German evolutionary biologist and physiologist Prof. Dr. Ulrich Kutschera told in an interview that “CO2 is a blessing for mankind” and that the claimed “97% consensus” among scientists is “a myth.”
97% consensus claim “untenable”
Kutschera, who has authored over three hundred scientific publications and twelve books, told the German “Junge Freiheit” (JF) that the 97% figure on consensus was created in 2013 by Australian cognitive scientist John Cook and that it has since “turned out to be untenable”, as proven by David R. Legates.
“Cook and Powell evaluated an arbitrary number of climate publications according to questionable criteria,” Kutschera told JF.
Climate doomsday “kind of religious cult”
When asked why he also signed the European Climate Declaration declaring no climate emergency, he said he considered it “important that a professional educational initiative, hopefully politically neutral, should finally emerge” and that he rejected extremes, among them the “‘climate alarmists’ who predict a fictitious, imminent ‘earth heat death’ and thus practice a kind of religious cult.”
“Basic nutrient for all plants”
“So since plants need CO2 as a basic foodstuff, there would be no life on earth without this trace gas,” said Kutschera, in response to claims that CO2 is a pollutant. “Therefore, the scientific discipline of plant physiology is of central importance, and CO2 is, therefore, a blessing for mankind!”
CO2 tax “nonsensical”
“Since about 1850, the CO2 content of the air has risen from 0.028 volume percent (280 ppm) to 0.041 volume percent (410 ppm) today. This has led to an increase in global photosynthesis – in other words, we humans have made the earth greener!” said the highly controversial professor from Kassel.
He also calls the planned CO2 tax “nonsensical” and that it is “actually a kind of new ‘special food tax’ on the state”.
Earth being greened by man
The renowned biologist also told JF that the natural carbon cycle has been altered by mankind so “that currently about a third of the CO2 we put into the air is consumed by plants, which increases their growth. The result is that the earth is greened by man, including higher crop yields – from which, incidentally, agriculture benefits worldwide – i.e. mainly poor countries that depend on agricultural products to a much greater extent than we do.”
97% of FFF activists don’t understand the carbon cycle
Kutschera criticizes the hysteria that some of his fellow scientists are spreading and he sees the climate issue as highly politicized and poorly understood. Concerning the Fridays for Future activists, he tells JF:
As I have been active in nature conservation since my early youth – building ponds, etc. – I basically rate the movement positively. However, I fear that more than 97 percent of its activists can neither define the term ‘climate’ nor have understood the carbon cycle or the function of the Rubisco enzyme, and therefore act purely politically. Since the irrational climate cult is on the rise, I advocate a ‘Fridays for Plant Physiology’ movement.”
Read more at No Tricks Zone
Strong national economies can’t be controlled by the UN’s drive for global governance . Hence the desire for liberal / socialists to destroy industrialized
civilization .
The UN in 1991 also hoped to eliminate 350,000 people per day
(128 million per year ) or about 3.7 billion people by now .
No doubt they hate Trump for being Trump but I wonder if the over the top nonstop anger is because he has stopped the globalist agenda and provided other countries room to fight back .
The UN has been lying about global warming from the beginning and we know why . Maurice Strong laid it out . They wanted some cause to galvanize public support for the UN ‘s agenda ( OK Agenda 21 ) Scary global warming was the means .
The UN has also been grossly over stating population growth .
A new book “Empty Planet” takes an on ground look and explains why the UN numbers are high . Urbanization and higher living standards , including education , are resulting in the three largest countries populations leveling off or below the 2.1 replacement need for a stable population . Some countries like Nigeria are going up but places like Japan are in decline .
Bottom line, the UN has a globalization agenda and their numbers are not credible . $Trillions wasted unless of course you like the socialist / communist model .
They hate Trump because he will look after American interests .
Food for thought, Private. Yes, we are creating carbon dioxide in increasing amounts (China, India).
Any warming raises humidity from the oceans, the carbon cycle itself will produce more CO2 as the temperature rises,no doubt there.
The big challenge is how to undo the propaganda that has asserted and established that warm is bad.
The 97% concensus BS needs to be undone. It’s eminently vulnerable. Go from there.
Pierre, Dr Kutscher may be correct, but this is not science; its political opinion about things. Your headline promised but the article did not deliver. Its just more rhetorical flailing.
More interesting would be some scientific research findings and environmental measurements that burn through the obsessive-compulsive group think of the climate change movement to expose some facts about the real causes of global warming. Why is CO2 the selected culprit? Why not H2O; which constitutes more than 60% of what they call GHG’s, and accordingly, is calculated to be doubling atmospheric temperature? What is really going on?
” … observations show a steady increase of the total water vapour column as well as a 30-year net increase in stratospheric water vapour.”
https://public.wmo.int/en/resources/bulletin/observing-water-vapour
Because that allows the UN control of the energy use that is the fundamental underpinning of all developed economies. Same difference for the coming attack on nitrogen footprint, whose compounds support the productive modern agriculture that has largely ended famine. The UN wants to control these key levers of energy and food supply globally, hence the 40 year conspiracy to frame CO2and nitrogen use as bad to excuse their taxing and wealth transfer to the 3rd World, based on partial pseudo science they paid to prove the selected problem.
Unfortunately their ecoonomics sucks. Its far better to get everyone up to fully developed level with max energy use and more productive agriculture by generating the largest surplusses than forcing everyone down to some regressive homogeneity of suffering sviet style. We do best developing solutions to pestilence, famine, war and natural disasters, and that is obviosuly less clear to people who live in countries who have made that transition than it is to those who have yet to, want to, and intend to.
A remark from Maurice Strong, who organized the first U.N. Earth Climate Summit (1992) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil revealed the real goal: “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrialized civilization to collapse.” This has been repeated many times by UN IPCC senior members. They are very blatant about their ideology, and those enforcing it are not worried about that while they can use the UN pseudo science to legitimise “saving the planet” responses that make them £Billions pa in subsidies, grants, carbon taxes, now Nitrogen taxes, etc, exploiting the climate change protection racket at the expense of the simple conned masses, by law. They never want it to stop, however much it ruins the economies of most of those paying for it.