Is There a Climate Crisis? - Part 1

The difference between pollution and climate change

We see, hear and read a lot about a “human-caused climate crisis that is causing imminent destruction of the planet.”

Trillions of dollars are being invested in “green” programs to “fight the climate crisis.”

The US government is mortgaging the economic future of the nation and future generations by spending insanely and wastefully on dubious climate and green programs.

Other nations are following suit, although not quite as insanely.

In doing so, the US, UK, Canada, many European nations, Australia and New Zealand are committing economic suicide by slashing the use of fossil fuels, fertilizers and even livestock which are blamed for causing the “climate crisis.”

This is also putting hundreds of millions of lives at risk.

Energy and food are the two most important life and economic lifebloods of these and all other nations of the world. And fossil fuels are the #1 driver of energy. So if the use of fossil fuels is slashed before there are viable alternatives available to take their place - which we don’t have at this time - then nations’ economies will be crippled, which in turn would have disastrous and destructive health and living standard consequences to hundreds of millions or even billions of people.

If livestock are killed off and meat severely limited or possibly banned (as is actually occurring or seriously considered by many governments, impossible to believe that might be), then the majority of the world’s population will be forced to eat lab-made and/or GMO and/or insect-based food. As will be discussed in a later Part of this series, these are dangerous to humans.

But what is the EXACT condition and situation with respect to climate? Is there a problem, situation and emergency?

There isn’t a black-and-white YES or NO answer to this question. There are actually three separate issues and factors intertwined in this question:

POLLUTION

CHANGES IN CLIMATE

the HUMAN FACTOR.

POLLUTION

Pollution is a serious problem in the world. Toxins and carcinogens dumped into the soil, water and air cause all sorts of harmful effects:

Medical conditions and diseases such as cancers and blood disorders

Depletion of nutrients in soil, which results in nutrient deficiencies in food

Lower-quality or toxic air and water, the two most important things life needs to live.

So pollutants are a serious, life-threatening condition which must be handled and resolved.

The technology exists to reduce pollutants from current energy-production systems to a bare minimum or even zero!

What is needed is the will and decision to USE that technology - not ban the use of those things that create pollution such as coal- or oil-powered generators and plants. We HAVE the technology to keep the air, soil and water clean and fresh of pollutants from existing energy generation systems. All we have to do is install and use that technology.

We can have our cake and eat it, too.

We can keep our economies humming with fossil fuel-driven systems like coal and oil while employing technologies to absorb and clean the resulting pollutants, preventing them from entering soil, air and water.

We can grow all the food and livestock we want without their by-products polluting our air and water, if existing technologies to clean up those by-products are used.

Nuclear power is an enormously beneficial, clean and unlimited supply of energy. It has been falsely discredited over the years, to the end result that nuclear plants are being shut down and very few new ones being built. The ONLY downside to nuclear power is the resulting nuclear waste. There’s a simple solution - shoot the stuff into the sun.

“Modern reactors, with negative reactivity coefficients, are intrinsically safe.”  - Dr. Matthew Wielicki

Not a single person has been killed from the meltdown of a modern nuclear reactor...

Basic, common-sense environmentalism means keeping pollutants out of the environment. I agree with this completely, always have. Not tree-hugging, over-the-top, hysterical, radical extremist environmentalism, but rational, common-sense, pollution-free environmental policies and technology.

Pollution doesn't cause climate change, however. As bad as it is, the climate isn’t changing because of pollution.

CHANGES IN CLIMATE

You might have heard that 97% of scientists agree on human-driven climate change. You may also have heard that those who don’t buy into the climate-apocalypse mantra are science-deniers.

The “97% consensus” is not only a lie, it’s an outrageous and nonsensical lie. The idea that 97% of climate scientists would agree on such an unproven and hypothetical theory is pure gaslighting propaganda from those who profit enormously from climate crisis programs.

Let’s step back and take a look at the entire picture. Earth’s climate has been changing for billions of years. Climate has undergone volatile ups and downs throughout history, going through several heating and cooling cycles, each lasting hundreds of thousands or millions of years.

Here are some graphs illustrating this. Look at the ups and downs just over the past 2,000 years.

Let’s take a little longer look, going back 15,000 years. See all the ups and downs?

Let’s go back even further, the past 450 Million years. Look at all these cycles of natural heating and cooling:

Look at the heating and cooling cycles over the past 4 Billion years. Also note the dramatic changes in CO2 levels - that are independent of humans and even temperature.

These are natural cycles caused by

• changes in the earth itself,

• the sun and

• earth’s orbit around the sun.

So yes, there IS climate change. It’s been happening for billions of years.

The Human Factor

The key and Trillion-dollar questions are:

Is there a genuine climate crisis?

If yes, are humans causing it?

The answers to these questions are in Part 2