is due to many causes, such as fossil CO2, flora CO2, and permafrost methane which converts to CO2.
CO2 emissions of fossil fuels are a blessing.
CO2 has increased from about 296 ppm in 1900 to 423 ppm at end 2023. It:
.
1) Increased world greening by at least 10 to 15%, as measured by satellites since 1979. Increased greening produces oxygen by photosynthesis. It forms a filter in the upper atmosphere that absorbs harmful UV radiation, with wavelengths below 240 nm.
2) Increased world fauna
3) Increased crop yields per acre.
4) Reduced desert areas
.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-study-2001-2020-global-greening-is-an-indisputable-fact-and
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-a-life-gas-no-co2-no-life
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-not-pollution-it-s-the-currency-of-life
Benefits of CO2
https://issuu.com/johna.shanahan/docs/co2_pitch_4-3-24_baeuerle_english
.
Oceans Absorb CO2
Sea water contains 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, in accordance with Henry’s Law
As a CO2 molecule enters the ocean, it combines with NaCl to form many compounds that contain C, O2, H2, Cl. These compounds sustain flora and fauna in the oceans. The only “free” CO2 is right at the surface, a minuscule quantity.
As a result, the oceans are the major sink of CO2 from human and natural sources in the TS.
At least 80% of new CO2 in the TS, human and natural, is added to the oceans
I wouldn’t say that they require it. But they sure do appreciate it.
If you feed plants the proper amounts, including CO2, they grow big, as proven in greenhouses
“Plants require require at least 1000 to 1200 ppm of CO2, as proven in greenhouses”
The current 420 ppm of CO2 is supporting 8 billion people, so it is very obvious plants do not “require” more CO2.
C4 plants will grow at 10 ppm CO2 and do not need more than 420 ppm CO2. They are about 20% of vegetation.
C3 and C4 plants will grow larger at 1000 ppm but that high level is not required and would take about 250 years at the current CO2 rise rate of +2.5 ppm a year.
More CO2 will also make leftists more hysterical. That’s the worst effect of rising CO2.
Doubtful.
They are already as hysterical as they know how to be, at least some of them, some of the time.
Their behavior has not got anything to do with CO2, global warming, or anything else related to weather or the atmosphere.
They just use it as an excuse.
Like how the professional rioters use the current war in Gaza as an excuse.
Do not plant tomatoes, peppers and cucumbers before May 15 in mid-latitudes unless in a heated greenhouse.
In Vermont, not until after May 31, to avoid night frost
Some people may be able to cover plants at night.
In Canada, tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, apples, pears, etc., are grown in automated, hi-tech Dutch greenhouses which are heated with very low-cost natural gas (as part of a Canadian subsidy), plus they have CO2 generators to increase the CO2 to 1200 ppm.
You can find these fruits and veggies in almost all supermarkets on the US East Cost.
Those supermarkets are owned by Dutch/Belgium conglomerates.
True for where I grew up in northern Minnesota, also frost can happen well into to June and return around August 15, my brother-in-law soy bean crop suffered due to that a few years back.
On planets with an atmosphere, the tropopause is at 100 hPa. Below this value, the air is very dilute and there the EM radiation is decided. The denser the atmosphere, the more particle collisions. Heat loss depends on the density of the troposphere. It also depends, of course, on the rotational speed of the planet, which determines the amount of energy loss at night.
Excerpt from
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
Upward IR Radiation by “Warmed” TS: The atmosphere above the TS is transparent to IR radiation (aka atmospheric window).
WV is about 3.3 ppm at 20 km; irrelevant regarding absorbing photons
CO2 is about 390 ppm at 20 km; at low temperatures of about -50 C (223 K), photon wavelengths are beyond CO2 absorption bands, i.e., any increase of CO2 ppm, such as from burning more fossil fuels, does not reduce upward IR radiation
Air pressure at sea level is 101.325 kPa, about 10000 kg, at 288.1 K (15 C)
Air pressure at 20 km is 5.529 kPa, at 216.6 K (-56.5 C)
https://www.pdas.com/atmosTable2SI.html
Collision rates are less, due to 1) low temperature, 2) molecules moving slower and much further apart.
Collision rates are 4 billion/s at sea level; 1 billion/s at 10 km; 7 million/s at 50 km
With sufficient transparency, the upward radiation flux becomes the dominant heat transfer/cooling mode.
Total upward radiation flux (TS + clouds + window) is 239.9 W/m^2, per NASA; this value has been increasing since 1985, even though CO2 ppm has been increasing, i.e., the window is not closing. See URLs and Image 11A and below 5 images
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/air-altitude-pressure-d_462.html
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-greenhouse-model-and-co2-contribution
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/04/18/when-satellites-refute-the-climate-crisis-narratives-trust-the-science/
Like all pronouncements that purport to simplify the atmosphere, the weather, and the climate patterns down to a simple one liner or three, what you wrote here is obviously not the case.
All kinds of factors play a role, and they interact in all kinds of ways.
We have an update from our man planted deep behind watermelon enemy lines-
Here’s how a Dutch designer made an old Volvo run on plastic (msn.com)
Operation Unicorn is spreading confusion in their ranks exactly as planned diverting attention from business as usual and the Big Oil cash rolling in.
Do you understand plastic comes from oil right, and a third of all oil is used in petrochemicals which plastic is.
All those agricultural scientists over at least the last century must have been badly mistaken about balancing soil nutrients, and limiting factors to growth.
Warmistas, like all extremist’s, are highly fact-challenged.
They mostly just make stuff up.
I guess that if I have to eat two slices of bread or eight Brussel sprouts to get the correct level of protein, so be it.
We are dealing with the abnormal. The optimist sees the glass half full, the pessimist half empty. Real scientist see a glass full. The paranoid want to know who stole half the water (and it is a government plot for a subgroup). We have the ‘there is half of a glass of water now and man-made product x is the cause’ group with which we are dealing (ht Winston Churchill preposition usage). You have to ignore other influences to come to that conclusion. If you tell them the history of the glass, they will change it to prove it was AGI (Anthropromorphic Glass Influencing). While a person did fill the glass, their owning a cat is why it is half full. Oh, that and using real butter.
PS
a mechanical engineer sees a full glass with a 2x safety margin.
an accountant wants to audit it as somewhere the is an accounting issue.
As for the rest of us, we drink it and fill it back up again.
The glass is full, half with water, and half with air.
It’s refreshing to read that more CO2 is good news. I have been saying that since 1997″
But why are conservative authors so sloppy with data? There are few numbers in the article but they are misleading:
“The boost in atmospheric CO2 since 1940 alone is linked to yield increases for corn, soybeans and wheat of 10%, 30% and 40%, respectively.
I have read at least 200 CO2 enrichment – plant growth studies. 600ppm to 800ppm can cause 40% to 100% more biomass. The CO2 increase since 1940, from 310 ppm to 420 ppm in 2023, was not a main cause of higher crop yields. Pesticides, fertilizers and new breeds of high yield crops, increased food production, especially in certain regions
” …some of the key advancements include: Pest management through genetically modified plants; institution of integrated pest management programs; plant breeding that allows high plant populations; precision planting equipment; better fertilizer formulations and application equipment; global positioning system agriculture; larger, faster and more efficient tractors and combines; mapping plant genomes that allows more rapid breeding; rapid and more accurate soil testing; and semi-dwarf wheat varieties.”
How have farming practices, production changed in 50 years? (farmprogress.com)
All that fancy stuff does not do much for at least 50% of the population, which could not afford it, and are not trained to use the fancy stuff.
Cropland greening drives (86.5%) greening of India in the last two decades. Improved irrigation, cropland management and farm mechanization drives cropland greening.
Rational programs to make better use of rainfall in order to refill aquifers, restore ground water, and have more water available for irrigation and for the general biosphere make big differences in many low rainfall parts of India.
Plants need drastically less water when CO2 is a lot higher.
If CO2 is somewhat higher, plants need somewhat less water/soil moisture.
At the margin, a small difference is how much a given plant, tree, or crop needs to survive and to grow, is the difference between living and dying.
that is independent of making better use of available water that generally ends up flowing away unused.
I it seems we owe more to Norman Borlaug than to my SUV. Glad to help with my very small contribution.
Comment deleted, posted in wrong place.
What about the desert greening, am I to assume that someone spreading fertilizer at night?
RG seems to spend time at night and also by day spreading it, pretty thick at times it seems.
Bullshit.
CO2 is making a large difference.
Every molecule in the entire biosphere starts out by six molecules of CO2 diffusing into the chloroplasts of a plant or other photosynthesizing organism.
You know what is really misleading?
Claiming that what you have read elsewhere is what is true, and therefore all other information on the subject is wrong, “slopping”, or “misleading”.
That is not how actual knowledge, or the scientific method, works.
One gets the impression you have learned everything you know, and also how to think and the make a point, from warmistas and other leftist extremists.
Science by assertion.
It is no more charming when you do it than when anyone else does>
Hear, hear!
Science by assertion. Love the term. So much of it here. Science says!
No doubt farming practices have a big part in the increased production. However, at the bottom line, plants must grow the additional mass that provides more food. That means more plant food is required, i.e. CO2.
Great news. But it won’t be taken seriously by anyone in the climate doom cult because it comes from from the enemy, ideologically speaking. You can cross all your “t”s and dot your “i”s and cite all your sources til your gums bleed and it won’t matter.
Even if the exact same material were to appear in Nature (Hah!) there would be no conversion. They’d just grumble a bit and then ignore it.
Cult don’t care ’bout no facts and no logic.
The moneyed elites, and IPCC, and WEF, and $politicians, and entrenched bureaucrats, and compromised academia, and lapdog Media, have formed a cabal to perpetuate and/or enrich themselves and impoverish all others, using the unscientific hoax of “CO2 causes global warming”.
The hoax is based on fossil fuels and CO2 being the villains
However, CO2 greens the earth, creates flora and fauna, including us, and increases crop yields per acre, and reduces desert areas.
We need more CO2, as proven by plant growth in greenhouses with 1000 to 1200 ppm CO2
.
Wind/solar/batteries/hydrogen/CO2 extraction/EVs/air-source heat pumps, etc., are a financial scam to enrich/reward the world’s moneyed elites, who will continue to fly their planes and sail their yachts
No restrictions off any kind on them!!
.
The scam,
1) Gives increased command/control by government over people and
2) Caused impoverishment of the EU, especially the UK and Germany, and will cause the impoverishment of the US.
All of these countries are overrun by tens of millions of scruffy, poor, inexperienced, uneducated, culturally-different folks, from all over, crossing borders, or secretly flown in, unvetted, to get free work permits, free phones, and free debit cards, and free housing, free healthcare, free education, and free sucking from various leftist/Democrat-run government programs.
.
The US/EU elites want to spread their scam to the entire world for the benefit of the Golden Billion in The Garden of Eden, i.e., the EU/US.
.
However, fast-growing BRICS, with 11 members and 20 applicants, including China, India, Russia, etc., are not playing along with the the IPCC-led hoax and the multi-$trillion per year scam,
In fact, they know, it is a Western rules-based insanity, that would impoverish them.
.
Excerpt:
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-e…
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-p…
.
Important Role of CO2 for Flora and Fauna Growth
Plants require require at least 1000 to 1200 ppm of CO2, as proven in greenhouses
Many plants have become extinct, along with the fauna they supported, due to a lack of CO2
As a result, many areas of the world became arid and deserts.
The current CO2 needs to at least double or triple
Earth temperature increased about 1.2 C since 1900, which is due to many causes, such as fossil CO2, flora CO2, and permafrost methane which converts to CO2.
CO2 emissions of fossil fuels are a blessing.
CO2 has increased from about 296 ppm in 1900 to 423 ppm at end 2023. It:
.
1) Increased world greening by at least 10 to 15%, as measured by satellites since 1979.
2) Increased world fauna
3) Increased crop yields per acre.
4) Reduced desert areas
.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/new-study-2001-2020-gl…
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-a-life-gas-no-c…
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/co2-is-not-pollution-i…
.
Benefits of CO2
https://issuu.com/johna.shanahan/docs/co2_pitch_4-3-24_baeuerle_eng…
.
Oceans Absorb CO2
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, in accordance with Henry’s Law
The sea water contains 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
The CO2 continuously combines with salt to form numerous Ca, Cl, O2 and H2 compounds that support ocean flora and fauna.
As a result, the oceans are the major sink of CO2 from human and natural sources in the TS.
At least 80% of new CO2 in the TS, human and natural, is added to the oceans
Doubling, tripling, or quadrupling of atmospheric CO2 might be a good thing but that it is “required” in some manner is an unsupported speculation.
Excerpt
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
Sea water contains 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, per Henry’s Law
CO2 and NaCl form many compounds that contain C, O2, H2, Cl. They sustain flora and fauna in the oceans.
At the surface, seawater pH = 8.2, the % presence of [CO2], [HCO3−], and [CO3 2−] is 0.5, 89, and 10.5;
“Free” CO2 molecules at the surface, is only 0.5%; CO2 out-migration is minimal, given the conditions.
As a result, the oceans are the major sink of CO2 from human and natural sources in the TS.
At least 40% of new CO2 in the TS, human and natural, is added to the oceans; about 50% stays in the TS
Most CO2 present in the ocean, or any other body of water, is not in solution taking part in the equilibrium reaction of carbonic acid, bicarbonate, and carbonate you quote here.
Most of the CO2 is just CO2 gas, dissolved in the water and existing simply as if it were any other gas.
that has nothing to do with what I wrote
Here is how they “speculate” with real $billions in cold Canada
In cold Canada, tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, apples, pears, etc., are grown in automated, hi-tech Dutch greenhouses which are heated with very low-cost natural gas (as part of a Canadian subsidy), plus they have CO2 generators to increase the CO2 to 1200 ppm.
.
You can find these fruits and veggies in almost all supermarkets on the US East Cost.
Those supermarkets are owned by Dutch/Belgium conglomerates.
For the above excerpt, use these URLs
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
Most CO2 molecules that enter the oceans are mineralized in a fraction of a second by a variety of ions just waiting to pounce on it and are either consumed by life or settle on the ocean floor.
Exactly correct.
Scare-mongering journalists write the oceans are heating and CO2 will be released!
That is total scientific nonsense.
It shows a complete lack of STEM (SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS)
It shows a complete lack of STEM
Not surprising since they’ve added “A” (STEAM)
Yes, they’ve now added “Arts”
And you are not only agreeing with this malarkey, but declaring it “exactly correct”?
The quality of the commentary here is dropping sharply, it seems.
Was a a time not so long ago where no pure bullshit comments would sit unchallenged for over a full day.
“Most CO2 molecules that enter the oceans are mineralized in a fraction of a second by a variety of ions just waiting to pounce on it and are either consumed by life or settle on the ocean floor.”
Sorry, but that is pure bullshit.
You should be ashamed of yourself if you really believe this.
Seriously, are you in high school yet?
For the past 600 million years the paleo record shows that temperature and CO2 are inversely related. Temperatures peak when CO2 is LOW and temperatures bottom out when CO2 is HIGH.
This is opposite to the GHG theory of CO2 because the theory does not include the effects of CO2 on life. CO2 theory only considers radiation, which is already saturated in the CO2 bands.
Life is affected by CO2 and CO2 is affected by life. Together these regulate the temperature to keep the planet habitable.
“that temperature and CO2 are inversely related. Temperatures peak when CO2 is LOW and temperatures bottom out when CO2 is HIGH.”
You are confused
When oceans are warmest, their CO2 content is lower, but the atmospheric CO2 content is higher. CO2 is a feedback to changes in ocean temperatures
Adding manmade CO2 to the atmosphere makes CO2 a forcing. It is sad that almost 100% of climate scientists have believed this since 1896. while many WUWT commenters deny it. The Nutters.
CO2 feedback and CO2 forcing are two different processes that happen at the same time. CO2 as a forcing is much larger and much faster.
More CO2 in the atmosphere always results in higher surface temperatures compared with less CO2 in the atmosphere. The only exception is an area with a temperature inversion.
For non-scientific readers, the CO2 is released by the ocean as it warms, just like your soda releases its CO2 fizz as it warms and makes you drink go “flat”.
Not so.
As soon as a CO2 molecule mixes with water, it forms ionic entities. Only 5 of 100 molecules stays as CO2.
Because CO2 ppm in atmosphere is continuously increasing, so will CO2 molecules continuously migrate into water, per Henry’s Law
It is a very complicated process, and it also involves CO2 and NaCl creating numerous compounds containing C, Cl, H and O, that sustain flora and fauna
CO2 out-migration is unlikely, given the conditions
Non-STEM journalists spread stories about the oceans heating and CO2 being released, should be ignored.
They are just pleasing editors to sell papers, and fooling people
Excerpt
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/natural-forces-cause-periodic-global-warming
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/hunga-tonga-volcanic-eruption
.
Sea water contains 3.5% salt, NaCl, by weight.
CO2 molecules continuously move from the air into sea water, per Henry’s Law
CO2 and NaCl form many compounds that contain C, O2, H2, Cl. They sustain flora and fauna in the oceans.
At the surface, seawater pH = 8.2, the % presence of [CO2], [HCO3−], and [CO3 2−] is 0.5, 89, and 10.5;
“Free” CO2 molecules at the surface, is only 0.5%; CO2 out-migration is minimal, given the conditions.
As a result, the oceans are the major sink of CO2 from human and natural sources in the TS.
At least 40% of new CO2 in the TS, human and natural, is added to the oceans; about 50% stays in the TS
“As soon as a CO2 molecule mixes with water, it forms ionic entities. Only 5 of 100 molecules stays as CO2.”
You have no idea what you are talking about.
All you have to do to check on this is look up the physical property of CO2 in aqueous solution called it’s “hydration equilibrium constant.”
About 1/10th of one percent is converted to carbonic acid and it’s various dissociation products.
This misinformation is very deeply rooted these days.
Total nonsense. See my other comments in the string
I intended to up vote you abs accidentally down voted but cannot change it. Sorry.
That’s really funny since there were no climate scientists in 1896. Now who’s Nutters?
I was going to reply to your post, but I see that Mr Greene already has. My only comment is that his post reflects the science. Yours is contradicted by Science.
Sock puppet.
According to Wikipedia animals first appeared 574 million years ago. Almost exactly the time the inverse relationship between temperature and CO2 first appeared in the paleo records. This is much too close to be simple coincidence.
Over vast periods of time, our primitive ocean formed. Water remained a gas until the Earth cooled below 212 degrees Fahrenheit . At this time, about 3.8 billion years ago, the water condensed into rain which filled the basins that we now know as our world ocean.
That means oceans could have been a CO2 sink for 3.8 billion years, not only the last 574 million years.
Having virtually no scientific basis, the “green” movement’s hostility to carbon dioxide seemingly ignores the gas’s critical role as a plant food.
There’s a reason why many green’s are referred to as watermelons. Green on the outside, red to the core.
One must truly wonder why Vegetarians and Vegans are not loudly protesting Joe Bidens anti CO2 policies in the streets.
Because Biden;s policy is based on Science. Wrightstone, not so much
Warren Biden’s police have nothing to do with science and you a a fool to believe that.
Oh really? Do you know what all climate research has concluded ?
Biden’s science policy is to starve vegetables from photosynthesis? Strange policy, that one.
Perhaps they do not know that the photosynthesis REQUIRED for ALL plant growth to feed them requires 6 molecules of CO2. The formula is available on the internet. Without CO2 there would be no food for anyone and we would all die. We are carbon based life and require carbon, including CO2 for our body processes.
Huh?
Bad news is good news (it sells). Good news is no news. No news is bad news.
I forget where that originated.
Hard times make strong men. Strong men make easy times. Easy times make weak men. Weak men make hard times…wash, rinse, repeat.
Another excellent article shining the light of truth.
Funny how the morons opposed to more CO2 fail to understand every carbon atom in their bodies came from CO2. My guess they also fail to understand is that all life on earth is carbon based and where that carbon comes from!
None of which has anything to do with man caused climate change
In the heading photo, what is that awful looking thing in the back, on the right. It looks like something that might have been dug out of a mass grave.
“Thus, CO2 concentrations and temperatures are usually inversely related over 600 million years. For hundreds of millions of years, temperatures were low when CO2 levels were high, and temperatures were high when CO2 levels were low.”
Source:
Richard Lindzen Professor of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences, Emeritus Massachusetts Institute of Technology
William Happer Professor of Physics, Emeritus Princeton University
Steven Koonin University Professor, New York University, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute
November 30, 2023
Court of Appeals The Hague The Hague The Netherlands
In the following days, a powerful patch of Arctic air over Russia, with ground frosts.
Eastern Europe is experiencing unusually cold weather for May. In Russia, temperatures are significantly below average. The Baltic states report record-breaking morning frosts, which have destroyed fruit trees. See temperature anomaly map:
https://www.ventusky.com/?p=56.6;44.3;4&l=temperature-anomaly-2m