Net Zero Lies Have Spread Like Wildfire!
Tom Shepstone
Shepstone Management Company, Inc.
…
…
Net zero apostles have relied on propaganda, not science, to spread their lies like wildfire, as the CO2 Coalition illustrates with a new paper unpacking them!
The CO2 Coalition is out with an excellent paper dispensing with some of the many lies that serve as the foundation for the climate scam. Those lies have spread like wildfire as it turns out, but first a little about the paper itself and our friends at the CO2 Coalition.
The CO2 Coalition is “a nonprofit organization of more than 100 scientists and researchers engaged in educating the public and policymakers on the benefits of carbon dioxide and on the role of the gas in climate dynamics.”
It has produced an excellent document, titled Challenging “Net Zero” with Science, that is authored by scientists Richard Lindzen and William Happer, together with the CO2 Coalition itself. It lays out the problems with the supposed science behind the climate scam and utilizes many of the arguments made in Unsettled by former Obama Administration official Steve Koonin.
You may download a printable version of Challenging Net Zero with Science here, and below is a nice explanation of what it’s all about.
Net Zero initiatives of governments and private organizations are scientifically invalid and will lead to worldwide impoverishment and starvation if implemented, according to a paper published by the CO2Coalition.
The 46-page paper details how the objectives of Net Zero to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and the emissions of greenhouse gases are based on analytical methods that violate fundamental tenets of the scientific method which originated more than 300 years ago.
“Reliable scientific knowledge is determined by the scientific method, where theoretical predictions are validated by observations or rejected by failing to do so,” say the paper’s authors – two renowned physicists and a geologist of more than 40 years.
“Agreement with observations is the measure of scientific truth,” continues the paper. “Scientific progress proceeds by the interplay of theory and observation. Theory explains observations and makes predictions of what will be observed in the future. Observations anchor understanding and weed out theories that don’t work.”
The paper predicts global starvation if fossil fuels are eliminated. At risk in coming decades would be half of the world’s 8.5 billion to 10 billion people who are fed by crops grown with fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Listed as an example of Net Zero’s potential consequences is the economic and social calamity of Sri Lanka which had banned the use of fertilizers and pesticides made from fossil fuels.
“The recent experience in Sri Lanka provides a red alert. The world has just witnessed the collapse of the once bountiful agricultural sector of Sri Lanka as a result of government restrictions on mineral fertilizer,” the paper says.
The paper says that 600 million years of geological evidence shows that CO2 levels are near a record low and that atmospheric increases of the gas follow warming periods rather than precede them.
These data “are good enough to demolish the argument that atmospheric CO2 concentrations control Earth’s climate and the theory that fossil fuels and CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming. They will not.”
The paper’s authors are Dr. William Happer, Professor of Physics, Emeritus, Princeton University; Dr. Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Gregory Wrightstone, a geologist and executive director of the CO2 Coalition.
The paper says Net Zero regulations and actions are scientifically invalid because they:
- Fabricate data or omit data that contradict their conclusions. Net Zero proponents regularly report that extreme weather is more severe and frequent because of climate change while the evidence shows no increase – and, in some cases, a decrease – in such events.
- Rely on computer models that do not work. An analysis of 102 computer models used by Net Zero proponents found that 101 of them had failed to match real-world observations. “Simply stated, the (computer) model essential to every government Net Zero regulation, action and the trillions of dollars subsidizing renewables and electric cars, trucks, home heating, appliances and many other products do not work,” said the paper.
- Rely on findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that are government opinions, not science. The paper says that the conclusions of IPCC scientists that contradict the narrative of catastrophic global warming from fossil fuels are rewritten by government bureaucrats for public reports to support the false narrative of Net Zero proponents.
- Omit the extraordinary social benefits of CO2 and fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide, including that from the burning of fossil fuels, serves as plant food that increases crop production and enables the feeding of more people. CO2, as well as the greenhouse gases of methane and nitrous oxide, help to keep Earth at temperatures conducive to life; without them, people would suffer. Fossil fuels are economical and abundant sources of energy necessary for modern societies and are critical feedstocks for fertilizers and pesticides that support the lives of billions of people.
- Omit the disastrous consequences of reducing fossil fuels and CO2 emissions to Net Zero. “It cannot be overemphasized that eliminating fossil fuels and implementing Net Zero policies and actions mean the elimination of fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides that will result in about half the world’s population not having enough food to eat,” says the paper.
- Reject the science that demonstrates there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2. “We are not aware of any reliable science that supports the National Climate Assessment’s or others’ theory that fossil fuels and CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming,” said the paper’s authors, “We have written extensively on this issue for decades.”
What immediately caught my attention about the document was the data on wildfires. Net zero advocates live up to their name by relying upon arguments that add up to net zero and wildfires, which have received enormous attention in recent years, provide the perfect example. Consider this from the CO2 Coalition paper:
The 4th National Climate Assessment presents a chart showing a huge increase in the amount of acres burned since 1984:
The “Key Finding 6 of the CSSR Chapter 8” is the incidence of large forest fires in the West has increased since the early 1980s:
“The incidence of large forest fires in the western United States and Alaska has increased since the early 1980s (high confidence) and is projected to further increase in those regions as the climate warms, with profound changes to certain ecosystems (medium confidence).”
The obvious question is what happen”ed before 1984, a very short time ago in geological terms. Unfortunately, this is once again an example of the USGCRP omitting contradictory data in its National Climate Assessments.
The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) and the U.S. Census Bureau provide data going back to 1928 and reveal that the number of fires in the United States and the area burned have been in a significant and long-term decline, with both exhibiting a more than 75% reduction since their peak in the 1920s and 1930s, while CO2 has been inexorably increasing. The following chart shows both the NIFC data and CSSR data in one chart for comparison purposes.
There is much more data in the paper that shows the same thing in multiple ways, but the above is enough to illustrate how the climate scammers and net zero preachers have pretended to do science as they were doing propaganda. All that’s required is drop a bunch of years off the chart. It’s that’s simple; a trick any liar/figurer learns in Propaganda 101.
There is much more, so read the whole report!
The post Net Zero Lies Have Spread Like Wildfire! appeared first on Natural Gas Now. This post appeared first on Natural Gas Now.
