Friday, January 04, 2008

Carbon Dioxide: Delicious and Nutritious!

No, not another Global Warming article!

I know, I know it's like beating a dead horse. Here's the deal... Climate change is real. The climate is always changing. It always will. The question is why does Al Gore and IPCC scientists automatically assume that the climate we had in the 60's, 70's and 80's was the "normal" or "right" climate? Well, they don't know it. These folks have an agenda that goes way beyond saving the polar bears.

Pursuing my initial question leads to another that is never answered in the media whenever this subject is broached. Why is it assumed that global warming is automatically bad?

Many scientists and historians have made the point of how mankind's lot improved greatly during the well documented Medieval Warming Period. Population soared because food production soared. The growing seasons were longer and fewer people perished during the shorter, milder winters. Remember that my claim is that the global warming scare mongers have an agenda? I'm fairly certain they are not thrilled by the thought of longer growing seasons and milder winters and a healthy, growing human population. In fact, there is ample evidence that far from evil intentions Gore and the scare mongers are in it for money and control. That is a topic for another day.

Dr. Arthur Robinson published an article on entitled "The Virtues of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" that just shoots holes in all of Al Gores specious and over the top claims regarding carbon dioxide. (Robinson is President and Research Professor of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.) Far from being a scary pollutant carbon dioxide is essential to all life on Earth. It is more dangerous to allow the scare mongers to re-classify this vital substance than it is do nothing about about it.

Robinson explains:

The three most important substances that make life possible are water, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. The primary structural and functional element in all living things is carbon. All carbon in protein, fat, carbohydrate, and the other organic molecules in living things is derived from atmospheric carbon dioxide. Without atmospheric carbon dioxide, life as we know it would not be possible. Plants inhale carbon dioxide and are thereby fertilized. When atmospheric carbon dioxide increases -- as it has by about 30% during the past century, plant life and the animal life that thrives upon it are also increased. The annual increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide attributable to human activities -- primarily the burning of coal, oil, and natural gas -- is about 1 part in 10,000 of that contained in the oceans and biosphere -- a contribution of ultimately negligible consequence.

Regarding the increasing levels of man-caused carbon dioxide in the atmosphere having a cause and effect relationship to the global greenhouse it has been explained to me like this: Picture a window with a shade pulled down to block the incoming light. If you add a second, and then a third shade you will block more light. Adding subsequent shades will have an exponentially smaller and smaller effect until no more light can be blocked. It will not get any darker no matter how many shades you add. As such, this is how it is with carbon dioxide - it will not ultimately increase the greenhouse effect beyond a certain point.

There is also good evidence that the oceans can and will absorb additional carbon dioxide just as it has happened for millennia after huge volcanic eruptions and long before SUV's. There is just so much we don't know about global climate change and the literally thousands of inputs both internal and external. The computer climate modelers are inadequate to predict the future. Enough people have tested the models against the past and have found them wanting that we shouldn't allow them to be used as an impetuous for policy and action.

Read Dr. Robinson's article - it is very level headed and illuminating. Dr. Robinson pulls up all the window shades to allow the light back in on this subject.