Why is man made global warming a hoax? The answer lies within simple logic patterns, you don't need an advanced degree to understand it. Anyone who tries to confuse you with long, jargon filled explanations doesn't know what they're talking about. As Einstein said:"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." That explains the vast majority of our liberal friends who 'believe'.
Alright, on to the meat and potatoes. CO2 is the devil, according to the AGW crowd. CO2 is 0.038% of our atmosphere, that tiny little sliver in the pie graph is to blame for most of the warming, or so they say. That little sliver represents about 380 parts per million of our atmosphere. So every time you breathe in the fresh air, you're breathing in 380 parts CO2 and 999,620 parts everything else. But let's look a little closer.
That little sliver, which is to blame for all of our woes, where does it come from? Obviously, it's evil human beings, right? Wrong. 96% of that little sliver comes from natural sources (mostly the ocean) the remaining 4% comes from man. So, every breath you take is 15.2 parts man made CO2, 364.8 parts natural CO2, and 999,620 parts everything else.
Alright, so we've established how little of our atmosphere is CO2 and how little of that CO2 is man made. However, as they say in pharmacology: 'it's the dose that makes the poison.' So maybe that dastardly CO2 is just so bad that a small increase would have majorly bad effects on our fragile planets temperature. That would hold their whole argument together, I mean, if every 10 ppm raised the temperature 1C, our having raised it 1.5C could be cause for alarm, couldn't it?
Well, unfortunately the AGW proponents run into yet another wall here. See, the warming effects of CO2 are well established. For every doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere the temperature will raise about 1 to 1.2 degrees centigrade. So, we have ~400ppm CO2 currently. If we want to raise our temperature 1C, we have to hit ~800ppm. Man is currently only responsible for 15.2ppm. That means, man would have to increase their CO2 output by about 2500%, just to warm the earth 1 degree. Could you drive your car 25 times the amount you do right now?
So why do the AGW proponents claim we are going to have massive temperature rises? They invented what they call feedback mechanisms, meaning that the earth will react to the changes in atmosphere which will cause it to raise faster than just the established CO2 rate. Seems plausible, right? I mean, the ecosystem is constantly changing and adapting to new players and new strategies employed by those players, so why not CO2? Well, simply put, it just hasn't happened. They estimated that these feedback mechanisms would result in a 3-5C change for a doubling of CO2.
Since 1880, the global temperatures have increased 0.85C according to UCAR. In 1880 the amount of CO2 in the Atmosphere was ~280PPM. This means for a CO2 increase of about 45% (120ppm) we saw a 70% realization of the 1.2C. This means there are feedback mechanisms, but their results are only marginal. At a full doubling of CO2 we would see a 1.6-1.7C change, no where near the 3-5C change that the AGW crowd needs to justify their catastrophic views.
Moreover, Mankind is only responsible for a total of 15.2 ppm, the earth is to blame for the other 384.8 ppm. If you'd like to let the earth know that it should stop producing so much CO2, be my guest, but I doubt it will listen. Much like it didn't listen millions of years ago when CO2 levels in the atmosphere were much higher than they are now.
So there you have it, even though climates do change and chemicals in the air can help it change, it's hardly us lowly human beings that are causing the change. It's really quite funny to think that mankind believes it's powerful enough to change the earth. It's like thinking that if we all jumped at the same time we could knock it out of it's orbital path. It's ludacris.#globalwarming #hoax