After the yearly global Earth Hour environmental movement celebrates its 11th anniversary on March 23 at 8:30 p.m., ever since it started in 2007 in Sydney, Australia, it is high time to assess what difference it has made, otherwise it is time to change the climate of governance and advocacy so as to understand better the opposing views about man-made
climate change.
Earth hour vs our Earth? Amid widespread “fake news” and their social-media proliferation through “Goebellian propaganda,” named after Hitler’s propagandist Joseph Goebbels, who peddled lies repeatedly that they were perceived as truth; perhaps, it is time to elevate the discourse to opposing views to get the public and the hoi polloi masses, to think more critically and discover the facts by themselves.
I believe global climate change is real, as climate has always been changing constantly and that we witness often Mother Nature’s wrath (i.e., storm surges, earthquakes, etc.), but I no longer believe this is due to anthropogenic or man-made activities as true science says human activities like industrialization and transport emissions do not really cause global warming.
The fake news, or massive propaganda that has unfortunately influenced governments and policy-makers worldwide to enter into onerous accords like the Kyoto Protocol, COP 21 agreements, etc., or for civil society to go nuts over Earth Hour only manifest our little understanding of our Earth.
Prof. Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph in Ontario argues why must we “demonize electricity” by switching it off on Earth Hour, when we should be celebrating electricity for its manifold benefits to humanity. He says this only manifests our ignorance.
Is it man-made or “Mann-made”? The United Nations’s Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) argument, on which Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth global warming documentary was based, is the “Hockey Stick” theory by climatologist Michael Mann.
Mann studied global temperature the past 1,000 years and recorded the spike in temperatures starting in the 19th century with a graph shaped like a hockey stick, which was correlated to man-made industrialization and motor-vehicle emissions. Mann got earth samples from the polar region and saw correlations between carbon dioxide (CO2) content and residues capturing temperature levels, although correlation does not establish causality.
A total of 31,487 American scientists alone even signed a petition opposing this. Many scientists resigned from IPCC, which is composed more of politicized non-governmental organization and government people.
Facts don’t follow theory. In the Global Warming Swindle documentary, earth’s history shows climate changed, contrary to propaganda that CO2 increase leads to global warming, followed by climate change. Prof. Philip Stott of University of London says when humans were not yet producing CO2, we had little ice ages and warm periods. In the 14th century, Europe had a Little Ice Age as artifact illustrations show ice fairs and people skating on the Thames River, and in the medieval period, England was warm as manifested in the writings of English poet Chaucer and numerous sites today like vineyards, Vine hill, Vine Street, Vinery, etc.
At the turn of the 19th century, temperatures rose by almost half-percent Celsius, but from the post-War economic boom to 1975, they dropped even when CO2 rose to their peaks with industrialization, thus negating the global warming scare theory.
More proof from Moore. Green peace cofounder scientist Patrick Moore left Greenpeace when it abandoned science and turned political, starting with its “Global Chlorine Ban,” when chlorine is the only technology that can purify water instantly on a mass scale, even dirty canal water. Chlorine evaporates in 30 minutes, making it safe, potable and free of the charges of carcinogenic content. Moreover, 75 percent of medicines are chlorine-based.
CO2 may have increased from 260 parts per million (ppm) to 400 ppm the past two centuries, this is a negligible 0.04 percent of a million parts. Over the last 600 million years, average CO2 levels were even at 2,000 ppm, which is ideal for plant growth, Moore said. Industrial Scientific asserts CO2 exposure causes headaches only at 30,000 ppm, and only gets life threatening at 80,000 ppm.
Need more CO2 to go green? We actually need more CO2 to develop agriculture. If environmentalists want more green, they must push for more CO2, being the plants’ basic food. CO2 is also used as a refrigerant in making dry ice to preserve food. There is even a web site, I Love CO2.com.
But why is CO2 restricted, if the bigger greenhouse gas is water vapor, which is 850 percent stronger than CO2, and 2.1-M percent more in volume than CO2 in the atmosphere? Without water vapor, the Earth will be 14 percent colder.
Apparently, there are people who don’t want backward countries like Africa to industrialize. Restrictions on CO2 will thus prevent industrialization and hinder the adoption of cold storage to sustain food, which can only mean systematic implicit genocide.
Renew energy to discover. Except for hydro and geothermal, other renewable energies like wind and solar have low energy flux densities, not capable of providing baseload energy for massive industries. Windmills made of steel may be more efficient, but are no different than Holland’s 12th-century wooden mills as there is no energy when there is no wind. Solar is also good, but maybe appropriate for remote areas beyond reach of power lines.
In summary, climate change is a fact, which we must prepare for, but it is not caused by humans, so we need to renew and redirect our energy toward discovering the truth by bringing back science and the creative imagination of the arts to discover concrete solutions to mitigate and adapt to global warming, or a mini ice age, and overall climate change. This requires a change in the climate of governance and the way we think.
E-mail: mikealunan@yahoo.com
3 comments
“The United Nations’s Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
argument, on which Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth global warming
documentary was based….”
Only a complete idiot thinks that “An Inconvenient Truth” was based on the IPCC’s AR3 or AR4. “An Inconvenient Truth” is based upon 160+ years of science discovery, of which the IPCC assesses now and then.
“I believe global climate change is real”
Only a moron believes demonstrable fact.
“as climate has always been changing constantly”
No, climate has not always been changing: please read the IPCC’s AR5 for how the world’s geophysicists define what climate is.
“is the Hockey Stick theory”
There is no such theory; no scientist has ever heard of any such theory. The theory you are thinking of is called “physics.”
“A total of 31,487 American scientists alone even signed a petition opposing this.”
… and only 8 people who signed it are scientists who are educated in the relevant science venues. Most of the “scientists” are not scientists, have never done science, never wrote any science paper, and have never been published by any science journal. =YAWN!= Meanwhile, over 84,000 geophysicists have stated they agree with the evidence. Oops!
” but from the post-War economic boom to 1975, they dropped even when CO2 rose”
… and every geophysicist on the planet agrees why. Carl Sagan, Dr. Hansen, and scores of other scientists even stated why. The reason (atmospheric particulates) are still cooling Earth right now, as they were in the 1970s.
“We actually need more CO2 to develop agriculture”
More atmospheric CO2 means fewer plants, less nutritious food crops, and diminished human cognition. Human-produced CO2 is already costing us about US$300,000,000,000 a year and the BEST CASE scenario projected for year 2060 is that every year human-caused climate change will cost us twice that amount: over 600 billion USA dollars every year.
“… other renewable energies like wind and solar have low energy flux
densities, not capable of providing baseload energy for massive
industries.”
Renewable energy is already providing all energy needs for industry in several countries, and is already meeting huge percentages of energy demand in other countries. In fact renewable energy in the USA is already less expensive than coal, oil, and methane.
“In summary, climate change is a fact, which we must prepare for, but it is not caused by human…”
All of the world’s geophysicists agree humans are the cause. In the past 30 years there have been over 94,000 papers written on the subject submitted to science journals of peer review and publication: of those 94,000+ papers, 7 reject the world-wide consensus on the subject, and more than 94,000 accept the consensus.
For over 180 years scientists have been demonstrating that increased atmospheric CO2 causes global temperature increase. Among them, Joseph Fourier in 1824 and 1827; John Tyndall in 1859; Svante Arrhenius in 1896; C.J. Fox in 1909; John Henry Poynting in 1909; A. Angstron in 1918; Chamberlain and Fowle in 1916; Alexander Graham Bell in 1917; E.O. Hulburt in 1931; S.G. Callendar in 1937; Professor Gilbert Plass in 1956; Carl Sagan in 1972; Stephen Hawking in 1960; Isaac Asimov in 1968; Wally Broecker in 1975; Richard Feynman and “The Jasons” in 1980; and over 660 science organization in 35 countries with one dissent. Science won; brainwashed “free market” cultists lost. Put some ice on it.
Excellent.
Did you know they were ice skating on the Thames in the 1800’s?
It’s the weather stupid