Skip to main content

What if CO2 has nothing to do with the Earth's climate?

There'd be a huge scramble of egg, vegetable and waste matter on the faces of, and obstructing the vision of, the vast worldwide army of over-sensitive and deeply concerned prognosticators in politics, academia, journalism, workplaces and kitchens, who have been scolding us all about our carbon emissions for nearly 2 decades.

And, make no mistake, this is now a completely legitimate question. Anyone genuinely interested in and curious about climate change must start asking themselves this in the light of the confirmation from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Institute and the British Met Office that there has been no no material change in the Earth's surface temperature in the last 15 years.



CO2 emissions have continued to rise unabated over that same 15 years but the planet has stubbornly refused to heat up. It looks mightily like there must be an explanation other than increases in atmospheric CO2 for the global warming in the 20 year odd period between 1976 and 1997.

Mike Stopa has now started the ball rolling on the rethink. There are many intriguing further questions consequent on this too, including, as Mike Stopa puts it, how will the history of this colossal mistake be written?

He suggests that:
  • "... They will say that the theory was seemingly invalidated by the decrease in global temperatures from 1940-1975, but that the adherents patched this up by explaining the cooling with pollution, specifically sulfur, from industry"...
  • "... They will say the theory was seemingly invalidated by the evidence that the atmosphere was already nearly opaque in the wavelengths that are absorbed by CO2 and so the additional CO2 could have, on its own, little effect, but that the theory was patched up by positing a feedback mechanism between the small temperature increases directly due to CO2 and the production of water vapor which is the main greenhouse gas..."
  • "... They will note that the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) proceeded much like any scientific theory (cf. Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions) in that it was modified and patched up and adjusted to fit empirical challenges until it finally collapsed altogether under the weight of incontrovertible evidence..."
                                                                                  [underlining added]

Most of the rest of the world have just entangled themselves in words and bureaucratic waste over this false alarm in the past decade. But Australia actually did something more than blow hot air in UN IPCC forums and at COP conferences. The Australian Labor government legislated last year to tax the country's largest 500 businesses with an impost of $23.00 per tonne of CO2 produced by those businesses, commencing 1 July 2012.

Now that it appears likely that CO2 probably does not contribute meaningfully to the warming of the planet, this tax is just a pointless handicap on Australian business. This pointless tax makes all Australian industry less competitive with the rest of the world. For no benefit. Not even the mystical benefit of "moral leadership" in the world. Just the dunces prize for being sucked in by all the smoke and mirrors from self-appointed important people who wanted to save us all from ourselves.

Just how this massive group-think folly is going to be backed away from by the educated opinion making elites in the West will indeed be intriguing.

These folk are not good at eating crow. So is there a face saving mechanism by which all the great and the good in the world who jumped on this absurd prosperity depleting bandwagon, can be redeemed?
We watch and wait.

It might take a while for these rubes to even realise that the game is over. But as it dawns on them gradually over the coming years that they got it so badly wrong, both the shrieks of pain and the silence of denial will be deafening. Indeed the deafening silence has already begun. This emergence of this clear conclusion of no warming for 15 years based on apparently rigorously collected and collated data remains pretty much unremarked on in the mainstream media to date. The dam will break soonish, methinks, especially here in Australia as the commencement date of the Carbon Tax looms closer.

So we might yet just be saved from both the oppression of unnecessarily intrusive world government edicts seeking to save us from climate perdition and the irritation of constantly being belittled by our betters for the mortal sin of high energy usage. Is it too much to hope that at some point soon it might even be possible to be able to resume creating prosperity for all without being told we can't use the cheapest, easiest and most abundant sources of energy?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Jackson, martyr ?

. Someone has to die for their beliefs to be a martyr . Drudge pointed to headlines last Friday saying that Jackson's was a " Death by Showbusines s". So in the sense that Jackson seems to have died for his belief in celebrity, yes, he might be called a martyr. I never got Michael Jackson. Thriller didn't thrill me at all ( Now Noel Coward, that's another story ). But I did get a bit of a kick from seeing others get him. He was boppy and catchy and slick, as well as monumentally fluffy and hugely impaired. What I struggle with is the apparently massive consequentiality of fluffiness and impairment like Jackson's. What is the fuss about the passing of a semi-talented song and dance weirdo from decades past? Boris Johnson, the London Mayor, has had a stab at explaining it to we mystified souls who struggle to get with the programme. He reckons it's just like Princess Di. And I agree, to the extent that I was almost as unprepared for and dumbfounded by th

Rugby bureaucrats, Stalin's spawn?

In recent weeks two larger than life Rugby players have experienced the tyranny of justice in a universe even more capricious and hostile than their sport: the world of sports officialdom. First Bakkies Botha , the great and brutal Springbok second-rower, got a raw deal from some small minded and ignorant Rugby officials. They banned him for a couple of matches over an incident that any disinterested rugby fan will tell you happens at nearly every ruck in every game of rugby: the clean out. The Springboks protested this dumb decision by each Springbok player wearing an armband saying "JUSTICE 4 Bakkies" at the following Test match against the British & Irish Lions in Jo'berg. And now the Springboks themselves have been cited by the International Rugby Board for "bringing the game into disrepute" and breaching the "IRB Code of Conduct" by questioning the disciplinary rulings of IRB sanctioned bodies. From little stupidities, big stupidities grow

Perpetual pretenders proclaiming possession of Truth ... (fact check the fat cheque)

Samizdata.net  have pointed me to an article in Public entitled " Nacissism of the Fact Checkers ". It's a sobering though disturbingly unsurprising read.  It adds to the litany of distressingly wrong facts that have been endorsed and perpetuated by the "official narrative" and with the reciprocal suppression or censorship of correct "falsehoods".  Here's a list of such behaviours by fact checkers from the article: - calling out a self avowed parody site for misinformation on the Paris riots for posting a typically over the top clip from the action movie "Fast & Furious"; -  that claim by the New York Times, AP and the BBC that fake news travels 6 times faster than the factual news, turns out to be fake news itself. The claim is based on a single MIT study on small number of tweets , not news. - Facebook removing 20 million posts, and labeling 190 million posts about Covid-19 as "content moderation" because those posts did