The Climate Crusade: A Scientific Rebuttal

A Misguided Campaign

The current climate frenzy mirrors the medieval Crusades, driven by virtue signaling and misguided beliefs. While some claim to be doing "God's work," the reality is far from divine. As a scientist with extensive experience in climate research, I can assure you there is no climate emergency, nor will there be one. These crusades always end badly, causing harm and discrediting the cause.

Recent attempts to declare national climate emergencies, like the one proposed by Senator Sanders and Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez, are based on utter nonsense. The climate crisis they describe simply doesn't exist.

The fervor becomes even more concerning at the state level, as illustrated by a recent incident in Massachusetts where an official spoke of "breaking the will" of citizens to reduce emissions. Such extreme rhetoric reveals the crusade's true nature – a secular religion driven by money and power, not science.

CO2: Pollutant or Plant Food?

The demonization of CO2 is a central pillar of this climate narrative. However, CO2 is not a pollutant. We exhale it, plants thrive on it, and it's a crucial component of the Earth's ecosystem.

While real pollutants, like the smog seen in Shanghai, deserve our attention, CO2 is invisible, odorless, and tasteless. Harebrained schemes to limit CO2 emissions will only hinder efforts to combat actual pollution.

In fact, CO2 is beneficial. It's plant food. Higher CO2 levels promote plant growth, leading to a greener Earth, particularly in arid regions. This greening trend, observable from satellite data, showcases the positive impact of increased CO2.

The Flawed Science of Climate Alarmism

The climate alarm narrative relies on flawed computer models that overestimate warming. These models fail to accurately account for the complex interactions between greenhouse gases, water vapor, and clouds. The observed warming is significantly less than predicted, and this small warming is likely beneficial, leading to longer growing seasons.

The claim that doubling CO2 will lead to catastrophic warming is simply not supported by the physics of radiative transfer. The effect of increased CO2 on outgoing radiation is minimal and already largely saturated.

Furthermore, throughout Earth's history, CO2 levels have been far higher than they are today, and life flourished. Plants evolved in environments with much higher CO2 concentrations and would benefit from a return to those levels.

The Consensus Myth

The argument that "97% of scientists agree" is a misleading appeal to authority. Scientific truth is determined by evidence, not consensus. History is rife with examples of scientific consensus being overturned by new data and understanding, like the theory of continental drift.

The current climate narrative ignores inconvenient truths and relies on fear-mongering tactics to push a political agenda. We must resist this misguided crusade and embrace a scientifically sound approach to environmental stewardship.

Q&A with Dr. Happer

During a question and answer session, Dr. Happer addressed concerns about the environmental impact of renewable energy production, the complexities of sea level rise, and the role of solar activity in climate change. He emphasized the importance of considering all factors and not relying solely on simplistic narratives.

He also discussed the challenges of overcoming the pervasive marketing and perception surrounding climate change, which often overshadows the actual science. He urged individuals to critically evaluate the information presented to them and not be swayed by fear-mongering tactics.