12 Comments
User's avatar
Kenneth Kaminski's avatar

Sweet! More good news and information regarding the climate hoax that is literally destroying the world’s economy. Thank God that Trump got elected and is bringing in the right people to change course. 🙏🙏🙏

Expand full comment
Al Christie's avatar

"This (CO2 warming) conventional wisdom has been questioned over the last decade by impeccably credentialed scientists who have undertaken actual science – not political science – to contradict this primary assumption underlying the AGW belief system."

Great article, but I'm getting so I hate acronyms, unless they're spelled out at least once. What is "AGW"? Awful Global Warming? - just having to guess, based on context...

Expand full comment
Thomas J Shepstone's avatar

Anthropogenic or human-caused global warming.

Expand full comment
Ann L. Klieves's avatar

One of many good articles that you post Mr Shepstone. We always say if assumptions are incorrect the end result will be incorrect.We all know CO2 is the life line of the planet.These climate con morons only used this to get subsidies, which they put in their dark pockets!! I am the Co2 speaker at the meetings I go to.So all this extra Information will be used to educate the public, especially ones that did not learn Photosynthesis in Grade School!! HA

Expand full comment
Scott Snell's avatar

This is the Big Lie of climate alarmism, upon which the entire edifice of Big Green is built. If we can dispel that untruth, the whole thing comes tumbling down.

Of course with so many careers, so much power, and so much money on the line the resistance is going to be ruthless, and the pushback brutal.

It's really pretty simple: CO2 absorbs strongly only in one relevant OLR wavelength, around 15 microns. Water vapor also absorbs at this wavelength but not so efficiently. This effect is visible at very low concentrations, so that by the time you get up to 200 ppm, you have gobbled up almost all the available OLR at that wavelength. Adding more CO2 is like adding another layer of curtains on a window that already blocks most of the light.

At least two other papers by reputable scientists in reputable publications have confirmed the earlier findings.

Without enough CO2 in the atmosphere, life doesn't happen. Years from now, after the spell is finally broken, people will wonder what the hell happened that we got so wound up about this essential trace gas.

Expand full comment
Ann L. Klieves's avatar

Yes Scott, you are so correct.Like adding another layer of curtains On a window that already blocks the light!!

Expand full comment
Jeff Chestnut's avatar

I ❤️ CO2!

So do my plants, trees, and my food loves to eat plants nourished by CO2.

Learn more about CO2:

https://co2coalition.org

Expand full comment
AYRE DAVID's avatar

Over a hundred years ago a theory was put forward proposing that a greenhous got warm because the reradiated heat from the ground was trapped by the greenhouse glass as it was opaque to low frequency IR. This was taught at schools and probably still is. But no-one has bothered to check this, or if they have, no-one has listened. See www.independentclimate science.co.uk to see an experiment that anyone can do which shows that if you replace the greenhouse glass with a glass that is transparent to all wavelengths of light (and heat) the greenhouse actually gets warmer than with the greenhouse glass.

If CO2 works in the same way, then it will have a slight cooling effect during the day, and prevent the Earth cooling too much at night, though this effect is very small.

Expand full comment
Thomas J Shepstone's avatar

Nice!

Expand full comment
Stephen Schwarz's avatar

The Supreme Court endorsed the USEPA endangerment finding in a landmark case, Massachusetts v. USEPA, in 2007. This is the case that must be reversed if we are to return sane environmental policies. I believe, given the current makeup of SCOTUS, and given scientific advances since 2007, such reversal is possible today.

Congress, of course, could still regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act. However such regulation would be subject to the normal give and take of the legislative process. I believe we would end up with much more reasonable regulations this way.

Expand full comment
William Rickards's avatar

Irrefutable fact. CO2 is plant food and produces the oxygen we breath, through photosynthesis.

Expand full comment
David Winterflood's avatar

Thanks.

Expand full comment