Many in the West are convinced that there is an urgent climate crisis.In an effort to help, I offer below a handy climate quiz and suggest some useful sources of rational information.
I have been racking my brains trying to figure out how to communicate with those many people who are becoming suspicious of the Climate Crisis fake narrative. It is the key globalist control narrative. It is designed to exploit people’s desire to do good in the world. Its role is to make them agree that humanity is bad. Everyone must surrender their liberty, wealth and indeed lives to their wealthy, psychopathic, globalist would-be overlords.
It is psychologically tricky to tackle the truth of the matter without being on the receiving end of people’s anger at having been duped. The brighter the person, the angrier he may become. Before you know it, conversations can degenerate into ‘surely you can’t be a climate denier’ or ‘you can’t deny temperatures are rising’, responses which are both irrelevant and unhelpful. It is not clear to struggling believers themselves what the problem is supposed to be.
So, I came up with this short Quiz as a way to cast light on the Climate Crisis meme:
1) Is the world warmer, or may it soon be warmer, than it ever has been?
2) Is the proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere higher, or may it soon be higher, than it ever has been?
3) What is the proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
4) What percentage decline in North America’s population of polar bears has occurred since the 1960s?
5) If I invented a machine which immediately sucked all of the Carbon Dioxide out of the atmosphere, would you want me to press its start button?
6) What is most likely going to be the climate here in Southeast England in 10,000 years?
I welcome suggestions for improvements to these questions. I don’t quite know how to get at the heart of the lie as clearly and painlessly as possible. People confused by years of military grade propaganda about climate can understandably be as hard to help as those whose reason was subverted by the similar campaign around covid.
But, if I write the Quiz answers here, those whose safe space, or indeed employment, depends on the misdirection and outright lying behind the Climate Crisis scam, will say: ‘What are you, a credentialled Professor of Climate? I don’t have to take you seriously,”
If, instead, people google the answers to the questions themselves, they may find information that is ‘authoritative’ to them in a way that freelance commentators like me might not be. So, I ask you to look up the answers, while I briefly talk about something else. You may be surprised at what you find. It might be fun to ask your friends what they think the answers should be? (I supply my answers at the bottom of this post.)
TWO BOOKS UNDERMINING THE CLIMATE CRISIS NARRATIVE
This other thing is to talk about are two publications that a seeker after truth in the forest of fibs should welcome as a guide to the truth. They are both only a click away on Amazon.
The first is ‘Climate, All Is Well, All Will Be Well’.
It is a Bruges Group publication written by Jeremy Nieboer. It covers the known science, including how rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide would be expected to affect global temperatures. The answer is not very much. The worst case is that a doubling in carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere would result in a 1 to 2 degrees warming. So southern England’s climate, a century in the future, might be more like that of the South of France. Did I say worst case? I meant best case, obviously, because cold kills more than heat, and because who wouldn’t want less wintry weather.
And then the book puts our current climate into context by explaining the magnitude of multiple overlapping cycles of change over thousands, millions or hundreds of millions of years. And lastly it explains how, through a mixture of selective choice of evidence, statistical and scientific incompetence and downright lying, the climate story has been put together and promulgated in a scary enough form to mislead so many otherwise rational people.
The second publication is one I have discussed before; environmentalist Patrick Moore’s ‘Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom’. This is a general review of fake narratives. It explains that the ideal threat of doom for panic mongers is something that is invisible, for example viruses, carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse’ gases, or the immense patch of floating plastic in the Pacific visible from space (which isn’t visible, has never been photographed, and seems not to exist). Ideally, scary threats of doom should be as inaccessible as possible so normal people have to take the media’s word on trust, or not. Examples include deadly diseases which somehow can’t fight their way out of the African jungle or a Brazilian town, as well as our elusive Pacific plastic patch.
Clearly the climate crisis and covid are both fine examples of the panic monger’s art.
So too may Russia be, groaning under the evil Putin monster, I would add. It is inaccessible, especially now the West has attempted to isolate it with sanctions. Few Europeans, and fewer Americans, have been to Russia. It’s a far-away place, ideal for demonisation. The man in the street cannot be expected to know that Russia is no longer the Soviet Union nor the globalist and oligarch exploited mess it became in the 1990s. Instead, it turns out to be a surprisingly open, prosperous, resilient and self-sufficient place. Who knew? Well, not our rapacious but clueless warmongering western ‘elites’ and their legacy media lackeys.
THE QUIZ ANSWERS
Is the world warmer, or may it soon be warmer, than it ever has been?
No. The world has been up to around ten degrees warmer for much of the past few hundred million years. For long periods carbon dioxide levels varied inversely with temperature – which is not what doomsters would lead you to expect. We are currently in a somewhat warmer interglacial sandwiched between two glaciations (previously known as ice ages) which would indeed be a lot colder. But earlier in this interglacial, in the time of the green Sahara, temperatures were higher than now, as they were in the Roman and Medieval warm periods. Warming between 1850 and the 1930s looks like a cyclical upswing after the cold of the Maunder Minimum ‘Little Ice Age’ from roughly 1600 to 1800.
Is the proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere higher, or may it soon be higher, than it ever has been?
No. Atmospheric carbon dioxide has generally been much more abundant than it is now. It was up to seven or eight times current levels over the long sweep of hundreds of millions of years. However, sea creatures have been steadily incorporating (‘sequestering’) carbon dioxide to make their shells, leading to a long-term decline in carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. It was still around three or four times current levels at the end of the dinosaurs’ reign on Earth, sixty or so million years ago.
What is the proportion of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?
Just 0.04%. The Climate Crisis is sooo serious that climate warriors should know this answer. Only generally they don’t, and they assume it is much, much greater.
What percentage decline in North America’s population of polar bears has occurred since the 1960s?
The number of polar bears in North America has tripled since the 1960s.
If I invented a machine which immediately sucked all of the carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, would you want me to press its start button?
No. Because we would all be dead soon after the button was pressed. It is a tribute to one and a half centuries of compulsory ‘education’ that supposedly well-informed people can fall for this question, and it is quite fun watching it happen.
My very knowledgeable readers will be aware that plants, and the animals that eat plants, including us, depend on photosynthesis. The sun’s energy is used by plants to combine water and carbon dioxide into, basically, food. No carbon dioxide, no food. All dead.
The recent increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide from around 300 parts per million before industrialisation to around 400 parts now has undeniably greened the planet and raised food production greatly. Perhaps we should burn some more coal. Not to worry. The rest of the world will be doing just that for years to come. Kind of makes one wonder what is the point of crippling Western societies in order to reduce our carbon dioxide ‘emissions’.
For what it is worth, there is a theory that below 250 parts per million of carbon dioxide, plants would give up and die – so bring on the hydrocarbon burners!
Lastly, of course, we would freeze if we had not already starved. As the first book discussed above explains, future increments of carbon dioxide will have little, and perhaps eventually no, warming effect. But getting rid of all of it entirely would take global temperatures down towards freezing. It’s all explained in the same book. It’s ‘The Science’.
What is most likely going to be the climate of in Southeast England in 10,000 years?
Tundra. The current warm interglacial period encompasses humanity’s entire history. Such periods don’t generally last as much as 20,000 years and we have had 10,000 good years since the ice sheets retreated. The chances are that England will be uninhabitable tundra. Scotland will all be under ice, again. Unfortunately, the glaciations or ‘ice ages’ typically last many tens of thousands of years.
Just what is the problem or ‘Crisis’ supposed to be? The Earth is not particularly warm or abundant in atmospheric carbon dioxide at the moment. Even a doubling in atmospheric carbon dioxide, assuming humans could achieve such a thing, which is not certain, would have only a minor warming effect. But it would benefit humanity (and forests and wildlife etc) hugely. Do you think carbon dioxide is a ‘pollutant’ rather than essential to all life? Do you know why the Climate Crisis is supposed to be a big deal. Like so many equally well- meaning people, have you been misled by those who should not be trusted?
Comments