Unjoining CO2, climate and ecocide

Modelers have raised concern about the acidification of the oceans and recent measurements of ocean pH suggest that mean pH may be ever so slightly decreasing (~0.01 pH units). However, ocean pH can vary by whole pH units from day to day and according to sea depth, latitude and currents.

The size of the Antarctic sea ice shelf varies according to the seasons: its maximum size is currently increasing, a fact rarely mentioned by the IPCC or anthropogenic climate change proponents. The increase in area of the Antarctic ice shelf in 2015 is greater than the decrease in the arctic ice shelf area, which has not decreased in the last several years despite the man-made accelerated rise in CO2.

That there have been more cyclonic events in the last 10 years compared to the previous 100 years, is a false statement. Cyclonic event intensities and landfalls have been recorded for many years, and are relatively easy to define, but the latest report from the IPCC states that there has been no discernible increase.

Climate science is politicized.

The premier global disseminator of climate science is the IPCC, a United Nations body. The IPCC's charter is to examine human-induced (anthropogenic) climate effects. It does not have a remit to investigate other causes of climate change, climate warming or cooling. Arguably the excessive focus on human-induced climate effects, in particular CO2, has skewed the overall climate science picture.

Some of the original mean temperature source data can no longer be viewed. There are several global temperature records but they are not all of equal quality due in particular to sampling biases and manipulation of the raw data. The satellite records (UAH and RSS) are the least affected by uneven sampling. The US NCDC and GISS surface records have been corrupted by data-cleaning manipulations since 2008. These changes cannot be independently validated and critically the source data can no longer be viewed. I would view the UK HadCRUT surface record as the most reliable surface temperature record.

The USA, which is the leading anthropogenic alarmist climate change proponent, has a geopolitical imperative to be independent of Middle Eastern and Russian oil and natural gas. It has a domestic energy policy to swap coal for natural gas. The policy is very likely destructive to the subterranean water aquifers but gets a green light because it releases less CO2. The USA has no intention of harming its economy.

The construct of man-made global warming has become a quasi-religious belief for many people. The urgency and severity of the perceived problem has disappointingly emerged as a reason to shut down opposing views, to justify misrepresentation of data (e.g. Mann's hockey stick or the East Anglia climategate email scandal), publication biases, scientific falsehoods (e.g. Director of NASA Gavin Schmidt's uncorrected scientific nonsense press release that "2014 was the warmest yet"by 0.02 +/- 0.04 °C). Subordination of ideas for the greater good was a feature of Stalinist Russia. It is also a feature of much of our news media. Dissenters such as prominent weatherman Philippe Verdier are sacked for being climate sceptics (2 November 2015). Less than 90 years ago, the advocates for some of the worst aspects of Stalin's Russia included literary giants such as George Bernard Shaw and Andre Gide, and film stars such as Charlie Chaplin. Few would dispute that they turned out to be mistaken in these particular views. While it does not follow that the current bevy of opinion leaders, film stars, politicians and scientific commentators in the leftist media, will also be so wrong about climate change, it behoves all of these people, scientists and non-scientists, to be more critical of their positions.

Alarmist man-made climate change doctrines are being taught in our schools. They are now accepted uncritically by large sections of the voting community as well as non-voting professional associations and colleges that benefit from ill-informed policies that are connecting with the growing environmental green movement. Disagreement or debate is discouraged by politically loaded pejorative labels such as 'denier', or 'flat-earther'.

CO2 is the carbon substrate for photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is how plants grow, and produces oxygen vital for life. The optimal CO2 concentration in a horticultural greenhouse is 1500-2000 ppm, which is 4x the current ambient CO2 concentration. CO2 is a building block of life on the Earth and in the Sea. The measured net green house gas effect of CO2 on temperatures is at least several-fold less than the alarming IPCC modelling, however, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) declared CO2 a pollutant in 2009. I believe that the predominant reason for this categorisation was political in order to outmanoeuvre a hostile US Congress. The CO2 endangerment finding gave EPA the power to regulate this gas even though the Congress would not pass laws to address man-made climate change.

The sheer volume of money associated with climate science is corrupting.

Climate change science devours money. Much of the money is spent on subsidies for either immature technologies or for mature technologies that cannot currently compete with burning fossil fuel for energy. There are rent-seekers whose livelihoods depend on these dollars. These include think-tanks on climate change policy, plantation schemes, and professional lobby groups which can tap into scientific, engineering, social and health aspects of the climate science budget. In the US, the total climate change spend from 2008-2012 was $68 billion dollars, but less than one quarter went to climate or renewable energy research programs.