Obama administration scientist says climate ‘emergency’ is based on fallacy

[rangerrebew]

 Obama administration scientist says climate ‘emergency’ is based on fallacy

By Dr. Steven E. Koonin

April 24, 2021 | 10:23am | Updated
 

‘The Science,” we’re told, is settled. How many times have you heard it?

Humans have broken the earth’s climate. Temperatures are rising, sea level is surging, ice is disappearing, and heat waves, storms, droughts, floods, and wildfires are an ever-worsening scourge on the world. Greenhouse gas emissions are causing all of this. And unless they’re eliminated promptly by radical changes to society and its energy systems, “The Science” says Earth is doomed.

Yes, it’s true that the globe is warming, and that humans are exerting a warming influence upon it. But beyond that — to paraphrase the classic movie “The Princess Bride” — “I do not think ‘The Science’ says what you think it says.”

https://nypost.com/2021/04/24/obama-admin-scientist-says-climate-emergency-is-based-on-fallacy/

[BassWrangler]

This is a great article. I highly recommend people read it in its entirety.

[thackney]

I do not understand how releasing CO2 into the atmosphere will "doom" the planet.

That carbon got into fossil fuels by being captured out of the atmosphere. 

If it did not doom the planet the first time, why would it the second?

[GtHawk]

I do not understand how releasing CO2 into the atmosphere will "doom" the planet.

That carbon got into fossil fuels by being captured out of the atmosphere. 

If it did not doom the planet the first time, why would it the second?

Well, because..........because............your racist!

[BassWrangler]

I do not understand how releasing CO2 into the atmosphere will "doom" the planet.

That carbon got into fossil fuels by being captured out of the atmosphere. 

If it did not doom the planet the first time, why would it the second?

I'm not a believer in climate alarmism, but I'll bite. During those times when the CO2 was really high, was the climate hospitable for humans?

[thackney]

I'm not a believer in climate alarmism, but I'll bite. During those times when the CO2 was really high, was the climate hospitable for humans?

How hot was it at that time and how did the sun cycles factor into that?

I believe the Global Warming crowd is claiming a runaway greenhouse effect that cannot be recovered.

[goatprairie]

How hot was it at that time and how did the sun cycles factor into that?

I believe the Global Warming crowd is claiming a runaway greenhouse effect that cannot be recovered.

IIRC the earth has been much warmer in the past, many millions of years ago. If that is true, and it appears to be true, then why wasn't the planet destroyed?
Remember, the "experts" are claiming an increase of five degrees or so on average will doom the planet.
Then why wasn't the planet destroyed when the average temperature was much warmer?
And they still haven't explained  the warming period of about one thousand years ago when Greenland was a lot warmer and they cultivated grapes. They've tried to claim that that the warming only extended to Greenland. How the heck could the warming have only extended to Greenland? And how could the warming have lasted for 400 years before it cooled again?
A very large part of northern hemisphere must have been a lot warmer. Why aren't there any records of coastal cities in Europe being flooded from the warming?
The "experts" are hiding a lot of info that harms their agenda.

[thackney]

IIRC the earth has been much warmer in the past, many millions of years ago.

Some of the time.  Much of earth history is in ice ages.

If that is true, and it appears to be true, then why wasn't the planet destroyed?

Exactly.

Remember, the "experts" are claiming an increase of five degrees or so on average will doom the planet.
Then why wasn't the planet destroyed when the average temperature was much warmer?
And they still haven't explained  the warming period of about one thousand years ago when Greenland was a lot warmer and they cultivated grapes. They've tried to claim that that the warming only extended to Greenland. How the heck could the warming have only extended to Greenland? And how could the warming have lasted for 400 years before it cooled again?
A very large part of northern hemisphere must have been a lot warmer. Why aren't there any records of coastal cities in Europe being flooded from the warming?
The "experts" are hiding a lot of info that harms their agenda.

Very true.