Barbara Samardich: Population, not global warming more of a concern
We constantly see across all the media that “the science is in” regarding global warming. But contrary to this widespread belief, there are many notable scientists that disagree. Because of the rush to legitimize “Cap and Trade” by our various state and federal authorities, you rarely see any discourse debunking the folly of CO2 being an atmospheric poison or being the chief cause of the so called global warming catastrophe.
The brilliant scientist — Istvan Marko — passed away earlier this year. He was a professor and researcher in organic chemistry at the Universite’ Catholique de Louvain (Belgium’s largest French speaking university). I encourage those interested in the global warming issue to read his interview with French journalist Gregoire Canlorbe.
The major points covered were as follows:
1. CO2 is not and never has been a poison.
2. Plants love CO2. That’s why the planet is greening.
3. There have been periods where the CO2 concentration was many times higher than now. Life thrived.
4. Animals need CO2 too. And by the way, forests are not the ‘lungs of the earth.’
5. It is not true that CO2 has a major greenhouse effect. Reports of its influence have been exaggerated.
6. Climate change is natural.
7. Don’t worry about shrinking glaciers. We’ve been here before…
8. Sea level rise is normal.
9. The polar ice caps are fine too…
10. Extreme weather events are actually decreasing.
11. Claims by alarmist ‘experts’ that 2016 was the hottest year ever are pure balderdash.
12. No … climate change has not led to an increase in tropical diseases.
If any of these points are of interest to you, Google his name and the interview can be read where each of these 12 points are extrapolated upon. It is very disturbing to me that global warming “deniers” are treated as dolts who ought to be put in jail. Where is our freedom of speech?
I ask you if you have ever heard a debate on this issue with credible people from both sides? Do you find it disturbing that most of the supposed scientists claiming global warming are receiving federal grants or are in some way part of a government funded institution such as NASA?
Why do we not hear about the amount of computer data skewed to fit the global warming model? (See the East Anglia University data scandal) How does “Cap and Trade” do anything to improve the environment? If a polluting company can simply trade for credits from a non-polluting company, how does this help the environment?
Why have people, such as Al Gore, continued to benefit from Cap and Trade? Many years ago, Mr. Gore founded “Generation Investment Management Company,” which was solely set up to capitalize on the Cap and Trade regulations.
If we are truly entering a “Sixth Extinction Event,” it is more likely that it will be due to over-population than growing CO2 levels.
Barbara Samardich lives in Nevada City.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.