harp on about "dangerously high" manmade CO2 output levels.
So how much are they?
The answer will shock you.
The agenda to push AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) or manmade global warming started around the 1980s and has been gaining momentum for decades, fooling many people along the way.
Yet, despite all the publicity it has gotten, it has still failed to make clear a very fundamental point:
If man is really driving global warming (now conveniently called "climate change"), surely this level must be pretty high or at least significant, right?
The answer may shock you... and give new meaning
to the term
global warming hoax.
Output Levels… Straight out of the IPCC's Mouth
Which one do you trust? How can you tell the truth
when one side uses one set of data to prove its point, and the other
side uses another set of data to prove its (diametrically opposed)
The IPCC is not a scientific body as you may imagine but rather a political one with a very clear bias towards promoting AGW and climate change alarmism.
It's their job to push the AGW agenda onto the public, even though they disguise that with claims that they,
Here's what Wim Rost had to say in his article IPCC ≠ SCIENCE ↔ IPCC = GOVERNMENT:
Earth's atmosphere consists of the following gases at the following levels:
So far, so good.
CO2 is a gas in such small concentrations that it hasn't yet entered the picture. So, the next step is to break down the composition of trace gases (which are also the greenhouse gases) in our atmosphere:
There are also some gases at tiny concentrations, including helium
(He), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and ozone (O3), as well as
halogenated gases (CFCs) released by mankind which have damaged
Check out these tables below where you can see that water vapor is excluded from the percentages. The IPCC and other AGW proponents claim they need to exclude water vapor from their calculations because it varies so much from region to region.
Yes, it does vary greatly all over the Earth, but to just exclude the largest greenhouse gas (and a massive driver of temperature too) from your calculations because it's inconvenient or varies too much is grossly misleading and unscientific.
Water vapor, despite being the overwhelmingly largest greeenhouse and trace gas, is simply ignored and omitted.
For simplicity's sake, let's call it 3%, so CO2 comprises 0.003% of the atmosphere...
That's pretty damn small, but we can't stop there, because the next question to ask is:
The IPCC has conflicting sets of data here, but both are within a small range of each other, either 3.0% (using the 2007 figures) or 3.6% (using the 2001 figures):
(IPCC data from 2001)
(IPCC data from AR4, 2007)
No matter which set of data you use, the IPCC data shows that manmade CO2 output levels are ~3%.
How do you figure this out?
According to the IPCC's own data, manmade CO2 output levels are 3% of 3% of 0.1% of the total Earth's atmosphere:
CO2 is measured
in ppm (parts per million) because it is such a tiny and
insignificant gas, yet somehow, the propaganda has been so
successful that is has sprouted into what some state is a US$1.5
The IPCC Can't Deal
with Water Vapor
It can't actually measure it, since the variability across the world is so high, H2O vapor changes so quickly, and it takes place above a variety of different landscapes/topographies.
There are too many variables to calculate to produce a good model. So it just shuffles it to the side and states it has no "confidence."
Here's exactly what the IPCC says:
It doesn't suit the IPCC's agenda to really dive in and better understand the role of water vapor as the key greenhouse gas driving climate temperature.
It's far easier to just pretend it doesn't
exist and only focus on the tiny amount of CO2 in the atmosphere
- A Massive Diversion
It diverts environmentalists' attention away from the true issues that need addressing.
Respected theoretical physicist Freeman Dyson said:
At the very top, those pushing the manmade global warming hoax know that's its a scam, so rather than focusing on the facts, they appeal to emotion with fake images of starving polar bears (to arouse anger) and underwater cities (to arouse fear).
The truth is that the green movement has long been hijacked by the very same NWO manipulators who helped to ruin the environment in the first place, through their ownership of oil, chemical and pharmaceutical multinational corporations.
These manipulators rely on the average person being too busy or lazy to check the facts or think critically.
They promote scientific illiteracy via,
Finally - if you dare - dig into the birth of the modern environmental movement, and you may be shocked to find how deeply it is steeped in eugenics and depopulation.
It's time to realize that
those pushing this gigantic scam aren't interesting in saving the
environment - but rather depopulating it...