Challenging Net Zero with Science: Lindzen-Happer-CO2 Coalition Paper Released - Let me file this one under a giant manila envelope labeled "NO FUCKING SHIT, SHERLOCK."

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Net Zero Plans Are Dangerous and Unsupported by Science and the Scientific Method

Net Zero initiatives of governments and private organizations are scientifically invalid and will lead to worldwide impoverishment and starvation if implemented, according to a paper published by the CO2 Coalition. The 46-page paper details how the objectives of Net Zero to eliminate the use of fossil fuels and the emissions of greenhouse gases are based on analytical methods that violate fundamental tenets of the scientific method which originated more than 300 years ago.

“Reliable scientific knowledge is determined by the scientific method, where theoretical predictions are validated by observations or rejected by failing to do so,” say the paper’s authors – two renowned physicists and a geologist of more than 40 years. “Agreement with observations is the measure of scientific truth,” continues the paper. “Scientific progress proceeds by the interplay of theory and observation. Theory explains observations and makes predictions of what will be observed in the future. Observations anchor understanding and weed out theories that don’t work.” The paper predicts global starvation if fossil fuels are eliminated. At risk in coming decades would be half of the world’s 8.5 billion to 10 billion people who are fed by crops grown with fertilizers derived from fossil fuels. Listed as an example of Net Zero’s potential consequences is the economic and social calamity of Sri Lanka which had banned the use of fertilizers and pesticides made from fossil fuels.

“The recent experience in Sri Lanka provides a red alert. The world has just witnessed the collapse of the once bountiful agricultural sector of Sri Lanka as a result of government restrictions on mineral fertilizer,” the paper says. The paper says that 600 million years of geological evidence shows that CO2 levels are near a record low and that atmospheric increases of the gas follow warming periods rather than precede them. These data “are good enough to demolish the argument that atmospheric CO2 concentrations control Earth’s climate and the theory that fossil fuels and CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming. They will not.”

The paper’s authors are Dr. William Happer, Professor of Physics, Emeritus, Princeton University; Dr. Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Gregory Wrightstone, a geologist and executive director of the CO2 Coalition. The paper says Net Zero regulations and actions are scientifically invalid because they:

  • Fabricate data or omit data that contradict their conclusions. Net Zero proponents regularly report that extreme weather is more severe and frequent because of climate change while the evidence shows no increase – and, in some cases, a decrease – in such events.
  • Rely on computer models that do not work. An analysis of 102 computer models used by Net Zero proponents found that 101 of them had failed to match real-world observations. “Simply stated, the (computer) model essential to every government Net Zero regulation, action and the trillions of dollars subsidizing renewables and electric cars, trucks, home heating, appliances and many other products do not work,” said the paper.
  • Rely on findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that are government opinions, not science. The paper says that the conclusions of IPCC scientists that contradict the narrative of catastrophic global warming from fossil fuels are rewritten by government bureaucrats for public reports to support the false narrative of Net Zero proponents.
  • Omit the extraordinary social benefits of CO2 and fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide, including that from the burning of fossil fuels, serves as plant food that increases crop production and enables the feeding of more people. CO2, as well as the greenhouse gases of methane and nitrous oxide, help to keep Earth at temperatures conducive to life; without them, people would suffer. Fossil fuels are economical and abundant sources of energy necessary for modern societies and are critical feedstocks for fertilizers and pesticides that support the lives of billions of people.
  • Omit the disastrous consequences of reducing fossil fuels and CO2 emissions to Net Zero. “It cannot be overemphasized that eliminating fossil fuels and implementing Net Zero policies and actions mean the elimination of fossil fuel-derived nitrogen fertilizers and pesticides that will result in about half the world’s population not having enough food to eat,” says the paper.
  • Reject the science that demonstrates there is no risk of catastrophic global warming caused by fossil fuels and CO2. “We are not aware of any reliable science that supports the National Climate Assessment’s or others’ theory that fossil fuels and CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming,” said the paper’s authors, “We have written extensively on this issue for decades.”
The Arlington-based CO2 Coalition is a nonprofit organization of more than 100 scientists and researchers engaged in educating the public and policymakers on the benefits of carbon dioxide and on the role of the gas in climate dynamics.
___________________________________________________________________
PDF of the paper is attached. Good that they're calling it out, but at the same time, this will be swiftly ignored by TPTB.
 

Archivos adjuntos

Climate change is the perfect cover for destructive development practices and get out of jail card for corporations. A company can do what it wants as long as it does lip serve and pays a small indulgence to church of climate change. Look at Florida and the recent destructive hurricane, the media and Democrats went on and on about how climate change was to blame. Not the history of destructive Hurricanes, most severe damage was in areas on barrier islands and shorelines that have been overdeveloped and had mangrove forest before. Strangely climate change super-storms skipped over area with intact mangrove forest with severe damage. Same thing in Califonria, overdevelop on hillsides, fragile cliffs and arroyos. Destroy native vegetation that stabilized these zones and replace them with non-native trees from Spain and the Mediterranean that are more acceptable to forest fire when they reach peak growth. Blame climate change for forest fires and flooding afterwards.

MangroveEffectsOnSurgeLevel.jpg
 
Última edición:
I'm not surprised.
When the goverment is saying that "The world will be on fire by 2040" and then proceeds to let China and India pollute anyway and just goes for carbon taxes, you can smell the bullshit from even in India.

If it was real, it wouldn't be confronted by "okey bro lets tax the shit out of the people, that will work."
 
Overdevelopment of deserts in Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico for 30 years to install suburb after suburb of McMansions for leftist carpetbaggers looking to escape CA taxes? Including HOA covenants that everyone gets fined if they don't grow a nice green lawn year-round? or has a dirty car in the driveway?

Why, it's OBVIOUSLY climate change that caused the rivers to dry up!
 
I'll trust that environmentalists actually care about the environment when they start backing nuclear power.

Until then, I'll just assume that alarmism is just a cover to push for policies, policies that just so happen to be things they wanted to implement in the first place as hard leftists. Crazy coincidence!

There's a good term for them: watermelons. Green on the outside, red on the inside.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo