Posted on 04/30/2019 8:18:02 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A former Republican aide who rejects the scientific community's consensus on climate change said carbon dioxide is not pollution, dredging up a decades-old defense of CO2 emissions in order to write off Beto O'Rourke's newly announced climate plan.
Speaking Tuesday morning with Fox & Friends, the longtime Fox News climate change denier Marc Morano joined host Jedediah Bila in ridiculing the former Texas congressman's $5 trillion climate change proposal.
"First of all, pollution and carbon dioxide, humans, we inhale oxygen and we exhale carbon dioxide, so he's calling CO2 pollution, which it's not," Morano proclaimed Tuesday. "No, this plan is as pie-in-the-sky as the Green New Deal except it's a little bit more tepid."
Fox & Friends co-host Bila labeled O'Rourke's plan "very vague and very nice and very idealistic." But as she listed bullet points of the plan, she derisively dismissed the idea of starting to cut pollution, saying, "whatever that means."
She concluded Americans "won't be so excited" about fighting climate change once they see its effect on their pocketbooks.
Morano, who has appeared on Fox News and other right-leaning international networks for years, frequently refers to climate change or the concept of global warming as "hysteria."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
I reject that premise.
Climate Change Denier Tells Fox & Friends Carbon Dioxide ‘Not A Pollution’
That is, he was simply stating the obvious. Take away carbon monoxide and the air is cleaner. It’s because that is a pollutant. Take away carbon dioxide and we all die. We need it to live. Yes, you can have too much, but the same is true of water. And we are currently in a CO2 drought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-9UlF8hkhs&t=5s
I do too but haven’t we any scientists on our side who can rebut this nonsense?
Maybe this former aide can get a guest shot on the “Cli-Fi Channel” to help expose this climatomfoolery. Nah, deniers MUST be silenced. T2o much money at stake.
L8r
No propaganda value in that writer’s biased choice of every other word, is there?
This is the question I want answered. “How much will it cost to clean up global water pollution?”
Once that is done, the answer to climate change is at hand. If we clean up water sources, new economies can be developed, new forestation can happen, people will no longer be thirsty or hungry or prone to disease.
This is the prerequisite for climate change.
Yes, thousands, but they are as invisible to the media as the tens of thousands of people at a Trump rally.
From the article:EPA doesn’t state that CO2 by itself is a pollutant given that humans and plants exhale it,...
Xxxxxxxxxxx
Do plants exhale CO2? I thought plants “inhale” it then “exhaled” O2???
Help.
the scientific community’s consensus on climate change ??
How can you have anything scientific to hang your hat on regarding Global Warming, if you don’t take into account that big ball of Radiation we call the Sun??
Thats what I though, Hang Him!
Certainly true, it's like calling Dihydrogen Monoxide a pollutant.
https://www.dhmo.org/facts.html
That’s “New Science”.
We have always been at war with Eurasia...
Same as humans.
Which is why the "breath of life" works because there is still oxygen in what we exhale.
Now plants exhale more oxygen then they do carbon dioxide which is the opposite of humans but the statement is correct.
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.