If you believe the debate over global warming has ever been about science—or for that matter climate—you have been conditioned, through formal education or through reports warning of doom and gloom, to believe what others rightly describe as a world-wide hoax concocted to unite the world under a single socialistic government where there is no capitalism, no democracy, and no freedom.
Why is exposing the truth so important? Because it has everything to do with the redistribution of wealth and the establishment of political agendas aimed at destroying the foundation of eastern democracies and free markets.
Accordingly, it is therefore critical for everyone to become informed so free and open debate can exist, rather than the suppression and falsification of actual scientific climate data.
This article will expose some of the popular climate myths about CO2, so the reader will be equipped with ammunition to spread the truth to those who are willing to listen and have not yet become environmental extremists.
Links are included after each myth to substantiate information and to provide reference material for further interest and clarification.
The article was written using individual articles, with permission from my friend Jay Lehr, Ph.D., in which he exposed popular climate myths related to CO2. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst for The International Climate Science Coalition.
Myth #1: Carbon dioxide emissions cause catastrophic global warming.
Carbon dioxide has always been in the earth’s atmosphere at much greater levels than today.
Six-hundred-million years ago when the greatest explosion of new animal species occurred, CO2 concentrations exceeded 6,500 ppm, 17 times more than today.
Over billions of years, the geologic record clearly shows that there is no long-term correlation between atmospheric CO2 levels and the Earth’s climate.
There are periods in the Earth’s history when CO2 concentrations were many times higher than they are today, yet temperatures were identical to or even colder than modern times.
The claim that fossil fuel emissions control atmospheric CO2 concentrations is likewise invalid, as they have gone up and done with no input from mankind.
The grand total for the CO2 produced by all living things, including humans and livestock, is estimated to be 440 billion tons per year or 13 times the CO2 currently being produced by fossil fuel emissions.
The Mythology of Global warming by Bruce Bunker, Ph.D. is a good source of detailed accurate information on the climate change debate.
See this primer on CO2 and global warming.
Myth #2: 2016 was the warmest year ever recorded. claimed NASA and NOAA in the U.S. and the Met Office in the United Kingdom.
Upon examining actual weather records over the past 100 years no correlation was found between rising carbon dioxide levels and local temperatures.
As climate change alarmists are prone to do, they focus on isolated temperatures that have reached all-time highs while ignoring reports of record all-time lows.
From 1970 until 1998 there was a warming period that raised temperatures by about 0.7 F that helped spawn the global warming alarmist movement, but since 1998, little warming has occurred while carbon dioxide emissions continued to increase.
This is totally consistent with variations in the amount of heat the Earth receives from the Sun.
https://www.factcheck.org/
https://thefederalist.com/
Myth #3: There is extraordinary species extinction due to man-caused global warming.
According to what Al Gore wrote in his 2006 book, An Inconvenient Truth, global warming is causing the loss of living species at a level comparable to the extinction event that wiped out the dinosaurs 6.5 million years ago.
Extinctions have always been an integral part of the Earth’s history and in recent centuries mankind has been the cause of some, having encroached on the habitat of some animals, but not a single species has been shown to be either threatened or endangered by the warming of the Earth by man’s increasing use of fossil fuels and the carbon dioxide emissions therefrom.
Plant live thrived when temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were both higher than they are today.
S. J. Gould, in his 1933 The Book of Life, points to strong clues that the 20 mass extinctions in the geologic record point to global cooling.
The “poster animal” of the climate change movement is the polar bear. It was Al Gore who said that because melting ice they will have no place to live.
Not true because the floating ice (pack ice) is not melting significantly and the polar bear is thriving. Its numbers have quintupled in the past 50 years from 5,000 to 25,000.
Myth #4: The temperature of the Earth was essentially constant until humans started burning fossil fuels to trigger runaway Global Warming.
Earth’s climate has varied widely over its history, from ice ages where large ice sheets covered many land areas, to warm periods with no ice at the poles.
Several factors have affected past climate change, including solar variability, volcanic activity and changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Data from Antarctic ice cores reveal an interesting story.
During the past 400,000 years, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together.
However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, which has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.
Most of the warming and cooling trends observed during human history are related to the third periodic factor operating on time scales from ten to 1,000 years and resulted in temperature shifts spanning a total range of around 7 deg. F.
These shifts arise from the fact that the output of energy and radiation from our Sun is not constant, but changes according to both long-term and short-term cycles of solar activity, these solar cycles, and their connection with the Earth’s climate, have been documented using the recorded history of sunspot cycles, aurora observations, radio-carbon dating techniques, and changes in solar radiance.
https://answersingenesis.org/
Myth #5: CO2 is damaging the world.
It is the global movement that will damage the world. One goal of the global warming movement is to limit the amount of energy that is available and place it under government control.
Energy costs are increasing because public utilities are being forced to replace what was existing and economical power with solar and wind, which since 2000 has raised electricity bills significantly for low-income families and small businesses.
Renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, are incapable of meeting the world’s energy needs either now or in the future, and also require government subsidies for investment.
The Socialist agenda to cripple affordable energy from coal and oil is working. Despite our booming economy, it will continue to be threatened as long as our government bases any of its politics on the global warming movement.
Scientists who disagree with the global warming movement risk losing their ability to publish papers, receive government funding, or even stay employed.
Myth #6: Green New Deal claims the U.S. can rely on solar energy
Solar power only becomes economically viable and competitive through massive government subsidies that become hidden in our tax burden.
At an efficiency of seven watts per square meter harvested, it would take 50 years to break even on energy out versus energy in and no solar collector has or will ever last 50 years.
Additionally, solar energy can’t be turned on and off to meet shifts in energy. The sun shines during the day, but power needs peak in the morning and evening.
While a solar farm can be built anywhere, sunny areas of the country are not evenly distributed requiring transmission lines from the sunniest areas to the less sunny areas.
There is also not enough land in the U.S. to harvest Solar energy to play a major role in the nation’s energy requirements. Wide-spread solar energy with the Green New Deal is but a fantasy of those who truly wish to destroy the nation as set forth by our Founding Fathers.
https://www.renewableresourcescoalition.org/solar-energy-disadvantages/
https://www.energy.gov/eere/solarpoweringamerica/solar-energy-united-states
https://www.americanactionforum.org/research/what-it-costs-go-100-percent-renewable/
Myth #7: Green New Deal claims the U.S. can rely on wind turbines.
Even though wind energy currently provides the United States with four times the amount of energy solar technologies supply, that doesn’t mean wind power can grow to the extent needed to replace fossil fuels.
The growth of wind power is hampered by many limitations, including its intermittent and inefficient nature; the limitations of batteries or other back-up systems; the lack of available sites with adequate wind; the acreage required to harness the wind; the excessive expense; its dramatic danger to the bird population; and the danger to human health created by its inevitable throbbing noise.
The average turbine constructed today is rated to produce 2.5 megawatts of power.
That assumes the wind will blow at its most desirable speed between 8 and 25 miles per hour, 24 hours a day, yet none have ever produced more than 30 to 40% of that.
The biggest drawback is the immense amounts of land they require. Roughly 880 square miles of land would be needed to produce the energy equivalent to the average fossil fuel power plant of 1,000 megawatts of electricity.
Backup power is also needed when the wind doesn’t blow and transmission lines to connect to electric grids. Like solar power, wind power needs government subsidies to be economically viable.
It looks like Minnesota will have a very expensive mess to clean up when the wind turbines currently operating in the state reach the end of their 20-year useful lifetimes.
According to utility documents filed by Xcel Energy for its Nobles Wind facility, it will cost approximately $445,000 (in 2009 dollars) for each of the 134 turbines in operation.
https://www.americanexperiment.org/2019/10/it-costs-532000-to-decommission-a-single-wind-turbine/
https://blog.udemy.com/disadvantages-of-wind-energy/
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-10/cp-luw092718.php
Read rest at Heartland’s Blog
Ninetynineptc The American Bird Conservancy sued the Dept of the Interior(Under Obama)and forced them to revoke the permit he grated to the wind turbine Compnaies
This is a good article, a lot of myths were busted! I actually cringe at the mention of “greenhouse gases” and the resulting depiction of a barrier bouncing “heat” from high in the atmosphere back to the surface. It’s wrong! Earth is not a green house! Then there’s CO2 which is not, I repeat NOT earth’s thermostat. These nuts want to micromanage every aspect of our lives and take us back to the stone age. I’m not buying it, ever.
AES is about to construct a new solar farm on the North Shore of Oahu and there is a huge and growing protest against it which I support, mainly for aesthetic reasons. Sure, there are wind turbines on several ridges of the island already, but you only hear that there will be only 8 new wind mills added to the few dozen already in place. The difference: the 8 new wind grinders are 565 feet tall – that is taller than the Washington Monument! Can you imagine what that will do the landscape of this beautiful place? Artists have done renderings, commissioned by local government, to show the public what it might look like. The problem is that these renderings show wind turbine structures that are no more than 200 feet in height. Wonder why they seek to fool the public into believing this will be okay . . .
All those pro wind energy advocates should be made to go and pick up the dead or injured birds under the Wind Turbines and to love under a whole field of wind turbines for a whole month before they start spouting off about wind turbines being enviromentaly friendly
The eagle is a national bird and is protected, or at least it used to be until Obama gave power companies permission to kill them and not be required to report the deaths.
The small contribution of renewables to our power grid is not going to grow much longer. The best wind sites, close to market, have been developed. Do the Greens expect people to move, in droves, to remote locations? Most of humanity lives near water. We turn our backs to the wind.