Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Simple Facts Expose The Climate Change Hoax
American Thinker ^ | 25 Oct, 2024 | Jonathan Gault

Posted on 10/25/2024 5:03:15 AM PDT by MtnClimber

The reality is that we are in a CO2 famine that puts life on earth at risk.

To believe in the climate change hoax, you must believe 5 (palpably untrue) things:

CO2 is the “control knob” for the climate. This has been proven to be ridiculous. CO2 makes up only about 0.04% of the atmosphere, while 96–99% of the atmosphere is oxygen and nitrogen. Water vapor, a much larger determinant of temperature, varies from 1-4%. But what determines temperature more than anything else? Changes in the Earth’s solar orbit (obviously). NASA has admitted this.

CO2 is harmful. Wrong! CO2 is plant food. Humans inhale oxygen and exhale CO2. Plants do the reverse.

SNIP

We are at historically high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Again, not true. We are actually at historically low levels of CO2. Before the Industrial Revolution, the seminal starting point for climate hysteria (often cited by climate hysterics), the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was approximately 290 ppm (parts per million). Plant life begins to succumb (it dies) around 150ppm. The amount of CO2 currently in the atmosphere is roughly 420ppm.

But is this historically high? Hardly. During the period of the dinosaurs, cold-blooded reptiles that required warm climates, consumed massive volumes of vegetation, and perished when the earth cooled, CO2 levels were roughly 3600ppm, creating the Jurassic conditions that enabled the dinosaurs to flourish, roaming the earth for millions of years.

Were the dinosaurs driving larger SUVs than Americans now drive? What caused CO2 levels to reach such heights then? It certainly wasn’t humans. It occurred, as it always does and has, due to solar cycles, which NASA has admitted.

Image. Oak Ridge National Lab. Public domain.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: climatechange; co2; globalwarming; marxism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: BrandtMichaels

Not even close to the mass balance.
Convertible organic mass diminishes to almost zero among plants.
A corresponding 90 ton tree would decay into about 1-2 pounds of convertible organic debris.

The overall point is that ‘fossil fuel’ is a misnomer.
It was really “coined” when the oil producing formations were found in fossil-containing strata.
Abiotic crude is more correctly used for the material we refine into fuels.


21 posted on 10/25/2024 8:40:14 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (When I say "We" I speak of, -not for-, "We the People")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Well, something doesn’t add up here - source link to support the claims?


22 posted on 10/25/2024 9:01:54 AM PDT by BrandtMichaels ( 1st Peter 4:8 "Above all, love each other deeply because love covers a multitude of sins." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

CO2 FOLLOWS the warming; it does not CAUSE it.


23 posted on 10/25/2024 10:02:32 AM PDT by JimRed (TERM LIMITS, NOW! Finish the damned WALL! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel
The overall point is that ‘fossil fuel’ is a misnomer.

Coal, the highly compressed remains of ancient plant life is a true fossil fuel.

24 posted on 10/25/2024 10:09:58 AM PDT by JimRed (TERM LIMITS, NOW! Finish the damned WALL! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH! )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

Thank you.
I was focused on crude/petroleum.
Petro-oleum.


25 posted on 10/25/2024 11:30:31 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (When I say "We" I speak of, -not for-, "We the People")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber
Rush was wont to say that man couldn't cause Global Warming even if he tried. Which put me to wondering, just how much energy would it take to heat up the whole of earth's atmosphere by just one degree, and what would it take to create that much energy. So I looked up the details and ran the numbers.


According to NASA, earth's atmosphere weighs 5.1e+18 kg (comes to ~5,600 trillion US tons).

According to The Engineering Toolbox, it takes 1006 Joules (of energy) to change the temperature of one kilogram of air by one degree Communist (or Kelvin).*

1006 Joules/kg/°C per 5.1e+18 kg comes to 5.712e+21 Joules to raise the temperature of earth's atmosphere by a single °C (or °K).

5.712e+21 Joules converts to 1.425 trillion Mega-Watt hours.

The largest nukular reactor in the US (in Palo Verde, Ariz.) can produce 3937 Mega-Watts if all three reactors are running @100%.
Running @100% 24/7/365, in a year's time, Palo Verde would make 34,488,120 MWh.

Running at 34,488,120 MWh per year, Palo Verde would need 41,323 years to produce the 1.425 trillion MWh needed to raise the temp of earth's atmosphere by one degree C (1.8 °F).
FREE photo hosting by Host Pic.Org - Free Image Picture Photo Hosting

Or to put it in another perspective, the Global Cooling Scare began about 1970. If we had brought enough reactors online that year in a deliberate effort to raise earth's atmosphere's temperature by 1°C (or 1°K, or 1.8°F) by running them @100% 24/7/365 until today, and converted ALL of that electrical output into heat, we would have had to build 780 Palo Verde-sized reactors (assumes 100% efficiency in the conversion).

To put that in Imperial measurements (1°Communist = 1.8°Fahrenheit), Palo Verde would need 22,957 years to make enough MWh that if converted 100% to atmospheric heat could raise earth's temperature by 1°F.

Or if we had started in 1970, it would have taken 434 Palo Verde-sized reactors to raise earth's temperature by 1°F by 2023.

Today there are only (roughly) 220 commercial nuclear power plants on the planet.


What if we didn't use atomic reactors but atomic bombs to create the same 1.425 trillion MWh? We certainly seem to have enough of them lying around, right?

The Little Boy atom bomb (the one dropped on Hiroshima) exploded with a force of about 15 kt.

A thousand tons of TNT will release about 4.184e+9 Joules so 15 of them comes to 62.76e+9J.

Divide that into the 5.712e+21 Joules and you get 91,013,384,321 -- 91 billion -- Billion with a "B" -- Little Boy atom bombs. That's what you'd need to heat earth's atmosphere by 1 °C.

We couldn't cause it if we wanted, which also means there's nothing we can do to un-cause it.


This obviously is an unfathomably YUGE amount of energy, far in excess of what a gas that comprises a whopping 0.04% of our atmosphere could be responsible for.


* Yes, I am aware this specific heat value only applies to air @sea level pressure but the scale of final answer is so absurd that I couldn't be bothered to find a mean value.

26 posted on 10/25/2024 5:37:58 PM PDT by Paal Gulli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson