As time goes on and we move closer to the Carbon Tax /ETS, more and more people are educating themselves about the phenomenon known
as Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) and the effects of CO2 emissions on our atmosphere.
For instance it is now common knowledge that,
1. Total amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is 0.039% or 0.00039
2. 97% of CO2 emissions come from the ecosystems, i.e. nature itself, oceans, land, vegetation etc.
3. 3% of CO2 emissions are manmade.
Thanks to the scare tactics of Al gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the last decade we have been led to believe that manmade CO2 emissions into the atmosphere where causing global warming which would lead to a runaway greenhouse effect and the destruction of the Earth as we know it, we were also told that the science was settled on this issue.
Al Gore used the now very famous hockey stick curve to correlate the rising of the Earth’s average mean temperature with the rise in CO2 emissions, This graph is the Hockey Stick Graph created by geophysicist Michael Mann it’s also known as MBH98.
This was a deception because as countless scientific papers prove the temperature drives CO2 emissions in our atmosphere and not the other way around, as the Earth warms up more and more CO2 is released into the atmosphere from the ecosystems like the oceans and land masses alike.
The IPCC has now removed Michael Mann’s hockey stick graph from its papers because it was an embarrassment when many global warming skeptics and historians picked up on its omission of the medieval warming period and the little ice age.
The IPCC has also been pulled up on the quotations it made about glaciers disappearing by 2035, which now it admits was wrong and put it down to a typo, would they have said anything if it wasn’t pointed out?
The only evidence we have that CO2 is driving global warming and may create a runaway greenhouse effect is the IPCC’s Global Circulation Models (GCM), i.e. computer models.
Many scientists have pointed out that these computer models are just not sophisticated enough to determine future climate change on Earth, and many have pointed out that the data that is entered at the coal face is not accurate with claims that the effects of CO2 are amplified 40 fold in comparison to the effects of the sun.
Not to mention the IPCC’s neglect of the albedo affects of the clouds and cosmic ray influence therefore as with all computer models the end result is only as good as the information being fed into the computer, therefore it stands to reason garbage in garbage out.