https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/02/28/the-process-of-rescinding-the-endangerment-finding-has-begun/
Look how fast the CO2 is increasing!
Oh my! Are we all going to die?
https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
Note the impact of that increasing CO2 on climate deaths and crops, below. The diametrically opposed polar opposite of what it's supposed to do.......kill people and the planet.
Increasing CO2 has SAVED an enormous number of lives. Over 1 billion ADDITIONAL being fed, just from the positive contributions of INCREASING CO2 and beneficial climate change.
Fossil fuels are feeding almost half the planet from the synthetic fertilizer made with natural gas.
https://www.nasa.gov/technology/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth-study-finds/
Death by GREENING!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
Remember the good old days when they taught this about CO2 as the beneficial gas that it is?
+++++++++++++++++++++
Anothersecret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields. September 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/02/28/much-harm-and-no-good-from-epa-greenhouse-rule-kill-it/
Having declared carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) to be harmful pollutants, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2009 endangerment finding has been the cornerstone of wrongheaded climate regulation, an impediment to economic growth and destroyer of livelihoods. All the result of rulemaking that puts ideology ahead of science.
Empowered to impose sweeping restrictions on GHG emissions from all manner of human activity, the EPA has been free to impose unreasonable demands on electric generation, transportation, manufacturing and agriculture – just to name more prominent targets. Under the Obama and Biden administrations, with CO2 emissions being the focus, fossil fuels in general and coal in particular were hammered by this regulatory cudgel.
In the last decade, regulations have contributed to the closing of more than 40 percent of the nation’s coal-fired power plants – one of the most economical and reliable generators of electricity. Job losses hit thousands of plant workers, coal miners and employees of supporting businesses, and both the price of electricity and the risk of blackouts increased.
The endangerment finding was a response to the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which ruled that EPA had the authority to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Act if they endangered the public. On the basis of flawed analyses, the Obama administration’s EPA concluded that there was such a threat, laying a foundation for some of the agency’s most consequential regulations.
++++++++++++
Even if the US didn't have a debt crisis, this would be a great idea!
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/02/22/climate-change-weekly-535-paris-climate-treaty-is-going-down/
https://heartland.org/opinion/climate-change-weekly-535-paris-climate-treaty-is-going-down/
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2025/02/21/climate/trump-blocks-scientists-ipcc
++++++++++++++++++
Just a little reminder of the work we've been getting from the extremely corrupt, biased and scientifically dishonest IPCC the past 3+ decades. They are responsible for the Fake Climate Crisis Bible to be used around the world by those following climate religion:
Here's an accurate description with the evidence of how they hijacked climate science then REWROTE CLIMATE HISTORY for their agenda. Seriously, they completely eliminated the Medieval Warm Period, (proven by 100 studies and long accepted by climate scientists) from climate history!!
Re: Poisoning the minds of young people
By metmike - Aug. 14, 2023, 9:34 p.m.
++++++++++++
Science corruption (IPCC)
Started by metmike - March 20, 2023, 5:50 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/93926/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
By metmike - March 20, 2023, 11:36 p.m.
As expected/predicted earlier this year:
If finalized, this proposal would undo the underpinning of $1 trillion in costly regulations, save more than $54 billion annually
Revoking the agency’s Endangerment Finding will lift costly regulatory burdens and restore the Clean Air Act to Congress’s original intent.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/epa-endangerment-finding-clean-air-act-trump
+++++++++++++
I always thought the biggest irony of this silly endangerment finding was catalytic convertors.
The most ingenious and effective pollution fighting device in history for decades.........suddenly became the source of CO2 pollution based on this junk science, political nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80x4IAm1n6o
++++++++++++++++
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalytic_converter
A catalytic converter part is an exhaust emission control device which converts toxic gases and pollutants in exhaust gas from an internal combustion engine into less-toxic pollutants by catalyzing a redox reaction. Catalytic converters are usually used with internal combustion engines fueled by gasoline (petrol) or diesel, including lean-burn engines, and sometimes on kerosene heaters and stoves.
The first widespread introduction of catalytic converters was in the United States automobile market. To comply with the US Environmental Protection Agency's stricter regulation of exhaust emissions, most gasoline-powered vehicles starting with the 1975 model year are equipped with catalytic converters.[1][2][3] These "two-way" oxidation converters combine oxygen with carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HC) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O).
The three-way catalytic converters have the additional advantage of controlling the emission of nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) (both together abbreviated with NOx and not to be confused with nitrous oxide (N2O)). NOx are precursors to acid rain and smog.[24]
Since 1981, the three-way (oxidation-reduction) catalytic converters have been used in vehicle emission control systems in the United States and Canada; many other countries have also adopted stringent vehicle emission regulations that in effect require three-way converters on gasoline-powered vehicles. The reduction and oxidation catalysts are typically contained in a common housing; however, in some instances, they may be housed separately. A three-way catalytic converter does three simultaneous tasks:[24]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Three-way-Catalytic-convertor_fig1_340022700
World , Vegetation Health Index (VHI): Current Week and One Year Ago | |
| VHI of current year | |
https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/smcd/emb/vci/VH/vh_browseVH.php
I plotted 2025, 2024, 2023 and the last major drought year 2012 below. 2025, in red is a new record high for vegetative health in the United States.
China, below is also well into record high territory for vegetative health right now as the global climate optimum continues thanks to the increase in CO2!
EPA’S ENDANGERMENT FINDING:
THE LEGAL AND SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATION FOR
CUTTING CLIMATE-CHANGING POLLUTION
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/epa-endangerment-finding-fs.pdf
In 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its science-based finding
that the buildup of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere endangers public health and welfare. This Endangerment Finding reflects the overwhelming scientific evidence on the causes and impacts of climate change. It was made after a thorough rulemaking process considering thousands of public comments and was upheld by the federal courts. In the years since, the scientific basis for the Endangerment Finding has only gotten stronger
++++++++++++++=
100% junk science rubbish!!!
CO2 has been a beneficial gas for tens of millions of years. Is a beneficial gas in 2025 and will always be a beneficial gas unless it gets much more than double the current level and that will not happen before fossil fuels run out.
Death by GREENING!
52 responses
Started by metmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
Death by GREENING! - MarketForum
++++++++++++++++
By metmike - June 7, 2025, 4:56 p.m.
Human emissions of CO2 have rescued the planet from CO2 starvation!
The current level of 430 parts per million is still LESS THAN HALF of the optimal level of life.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/140-million-year-trend-of-dangerously-decreasing-co2/
Without the endangerment finding, the U.S. would have fewer tools to curb emissions, leaving Americans more exposed to climate damages, according to Field. That could mean more cases of asthma and heart disease linked to poor air quality, higher food prices from climate-stressed crops, and economic losses as U.S. companies fall behind in global clean-tech markets.
+++++++++++++==
Not only is this a blatant and outrageous scientific lie, it's 100% the opposite of the truth. We've been bombarded with these lies for over 3 decades now.
Climate change and the increase in CO2 is responsible for at least 28% of the increase in food production and crop yields.
The current climate OPTIMUM is massively BOOSTING crops around the planet. Droughts have NOT increased.
This is the authentic science based on every legit measurement!
CC: Need links showing it leads to larger crops
25 responses |
Started by WxFollower - Oct. 4, 2025, 9:13 a.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/reply_post/115673/
++++++++++++
Just look at the climate-stressed crops below
https://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Field_Crops/soyyld.php
Anothersecret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields. September 2019
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39215/
There is plenty of REAL pollution on this planet!
The real environmental crisis's
31 responses |
Started by metmike - April 10, 2019, 7:11 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/27498/
++++++++++++++++
Instead of fighting that as a #1 priority, crony capitalists are getting rich on really dumb, fake environmental projects like sequestering CO2 in the ground.
Dumbest idea in history
Started by metmike - Feb. 12, 2022, 2:53 a.m.
President Trump deserves much credit for fighting against the fake climate crisis fraud and waste.
Fossil fuels are cheap, abundant, reliable and CLEAN, especially compared to wind energy that destroys the environment/tears up the earth to obtain the raw materials, are very aesthetically unappealing and unnatural after they are installed. Then they kill many thousands of birds and bats for 20-25 years(but not when there is no wind, when they produce no power). After that they go into landfills.
Fossil fuels, on the other hand are the only TRUE green energy.
Their CO2 emissions are massively greening up the planet and increasing food, yet the energy sources that we have been conditioned to call "green energy" are anti environmental and anti green. Go figure
++++++++++=
Fossil fuels vs renewable energy: Which is best?
https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?10271866/Fossil-fuels-vs-renewable-energy-Which-is-best
The results were unequivocal.
Across 30 different measures of environmental and social wellbeing, the clean-energy transition future was between two and 16 times better for nature and society than the fossil-fueled "business-as-usual" one.
For example, under the fossil fuel scenario, the impacts of climate change, ocean acidification and pollution from fossil fuels result in four times the loss of nature – including species extinctions – compared with a clean energy transition.
+++++++++++++
These are mostly huge lies!!!
So sad that climate science has been hijacked and they even rewrote climate history to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period, 1,000 years ago and the Holocene Climate Optimum, 9,000 to 5,000 years ago.
They reclassified an extremely beneficial gas that's still less than 50% of the optimal level(and the entire planet begging for more, even after we rescued life from dangerously low levels).
Optimal CO2 for life more than double current level
26 responses |
Started by metmike - Dec. 15, 2020, 8:03 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62784/
Remember this equation from science class when you were younger?
Sunshine +H20 + Minerals +CO2 = O2 + Food(sugars)
All of life on this planet still abides by that indisputable law.
However, humans with a political agenda(and crony capitalists) have gone in and redefined CO2's role as an entirely beneficial gas:
Sunshine +H20 + Minerals +POLLUTION = O2 + Food(sugars) + a planetary apocalypse
https://www.wri.org/news/statement-us-epa-reverses-its-authority-limit-climate-pollution
+++++++++
Climate "pollution" ?????
Anybody that calls the massively beneficial gas CO2, climate pollution is either scientifically ignorant, scientifically biased or scientifically dishonest.
The current 430 parts per million is less than half of the OPTIMAL level for life on this planet.
We rescued the planet from dangerously low levels of this beneficial gas. Plants were just barely above the level needed to survive and be productive.
The entire planet is begging for MORE CO2 and the booming biosphere and greening up from the increase from 280 to 430 ppm is telling that to us loud and clear.
Lying to us and calling it carbon(which is a solid) pollution or climate pollution are just blatant, anti science lies.
+++++++++=
I've been an objective, independent atmospheric science for 45 years. I've studied climate science/change for over 3 decades.
I'm extraordinarily critical of most of Donald Trump's strategies and the way he talks and does business.
He got this one, 100% right!!!
From the standpoint of science, biology, agronomy, the environment, natural resources, pollution, the climate, meteorology, the economy and every realm except for the politics being pushed by one side that HIJACKED climate science almost 40 years ago and even rewrote climate history for their cause.
And for many trillions of dollars in crony capitalism!!
++++++++++++++++
I have to rephrase the crossed out sentence above. Donald Trump got the position right but he's confused about the science. He keeps saying that climate change is a hoax. He gets that exactly WRONG!
Climate change is real. CO2 is a greenhouse gas with physics that cause it to capture long wave radiation that would otherwise keep going straight out to space. Then reradiates it, some of which goes back towards the surface.
There is a hoax though. The beneficial warming and massively beneficial increase in CO2 makes this a climate OPTIMUM by a wide margin for most life.
You want a climate crisis:
Go back to the OLD climate before the Industrial Revolution really kicked in with increasing CO2..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death by GREENING!
long lasting droughts with catastrophic global and huge regional famines!
Here in 2025, we are living in a climate optimum with absolute, scientific certainty!!
Causes and consequences of nineteenth century droughts in North America
https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/nineteenth.shtml
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You want a REAL climate CRISIS?
This is what it looks like:
Can you imagine if this below happened today? It's less likely because climate change and the current climate OPTIMUM is helping to PROTECT US!
The planet had a REAL climate crisis between 1876 and 1878.
50 million people died. 3% of the global population died from that real climate crisis!
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2017/12/15/causes-great-famine-drought/
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AGUFMGC51F..04S/abstract
The 1876-1878 Great Famine impacted multiple regions across the globe including parts of Asia, Nordeste Brazil, and northern and southern Africa, with total human fatalities exceeding 50 million people, arguably the worst environmental disaster to befall humanity.
NASA EXPLAINS THE DUST BOWL DROUGHT
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2004/0319dustbowl.html
++++++++++++++++++
Climate change in the United States, with 100% certainty is helping to protect us from widespread severe droughts.
Summer Climate Change in the Midwest and Great Plains due to Agricultural Development during the Twentieth Century
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/32/17/jcli-d-19-0096.1.xml
++++
We are indisputably living in a climate optimum for most life on this planet(that would still prefer a bit more warmth and a lot more CO2) and for growing crops in the United States!
By metmike - June 7, 2025, 4:56 p.m.
Human emissions of CO2 have rescued the planet from CO2 starvation!
The current level of 430 parts per million is still LESS THAN HALF of the optimal level of life.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/140-million-year-trend-of-dangerously-decreasing-co2/
Explore our extensive library of facts and detailed data to empower yourself with knowledge, educate friends and family, and join us in our love for CO2.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/
More on Friday demonstrating how CO2 is going to plateau, then fall, at which time the REAL crisis will begin because of falling, NEEDED beneficial CO2.
There are so many things so darn wrong about the fake climate crisis.
You can go here to read about many of them:
Death by GREENING!
52 responses |
Started by metmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
+++++++++++++
Let me point out what is REALLY going to happen with high confidence:
Fossil fuels are finite. There was only X amount of plants that died while life existed on this planet that got sequestered/buried in the ground and decomposed/concentrated into fossil fuels. At the rate that we are burning them, it won't be much longer before they start running out.
BTW, all the CO2 we've been returning back into the atmosphere was there before as a beneficial gas and the building block for all of life. This scary false narrative of "CO2 is the highest its been in X zillion years" is intentionally meant to make people think there's something wrong with that, instead of receiving it as the profound gift that it's been for life on our massively greening planet.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/140-million-year-trend-of-dangerously-decreasing-co2/
+++++++++++++++
Anyways, back to the fact that fossil fuels will be running out with certainty and the horrific disaster that will occur to the planet and human beings when that happens, almost with certainty.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/years-of-fossil-fuel-reserves-left
We constantly hear that CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 100+ years and the carbon pollution that we are spewing into the atmosphere today, will be damaging the planet past 2100. Complete hogwash!!!!!!!!!!
Here's an article written by supposedly bright PhD climate authorities that is wrong because they lack objective, critical thinking and I'll show why.
https://www.nature.com/articles/climate.2008.122
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now let's look at the last 7 decades when CO2 levels have increased the most. CO2 is well mixed in the global atmosphere. Obviously, the trend is up but the significant thing to note is the zig zag nature of the increase that corresponds exactly to an annual cycle.
We should compare this graph below to the one above that shows the BIG picture. The one below looks so ominous because it starts EXACTLY when CO2 started increasing a lot (from near CO2 starvation). While the one above shows this increase as just a tiny, beneficial glitch up at the end of a catastrophic plunge in CO2.
If we zoomed in, we would see that CO2 actually DROPS every single year at the same times for numerous months. Can you guess why that is?
Hint: The months when CO2 drops are May-June-July-August-September-October.
The reason is that the INCREASING amount of Northern Hemisphere's plants on this greening planet(thanks to climate change and the increase in CO2) come out of dormancy and gobble up even more than we are putting in at this higher rate.
When they go dormant in the Northern Hemisphere and the growing season takes place in the Southern Hemisphere(which is mostly ocean) there aren't enough plants to offset the CO2 emissions and they RISE even more than they dropped during the Northern Hemisphere's growing season. So each year, the difference ADDS UP to the gradually increasing slope we see above.
++++++++++++++++
Now that you understand this basic principle, let's use critical thinking to apply it to the future.
1. Every single year the earth greens up, there are more plants that need more CO2. The earth is greener by close to 30% compared to 100 years ago, BEFORE we enriched it with the additional atmospheric fertilizer. That means that those plants now REQUIRE 30% MORE CO2 than they did before and they can only get it by extracting it from the atmosphere. The graph directly above shows that happening indisputably from May-Oct every year.
2. We are told by one side that models project X amount of warming or X amount of sea level rise or X amount of bad things happening in 2100 and catastrophic by 2150 or sooner based on the models being fed complete garbage from biased scientist who lack critical thinking.
They are dead wrong for 2 different reasons.
a. Fossil fuels will be running out long before 2100. As they run out, the CO2 in the atmosphere will, at first increase at a slower rate, then top out, then be at an increasing deficit. If we do NOTHING, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will be dropping at an increasing rate BEFORE 2100.
b. It's complete hogwash to claim the CO2 we are emitting today stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. An actual molecule of CO2 might stay in the air for 5 years or so. However, the amount in the atmosphere is based on how much is added, less how much is taken out (oceans absorb some of that too). We can see exactly how long it takes for that to happen: IMMEDIATELY! Every Northern Hemisphere growing season the atmospheric CO2 goes DOWN because plants gobble up more than we emit out. EVERY year that happens.
EVERY year those plants need MORE CO2 than they did before to survive. EVERY year they pull out more from the atmosphere than they did the years before just to survive. It's the CO2 demand base, now locked into the CO2 fundamental equation needed to determine what will happen when we start running out of fossil fuels.
When we start running out, CO2 emissions WILL be dropping. However, the demand base from the increasing plants will still be INCREASING with a lag time of several years. This will result in CO2 being gobbled up at a still increasing rate, while the amount emitted is dropping.
The inevitable result is that the surplus will quickly turn into a YEARLY CO2 deficit that we can already see happening in the real world during the Northern Hemisphere's growing season.
That's when the real crisis occurs!!!!
In several decades, with the planet having greened up even more and increasing the consumption of atmospheric fertilizer/CO2 by plants there will be 10 billion people to feed on the planet.
https://populationconnection.org/learn/population-milestones/
30% of the plant growth and yields has been coming from the increase in CO2 atmospheric fertilizer. If we took all of that away, for instance and went back to the OLD climate from more than a century ago, 2 billion people would starve within 5 years and food prices would triple because the planet is only able to keep up with the growing populations demand for food BECAUSE of climate change/the increase in CO2.
When fossil fuels start running out, THIS WILL ACTUALLY HAPPEN over the course of several decades, starting WELL BEFORE 2100, when we are told that really high CO2 levels will be the crisis.
No they won't. FALLING CO2 levels WILL BE THE CRISIS!
The combination of LESS CO2 emissions from fossil fuels running out and the planets biosphere requiring more each year just to exist and CROPS NEEDING MORE to keep up with the 10 billion people …….will start the biggest crisis that mankind has every experienced.
And it will start when CO2 levels stop increasing and crop yields on finite areas to grow food stop going up as fast as they had been.
After a few years of food: corn, wheat, beans, rice, oats vegetables and even non food crops like cotton seeing massive draw downs that cause tremendous price spikes so that poor people can no longer afford to eat.........the world will suddenly learn its lesson about CO2.
The world will KNOW that the best thing would be to INCREASE CO2 to help reduce the unthinkable, increasing starvation on the planet as atmospheric CO2 drops at an increasingly fast rate.
This is not just speculation. It's exactly what WILL happen if/when fossil fuels start running out. It's based on climate science, plant science agronomy/photosynthesis, human nutrition and biology and the principles of economics and energy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So we should be trying to reduce the use of fossil fuels today but for the exact opposite reason that they are supposedly wrecking the planet and causing a climate crisis.
We should be CONSERVING THEM (and all natural resources) because they are SAVING THE PLANET during this current climate optimum for life on this greening planet.
We should be conserving them so that our children and children's children have the most amount of precious fossil fuels left to keep the CO2 elevated in the atmosphere to sustain enough food to feed 10 billion people as long as possible.
Even then, the crisis IS coming. The only reason that it's been put off so long is..............beneficial CO2 massively increasing food production for humans and all life, along with other benefits from REAL climate change. Every creature on this planet eats plants or something that ate plants. When the inevitable drop in CO2 starts later this century, they will all have less food.
When the CO2 starts dropping, well BEFORE 2100, the world will look at the humans of this current age of the fake climate crisis, in the same way that it looks at the scientifically ignorant humans that thought the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth.
CO2 is an invisible, odorless beneficial gas at ambient atmospheric levels which are still less than 50% of the optimal level for life(which is begging for more).
When you SEE images of a smokestack spewing out “something” in an article vilifying CO2 and claiming it’s pollution, you can know what they are showing is NOT CO2.
When you hear the term carbon pollution used for CO2, you can know that the person using it is scientifically ignorant.
There are thousands of things with an atom of carbon in them but none of them are Carbon. All of our food has carbon in it. Broccoli and corn isn’t carbon pollution.
Your wooden table isn’t carbon pollution.
Pure carbon, C is a black solid. CO2 is a gas with 1:atom of carbon bonded to 2 atoms of oxygen.
Calling CO2 carbon pollution would be like calling H2O hydrogen pollution.
Better cut back on drinking water because all that hydrogen pollution if going to kill you
Additional thread on the trading forum:
Overturning the fradulent Endangerment Finding
Started by metmike - Feb. 13, 2026, 2:26 p.m.
Hey Mike,
Last night I quoted most of the 1st 1/2 of your 9:10 AM EST 2/13/26 post with 100% credit to you. Here was poster Charlie’s response:
Per Wikipedia the CO2 Coalition is a climate denial organization funded by fossil fuel interests. The CEO is a former head of the American Petroleum Institute. Sure plant life thrived when CO2 was higher but natural temperatures change occurred slowly which allowed accommodation through evolution. The idea that CO2 is plant food is climate denial myth. High temperature and intensification of precipitation counteract CO2 benefits on plant growth. The plants that thrived under higher CO2 were not the same plants in the same locations as today. For instance, If warming continues the Amazon rain forest and Boreal forests will transition to grasslands releasing large amounts of CO2. The same with animals, cold-blooded reptiles were favored in warmer times. Mammals were all small to shed heat. The bottom 2 links cover past mass extinction events. Notice how many where caused by episodes of volcanic activity that released CO2 and other greenhouse gases.
https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/is-co2-plant-food-why-are-we-still
https://www.sciencenewstoday.org/10-mass-extinction-events-and-what-caused-them
Thanks very much, Larry.
Please pass this response on. I apologize for my initial snide type of remark to start off this post directed, in general at people that label authentic sources of science that disagree with them as deniers.
CO2 below 1,000 parts per million is a massively beneficial gas. To compare it to when CO2 was numerous times higher is a strawman attack (assigning a position or dynamic that doesn't exist now and attacking that position instead of the REAL one).
So what if CO2 was X,XXX+ parts per million in earth's distant past? We are discussing THIS atmosphere where the CO2 has risen from ~290 ppm to close to 430 ppm and will, at the most get to 800 ppm but likely will not exceed 600 ppm. The optimal level for life on earth is ~900 ppm.
And to keep projecting CO2's increase for another 100 years and to keep insisting that the residence time(how long emissions today will stay in the armosphere) is hundreds of years lacks critical thinking based just on how we watch it DROP during the Northern Hemisphere's growing season every year.
Ignoring the fact that fossils fuels are finite and will be running out well before then and the chances of us ever getting over 900 ppm, the optimal level for life/plants/crops is minuscule.
So what if CO2 was XX thousands of parts per million in the past???? If I'm forecasting the weather for February 15, 2026 in Bismark, ND, for instance, I don't use the hottest recorded temperature on earth in a desert in the middle of Summer as an analog!!!!
Let's discuss our atmosphere during THIS recent and future time frame which is the one that matters. The highest reasonable projection is still BELOW the optimal level of 900 ppm.
Regarding all the articles from their so called authorities that climate change is already cutting back on food production. I've read 100 just like it in recent years.
100% nonsense. It's the exact opposite. Let's PROVE that below.
With crops, we can't tell how much impact is from CO2, climate/weather, genetics, fertilizers, use of pesticides/herbicides(technology).
Remember the good old days when they taught this about CO2 as the beneficial gas that it is?
+++++++++++++++++++++
Death by GREENING!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
++++++++++++++++
When you change numerous variables at the same time, like we do with crops, it's impossible to separate the impact from each one on the outcome.
However, we have 2 ways to address that with OBJECTIVE data which clearly speaks for the impact of photosynthesis by itself and for photosynthesis +climate change.
+++++++++++
1. The impact of JUST adding CO2 and not changing anything else:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fake beer crisis/Death by Greening!
By metmike - June 19, 2021, 1:25 p.m.
Here is irrefutable evidence using empirical data to show that the increase in CO2 is causing a huge increase in crop yields/world food production.
We can separate the CO2 effect out from other factors effecting crops and plants with many thousands of studies that hold everything else constant, except CO2.
Observing and documenting the results of experiments with elevated CO2 levels, tell us what increasing CO2 does to many hundreds of plants.
Here's how to access the empirical evidence/data from the site that has more of it than any other. Please go to this link:
http://www.co2science.org/data/data.php
Go to plant growth data base:
http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/plantgrowth.php
Go to plant dry weight(biomass):
http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/dry_subject.php
Pick the name of a plant, any plant and go to it based on its starting letter. Let's pick soybeans. Go to the letter S,http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/dry_subject_s.php
Then scroll down and hit soybeans. This is what you get:
http://www.co2science.org/data/plant_growth/dry/g/glycinem.php
Glycine max (L.) Merr. [Soybean]
Statistics
| 300 ppm | 600 ppm | 900 ppm | |
| Number of Results | 290 | 29 | 7 |
| Arithmetic Mean | 47.9% | 70.7% | 80.9% |
| Standard Error | 2.2% | 7.1 | 8.9% |
This tells us that there were 290 studies with the CO2 elevated by 300 ppm. The mean increase in plant biomass was 47.9% from all those studies.
The individual studies are listed below that.
USA Soybean yields in the real world since 1988 have doubled while CO2 increased by 75 ppm(350 ppm to 425 ppm), so we have strong corroborating evidence.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But other human factors impact soybeans, including climate change that we can't separate out.
That's ok because we have something that looks almost exclusively at the increase in CO2 and climate change as the main factors.
Planet earth has been a huge open air experiment the past XX years. The objective results are striking. The impacts have been mostly from changes in photosynthesis and changes in the climate.
https://www.nasa.gov/technology/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth-study-finds/
To claim that these benefits would be even greater without climate change is to contradict that this is actually the response of the planet TO photosynthesis AND climate change from the increase in CO2. If not for the increase in CO2, then the increase in photosynthesis AND climate change would go away. They go hand and hand. They are both caused by the exact same thing. Human emissions increasing the beneficial CO2 in the atmosphere.
My 3 year old grandson can look at the image ABOVE and tell us which color has increased all over the map. GREEN!
The gray shades were mostly places that had NO DATA and NOT places that did not green up.
Note the tiny % of places that had red colors. In today's fake climate crisis world, the type of reporting from the gatekeepers of fake climate crisis rhetoric would result in them only telling us about the reds, while completely ignoring all the greens.
Instead of listening to the climate crisis propaganda, we should be using our eyes and brains by applying common sense and critical thinking.
++++++++++++++++
In addition:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332223005584
++++++++++++++
Importantly, the indisputable science tells us that increasing CO2 allows plants/crops to be more drought tolerant(not the other way around). The reason is that plants open their stomata to get CO2 and while doing so, they transpire(lose water from their roots that get it from the soil) As CO2 increases, the stomata don't need to open as wide and this REDUCES water loss from their roots. It's rock solid agronomy/plant science.
https://www.masterresource.org/carbon-dioxide/co2-increased-water-use-efficiency/
+++++++++++++++=
Despite me just PROVING the points with indisputable science above, this is what the very predictable response will be from people that posted to you previously with the same response they gave the first time:
"Those are denier sources"
NASA's satellite study showing the greening of the planet obviously can't be put in that category but CO2 Science and Dr. Craig Idso, an elite authority on plants and the impact of CO2/climate change has been labelled a denier.
Never mind everything he shows is backed up with empirical data and rock solid scientific principles, which is why I use that source(as well as being an atmospheric scientist for 44 years) if he or anybody else, including me contradicts the mainstream view on the climate crisis.........they are discredited as deniers no matter us using 2+2=4 science to prove that 2+2 is not 5, 6, 7 and 8.
+++++++++++++++++
Ironically, the increase in CO2 is PROTECTING crops and REDUCING severe droughts, not the other way around. Droughts and crop failures were MUCH more common with COOLER global temperatures and lower CO2 levels.
You can can take that one to the bank: Droughts and crop failures were MUCH more common with COOLER global temperatures and lower CO2 levels.
We should note that they never go back to the period BEFORE climate change and increasing CO2. They start with the assumption that when we started increasing CO2 and warming the planet..........that was supposedly the PERFECT climate and all data comparisons start then. Any movement up in temperature and CO2 is BAD because it deviates from the PERFECT temperature and CO2 level.
Never mind what the conditions were like BEFORE then under global cooling or the fact that the empirical data/observations of a greening planet completely contradict the extraordinarily bad assumption.
DeathbyGREENING!
Started bymetmike - May 11, 2021, 2:31 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Death by GREENING!
By metmike - Feb. 2, 2025, 7:54 a.m.
Here's a perfect example of why they get it so wrong. Please tell me where on this graph below, that the climate change droughts are and where the natural droughts are since the year 2000? Impossible because the pattern is THE EXACT SAME! The MSM, in 2025 tells us that EVERY drought is now caused by climate change to the point that they use the terms interchangeably.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/2017-state-climate-global-drought
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Global cooling and LOW CO2 levels are what INCREASE widespread, extremely long lasting droughts with catastrophic global and huge regional famines!
Here in 2025, we are living in a climate optimum with absolute, scientific certainty!!
Causes and consequences of nineteenth century droughts in North America
https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/nineteenth.shtml
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You want a REAL climate CRISIS?
This is what it looks like:
Can you imagine if this below happened today? It's less likely because climate change and the current climate OPTIMUM is helping to PROTECT US!
The planet had a REAL climate crisis between 1876 and 1878.
50 million people died. 3% of the global population died from that real climate crisis!
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2017/12/15/causes-great-famine-drought/
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017AGUFMGC51F..04S/abstract
The 1876-1878 Great Famine impacted multiple regions across the globe including parts of Asia, Nordeste Brazil, and northern and southern Africa, with total human fatalities exceeding 50 million people, arguably the worst environmental disaster to befall humanity.
NASA EXPLAINS THE DUST BOWL DROUGHT
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2004/0319dustbowl.html
++++++++++++++++++
Climate change in the United States MIDWEST, with 100% certainty is helping to protect us from widespread severe droughts.
Summer Climate Change in the Midwest and Great Plains due to Agricultural Development during the Twentieth Century
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/32/17/jcli-d-19-0096.1.xml
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We are indisputably living in a climate optimum for most life on this planet(that would still prefer a bit more warmth and a lot more CO2) and for growing crops in the United States!
+++++++++++++++
All my posts use ONLY verified empirical data and scientific principles.
As as atmospheric scientist for 44 year and expert on agronomy/plant science I vigorously fact check every iota of data and constantly fact check myself, practicing the Scientific Method sincerely.
Most people use their "faith" in climate religion and simply go to their high priests to get extremely bad science that contradicts the real world.
There are thousands of articles and experts that show support of a climate crisis which is plenty enough for people to copy and regurgitate and repeat over and over to reinforce their FAITH in the climate crisis belief system.
They are lacking in independent thinking and are just evidence of the cognitive bias in humans which causes us to seek out information that confirms what we think that we know and reject information that contradicts it.
Of course, this makes metmike a climate denier.
Despite my full embrace of climate change and the physics of green house gas warming from the increase in CO2.
And fulling acknowledging that this has led to an increase of almost 2 deg. F in global temperature(mostly in the coldest places of the Northern Hemisphere during the coldest times of year).
Despite me recognizing that a warmer atmosphere DOES hold MORE moisture that is indisputably increasing high end heavy rain events. The overall atmosphere has around 7% more moisture because of climate change. Not 700%, not 70% but 7%. Some of this is GOOD for the planet.
Despite me recognizing that some hurricanes will have MORE rapid intensification because of the warmer tropical oceans during the hurricane season.
Despite the recognition that this warmth is slightly accelerating the increase in sea levels (emphatically rejecting the junk science +10 feet by 2100 projections) and embracing the authentic science/empirical data which has measured around a foot increase the past 100 years but with acceleration and worst case scenario could result in an increase of another 2 feet by 2100.
Despite me acknowledging that some air masses in mid Summer will be slightly hotter( warm humid air is NOT impacted by the warming that much because the radiation absorption bands for CO2 are already saturated from the H2O).
That's why most of the warming is in the cold/dry places.
So despite me embracing all the LEGIT/AUTHENTIC science of greenhouse gas warming from human CO2 emissions from burning fossils fuels, I'm considered a climate denier.
I could also list the many benefits of the warmth to life that OUTWEIGH the negatives listed above to HUMANS in addition to the biggest one from photosynthesis.
Cold still kills almost 10 times more humans than heat and cold kills over 200 times more life than heat. But its getting better thanks to climate change.
It's REDUCED the meridional temperature gradient from warming the highest latitudes which has weakened cold fronts and the extreme weather from them......including reducing violent tornadoes by 50%.
DETECTED tornadoes have increased entirely from technology using Doppler radars that can see the wind and population increase/observations.
Climate change mainly warms temperatures at night. Record highs in the Summer are not keeping up with record warm nights. In the Midwest, climate change during the Summer has actually reduced record high temperatures but that is because of negative feedback being cause by the increase in photosynthesis and greening from tightly packed rows of corn.
Plants capture solar radiation that heats the air and convert it into chemical energy via photosynthesis(sequestering CO2 in the process) as well as transpiring H2O thru their stomata, which helps to saturate the radiation absorption bands that CO2 uses to warm the air, as well as increases low clouds and precipitation from recirculating moisture from the soils, thru transpiration.
++++++++++==
Another point using CRITICAL THINKING about the increasing CO2 and comparisons to a DISTANT past with 10 times the current level.
We are currently at around 430 parts per million and increasing at around 3 ppm/year.
This is 30 parts per million/decade. In 7 decades from now, as we approach 2100 and all these catastrophic predictions should be occurring, that would mean a CO2 level of 640 parts per million.
Remember, the OPTIMAL level for life is indisputably, 900 ppm or more as determined by many tens of thousands of studies of CO2's impact on every plant that exists.
At the same time, keep this in mind:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/years-of-fossil-fuel-reserves-left
We can debate when peak oil, ng and coal will occur(probably later than predictions) but not that CO2 will ever get above the optimal level for life of 900 ppm in the next century. It's not likely to happen under any scenario.
And that fossil fuels are FINITE and NOT renewable based on archaebotony/paleobotany and geology.
Fossil fuels form from the remains of prehistoric dead animals and plants due to geologic processes.
https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/distribution-fossil-fuels/
++++++++++++++
So there is an increasing chance that human emissions of CO2 will start dropping late this century. .......no matter what we do
It's at THAT time, when humanity will embrace the REAL crisis of falling CO2 levels and truly appreciate the scientific(political/crony capitalism) ignorance and fraudulence/corruption of the past 30+ years.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110244/#117897
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/110244/#117898
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/117904/#117921
