Computer models do a good job of helping us understand the climate but they do a very poor job of predicting it.
That’s according to the much-lamented physicist Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. [bold, links added]
Dyson says, “As measured from space, the whole Earth is growing greener as a result of carbon dioxide, so it’s increasing agricultural yields, it’s increasing the forests, and it’s increasing growth in the biological world, and that’s more important and more certain than the effects on climate.”
He acknowledges that human activity has an effect on climate but claims it is much less than is claimed.
He stresses the non-climate benefits of carbon are overwhelmingly favorable.
h/t David B via Twitter
Video source here
Environmentalists want to starve the plants… seems more than a bit counter-intuitive…
Anyone who thinks CO2 is a pollutant is either a total idiot or watches way too many mindless Earth Day specials on TV
Exactly. CO2 is far more important to the environment than its negligible effect on climate. More always makes the environment greener, stronger, more drought-tolerant, and abundant. And every one of the billion-dollar CO2 driven climate models exaggerates warming compared to satellite and weather balloon actual temperatures over the last three decades. Making the war on energy a climate fraud.