Why the CO2 'Theory' Fails

Why Why Why the CO2 'Theory' Fails

Earth's atmosphere, which is around 300 miles thick, is mainly made of nitrogen and oxygen, although there are many other trace substances in its composition. Trace substances make up only 1 percent of the bulk of the atmosphere while nitrogen (78 percent), oxygen (21 percent) and argon (1 percent) make up the rest.
The minority 1 percent contains a variety of things, including minute amounts of neon, carbon dioxide, helium, krypton, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrogen, iodine, ozone, xenon, ammonia and carbon monoxide. At lower altitudes, water vapor may also be present.
The atmosphere is divided into five layers, including the troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere and exosphere. The layer closest to Earth is the troposphere. It's around four to 12 miles thick. Scientists know the least about the mesosphere since weather balloons and jets can't reach its height (31 to 53 miles above the Earth) and satellites orbit too high above it
Scientists express the gasses in  parts per million, or ppm. In March 2011, carbon dioxide levels were at 391 ppm, which is 0.0391 percent of the atmosphere. This roughly corresponds to a mass of 3 trillion tons.
When we look at the density, I.e how heavy the gas is. We can see that SEAWATER is just a little heavier! Infact the IPPC own scientists :
M. Kaufmann, O. A. Gusev, and K. U. Grossmann
Department of Physics, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany
R. G. Roble, M. E. Hagan, and C. Hartsough
High Altitude Observatory, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA
A. A. Kutepov
Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, University of Munich, Munich, Germany
Received 2 April 2001; revised 28 September 2001; accepted 28 September 2001; published 18 October 2002. quote from the abstract:
The vertical and horizontal distribution of CO 2 densities
in the upper mesosphere and lower thermosphere as
measured by CRISTA
[ 1 ] The Cryogenic Infrared Spectrometers and Telescopes for the Atmosphere (CRISTA) experiment measured the global distribution of CO 2 4.3 mm infrared emissions in the
mesosphere and lower thermosphere during two Space Shuttle missions in November 1994 and August 1997. The daytime radiances have been inverted to CO 2 number
densities in the 60–130 km range by using a nonlocal thermodynamic equilibrium model.
A detailed sensitivity study of retrieved CO 2 number densities was carried out. The O( 1 D)
excitation mechanism and model parameters constitute the most important uncertainties of
retrieved CO 2 , typically 10–20%. The inaccuracy due to uncertainties in other
atmospheric parameters is usually less than 10%. The CO 2 volume mixing ratio (VMR)
deviates from being well mixed between 70 and 80 km, which is significantly lower than
indicated by previous rocket-borne mass spectrometer data and model calculations but is in good agreement with the data obtained by other 4.3 mm emission and absorption
experiments. The global distribution of CRISTA-2 CO 2 density shows significant
longitudinal and latitudinal structures. The zonal mean CO 2 densities are increasing
toward polar summer latitudes below 90 km and above 115 km. Between 90 and 115 km,
the latitudinal gradient is reversed. At 100 km, the gradient is mostly pronounced,
reaching up to 50% difference between low and high latitudes. These variations are
compared with results obtained by the Thermosphere/Ionosphere/Mesosphere
Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIME-GCM), showing very good agreement
for the latitudinal distribution. Below 110 km, this variation is mostly due to the change in
INDEX TERMS : 3394 Meteorology and
total density rather than to the CO 2 VMR.
Atmospheric Dynamics: Instruments and techniques; 3360 Meteorology and Atmospheric Dynamics: Remote
sensing; 0340 Atmospheric Composition and Structure.
Ok , now a:
    FACT:  Changing CO2 has no effect EVEN the Models used by the Met Office and UN's Climate Committee (the IPCC) show CO2 levels have no effect on the Jet Stream or extremes which come from the Wild Jet stream changes which they fail to predict.  It is meteorological fact that the recent very wild weather extremes and contrasts follow from wild Jet Stream behavior. 

2. FACT. Even if CO2 had an effect the idea that Man’s 4% of total CO2 flux rules the other natural 96% flux in and out of sea/land making it follow man’s activity is a ridiculous conspiracy theory of nature.

Atomic weights go gasses

C=12.011
N=14.007
O= 15.99
Neon= 20.180
Argon= 39.948
Xenon=131








“Determination of the Total Emissivity of a Mixture of Gases Containing 5% of Water
Vapor and 0.039% of Carbon Dioxide at Overlapping Absorption Bands.”
By Nasif S. Nahle
Scientist, University Professor and Director of Scientific Research Division at Biology Cabinet Mexico
Abstract
This assessment is a review of the common AGW argument on the carbon dioxide increasing the
potential of the water vapor for absorbing and emitting IR radiation as a consequence of the overlapping absorption/emission spectral bands. I have determined the total emissivity of a mixture of gases containing 5% of water vapor and 0.039% of carbon dioxide in all spectral bands where their absorptivities/emissivities overlap. The result of these calculations is that the carbon dioxide attenuates the total absorptivity/emissivity of the water vapor, working like a coolant, not a warmer of the atmosphere and the surface.

Clouds over NZ 1]10]2019

1. FACT. There is no evidence for the CO2 climate driver proposition in the real world using real data over hundreds of thousands of years. World temperatures do not follow CO2.
    The world is not warming and has not been doing so for 18 years. Even under fraudulent UN-MetO-NOAA manipulated data the world is not warming. ALL the alarmist predictions of CO2 warmism have failed. 

      It follows War should be declared on termites which emit 10x Man's CO2 equivalent. Why has this not happened?

Southern Hemisphere jet stream

3. FACT. The reason why the CO2 atmosphere theory can never work is that the Ocean-atmosphere interface controls the amount of CO2 in air – a warmer ocean (which holds 50x more CO2 than the atmosphere) emits CO2 and vice versa. This is very basic physics*. 

    Just as when you warm a glass of fizzy drink more CO2 comes off and it absorbs more when it is cold. Putting more CO2 above the glass of fizzy drink does NOT however warm it up!
    Ocean temperatures CONTROL atmospheric CO2 levels. It is an observed fact in millions of years of data that Ocean temperature changes LEAD atmospheric CO2 changes. 
    Irrespective of these facts there are 2 other reasons why CO2 warmist theory must fail: a) the surafce cooling effect of plants b) Non equilibrium thermodynamics in the atmosphere  *Henry's Law.*

Henry's Law Problem

How many grams of carbon dioxide gas is dissolved in a 1 L bottle of carbonated water if the manufacturer uses a pressure of 2.4 atm in the bottling process at 25 °C?Given: KH of CO2 in water = 29.76 atm/(mol/L) at 25 °CSolution    When a gas is dissolved in a liquid, the concentrations will eventually reach equilibrium between the source of the gas and the solution. Henry's law shows that the concentration of a solute gas in a solution is directly proportional to the partial pressure of the gas over the solution.P = KHC where:P is the partial pressure of the gas above the solution.KH is the Henry's law constant for the solution.C is the concentration of the dissolved gas in solution.C = P/KHC = 2.4 atm/29.76 atm/(mol/L)C = 0.08 mol/LSince we have only 1 L of water, we have 0.08 mol of CO.

Convert moles to grams:

mass of 1 mol of CO₂ = 12+(16x2) = 12+32 = 44 g

Answer

g of CO2 = mol CO2 x (44 g/mol)g of CO2 = 8.06 x 10-2 mol x 44 g/molg of CO2 = 3.52 g 

There are 3.52 g of CO₂ dissolved in a 1 L bottle of carbonated water from the manufacturer.

Talking about BASIC Science .

“97% of scientists agree!”

This is the mantra that became popular several years after Al Gore’s 2006 propaganda film An Inconvenient Truth. It was endorsed by Pres. Barack Obama when he tweeted on May 16, 2013 that, “97% of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerou Where did this 97% figure originate? It appears to have started with a short 2009 paper by Peter Doran and Maggie Zimmerman of the University of Illinois at Chicago. In this paper, the announced the results of the two question poll. This poll was sent to 10,257 “Earth scientists.”
The two questions were:
1. When compared with pre- 1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?
The poll received 3,146 responses. Of these only 79 of the respondents listed climate science as their area of expertise and had published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change. Of those 79, 97% responded “yes” to both questions. 97% of 79 is 77. When they tell you that 97% of scientists agree, you need to know that they mean 77 scientists out of 10,257 polled. I admit that I’m not very good at this new math, but the way I learned it, 77 out of 10,257 is 0.75%.
This is a dramatic conclusion drawn from a mere two question poll based on subjective evaluations. I asked an expert in research methodology about their paper, and she had the following questions:
    What do they consider as an “earth scientist”?
    What do they mean by “significant”?
    Is there a standard definition of pre-1800s temperatures?
    What types of human activity are to be considered?
    Are there multiple intervening factors?
    When considering mean global temperatures, from what date range is the mean derived?
    What, exactly, is being measured in global temperatures?
Doran and Zimmerman failed to identify the possibility of question bias and polling bias in their results. They freely admit the largest source of bias, apparently in the hopes that nobody would notice. Of their subsample of respondents, they filtered for scientists who published at least 50% of their papers on the subject of climate change. In 2009, mainstream climate scientists who disagreed with the global warming model had no incentive to publish their refutations. The sampling method of the results, in essence, filtered out anyone who would disagree with the proposition of anthropogenic global warming. In plain English that means, “97% of the scientists who agree with us agree with us.” Astonishing.
The Dornan and Zimmerman study and its associated controversy prompted John Cook and several other researchers to do a study of scientific literature to try and determine the scientific consensus surrounding anthropogenic global warming. They studied 11,944 climate abstracts. Of those, 7,930 were deemed to have no position on anthropogenic global warming and were discarded. Of those that remained 78 rejected anthropogenic global warming, 40 were uncertain, and the remainder endorsed anthropogenic global warming. Somehow, 3896 papers endorsing anthropogenic global warming out of 11,944 became 97%. In a jaw-dropping case of analysis bias, 66.4% of the data was simply thrown out, allowing them to claim the remaining 32.6% was actually 97%. This paper seem to confirm Dornan and Zimmerman’s results, and was widely touted, even though it means essentially nothing because the papers cited weren’t examined beyond the abstracts.
The Barstard Polar Bears;
      Polar Bear numbers reach new highs – Population increases to the highest levels in decades

Far from the 2007 predictions of a 67% decline in global polar bear numbers, the new report reveals that numbers have risen to the highest levels in decades.
  
HOWEVER
Forty percent. ( this is the mainstream headline )

one small area is in decline , the rest doing well

That’s the stunning population loss for polar bears in the southern Beaufort Sea. The news comes from a new study linking the dramatic decline in this polar bear sub-population in northeast Alaska and Canada to a loss of sea ice due to climate change.
How does climate change affect polar bears so dramatically? Polar bears rely on sea ice to access the seals that are their primary source of food as well as to rest and breed. With less sea ice every year, polar bears and many other ice-dependent creatures are at risk.Today’s study, published in Ecological Applications, analyzed data on polar bears in northeast Alaska and the Northwest Territories and documented a 40 percent population loss between 2001-2010 from 1,500 to 900 bears.
“An urgent need to address climate change” ( here is the narrative)
Climate change is the main threat facing polar bears. But we also know the effects are being seen around the world. Now is the time we must speak up and demand global action.

1958 eh, 

“This is a clear warning sign of the impact a warming Arctic has on ice-dependent species like the polar bear,” said Dr. Pete Ewins, WWF’s Senior Species Officer in Canada. “Given this subpopulation is at the edge of the range, it’s no surprise to see this happening so soon.”
Added Margaret Williams,  Managing Director of WWF’s Arctic Program, “Here are concrete numbers to show us that the impacts of climate change are happening now. We need to change course if we want to stop further habitat loss and ensure resilient wildlife populations, both in the Arctic and around the world.”
Though;     
The US Geological Survey estimated the global population of polar bears at 24,500 in 2005. In 2015, the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group estimated the population at 26,000 (range 22,000–31,000)7 but additional surveys published 2015–2017 brought the total to near 28,500. However, data published in 2018 brought that number to almost 29,5009 with a relatively wide margin of error. This is the highest global estimate since the bears were protected by international treaty in 1973
My scientific estimates make perfect sense and they tally with what the Inuit and other Arctic residents are seeing on the ground. Almost everywhere polar bears come into contact with people, they are much more common than they used to be. It’s a wonderful conservation success story.”
From Chapter 10 of The Polar Bear Catastrophe That Never Happened (Crockford 2019). This new estimate for 2018 is a modest 4-6 fold increase over the 10,000 or so bears that existed in the 1960s and after 25 years, a credible increase over the estimate of 25,000 that the PBSG offered in 1993 (Wiig et al. 1995).2019/03/27  Do you get the feeling someone is pulling ya plonker?

weeee,,,I can fly

           Btw it tuns out that these baskets   bears, Cause these walruses to Jump!  It Turns out the walruses, love to rest on the land in large groups for protection. When they get “ spooked” they stampede, Naturally , either by film crew flying drones or the big basket bears, they naturally fall of the cliff.

The footage from the David "attaboy" our planet TV program,  looked like it was on the same beach. It wasnt.The beaches were over one hundred kilometers apart.
The Poles are Melting
Surface temperatures Undocumented adjustments
The graph shows temperatures and their adjustments in Darwin (a smallish town in NW Australia). The blue curve is actual temperature which suffered a drop in 1940, thought to be 'unusual', but happening again around 1987. The average trend of the raw data (blue) shows 0.7 degrees cooling per century. After undocumented adjustments (black curve), the red curve was arrived at, showing warming of 1.2 degrees per century. This is a very blatant case of cooking the temperature, and many such cases have been documented from all over the world. For more information, visit http://climateaudit.org/.





Policy-driven deception
Investigators Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts reported the following shortcomings in the temperature records [1]:
    1. Instrumental temperature data for the pre-satellite era (1850-1980) have been so widely, systematically, and unidirectionally tampered with that it cannot be credibly asserted there has been any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.
    2. All terrestrial surface-temperature databases exhibit very serious problems that render them useless for determining accurate long-term temperature trends.
    3. All of the problems have skewed the data so as to greatly overstate observed warming both regionally and globally.
    4. Global terrestrial temperature data are gravely compromised because more than three-quarters of the 6,000 stations that once existed are no longer reporting.
    5. There has been a severe bias towards removing higher-altitude, higher-latitude, and rural stations, leading to a further serious overstatement of warming.
    6. Contamination by urbanization, changes in land use, improper siting, and inadequately-calibrated instrument upgrades further overstates warming.
    7. Numerous peer-reviewed papers in recent years have shown the overstatement of observed longer term warming is 30-50% from heat-island contamination alone.
    8. Cherry-picking of observing sites combined with interpolation to vacant data grids may make heat-island bias greater than 50% of 20th-century warming.
    9. In the oceans, data are missing and uncertainties are substantial. Comprehensive coverage has only been available since 2003, and shows no warming.
    10. Satellite temperature monitoring has provided an alternative to terrestrial stations in compiling the global lower-troposphere temperature record. Their findings are increasingly diverging from the station-based constructions in a manner consistent with evidence of a warm bias in the surface temperature record.
    11. NOAA and NASA, along with CRU, were the driving forces behind the systematic hyping of 20th-century “global warming”.
    12. Changes have been made to alter the historical record to mask cyclical changes that could be readily explained by natural factors like multidecadal ocean and solar changes.
    13. Global terrestrial data bases are seriously flawed and can no longer be trusted to assess climate trends or VALIDATE model forecasts.
    14. An inclusive external assessment is essential of the surface temperature record of CRU, GISS and NCDC “chaired and paneled by mutually agreed to climate scientists who do not have a vested interest in the outcome of the evaluations.”
    15. Reliance on the global data by both the UNIPCC and the US GCRP/CCSP also requires a full investigation and audit.”

Surface temp measurement points

[1] http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/policy_driven_deception.html  by Joe D’Aleo and Anthony Watts

The “hockey Stick”

Back in 1998, a little known climate scientist named Michael Mann and two colleagues published a paper that sought to reconstruct the planet's past temperatures going back half a millennium before the era of thermometers--thereby showing just how out of whack recent warming has been. The finding: Recent northern hemisphere temperatures had been "warmer than any other year since (at least) AD 1400." The graph depicting this result looked rather like a hockey stick: After a long period of relatively minor temperature variations (the "shaft"), it showed a sharp mercury upswing during the last century or so ("the blade")
In a news Headline ."Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball (above, right) is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”As you can see the temperature graph shows that the temperature just varied a few tenth of a degree before 1900. This graph was publish in the very prominent scientific magazine Nature and made quite a sensation. It was also prominent display in several places in the 2001 IPCC report, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
It has now been removed from the latest 2007 IPCC report for policymakers because it has become to much of an embarrassment for the IPCC to include it.The graph was subsequently criticized by many global warming skeptics and historians, because weather events such as the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age were absent. Although with little imagination one can see that the temperature is a little higher in Medieval time period and little cooler after 1500. But the variation is far to small to correspond to historical records.

Criticism from some skeptics have been centered around the statistical Auto Regression method which was used and the associated computer program. It was suspected that it might be responsible for data set end irregularities which could be responsible for some of the rapid rise in the 20th century.
The flaw is in the method in collecting the various types of sampled data or proxy as it is called in climatology circles. It turns out that the data is collected from different sources such as corals, tree rings, ice cores and temperature records.

The temperature is only taken from measurements during the last century. The temperature estimation is mainly taken from biological materials and is primarily from tree rings. With tree ring analysis or Dendrochronology which is its scientific name, it is possible to evaluate the growing condition of trees. The distance between the rings are larger if the growing season is longer for a specific year and it becomes shorter if the growing season is short. However the tree ring growth is also affected by other conditions such as humidity, the amount of sunshine, soil and by fertilization.

Because not enough reliable temperature recordings exist before the 1900, the temperature estimations before that time are largely based on tree ring recordings. In order to estimate the tree ring growth correspondence to temperature variations a normalization was made from tree ring recordings during the 20th century by matching them against made temperature recordings. The problem of the tree ring recordings after 1900 are that they do not follow the temperature changes correctly.
The condition for tree ring growth after 1900 have changed substantially.
What was missed and what cause the flaw is something that every school kid learn at school or at least they use to!

And that is the biological mechanism of Photosynthesis!


The tree rings are affected by increased levels of CO2. In other words the tree rings grow larger today than they did 100 years ago. A major part of the extra tree ring growth is from elevated levels of Carbon Dioxide instead from the expected temperature increase. Another problem is from the so called Urban Heat effect. This effect is caused at temperature recording stations in or near urban areas which  becomes hotter over time because of urban sprawls. The concrete and asphalt heats up the area. A temperature station which 100 years ago was out in the countryside may now be in an urban area. We know that most of the recorded warming have been in the northern hemisphere in the US, Europe, Russia and in the Artic. Some of that recorded warming may be caused by The Urban Heat Effect.

Ya local weed grower adding Co2 900ppm is best aparently!

The made normalization and matching from the temperature and tree ring growth means that the temperature signals before 1900 has been severely dampened leaving the erroneous impression that temperatures before 1900 were very static. If you look closely at the hockey stick graph a marked kink can be seen where the temperature recordings are absent and where the temperature recordings are included. This is visible around year 1900 and is a result from the different normalization of the tree rings.

Harlech Castle

If you look at the temperature recording going back to 1850 at the bottom of the home page you will see that the temperature variations are of the same magnitude before 1900 as the are after the 1900.

Finally; Harlech Castle (Welsh: Castell Harlech), located in Harlech, Gwynedd, Wales, is a Grade I-listed medieval fortification, constructed atop a spur of rock close to the Irish Sea. It was built by Edward I during his invasion of Wales between 1282 and 1289 at the relatively modest cost of £8,190 notice it was designed to be re-supplied BY SEA.

Good luck with that now! 
 

So by now, if you are still clinging to the hope that you aint been scammed by these fellas; and or the odd child ..there's no hope! 

World War one British propaganda

And there's more " facts" ..will this blog ever end !

Second list.

Please circulate amongst the brain-washed kids.

1. Life and planet earth have never faced extinction before. Computer models that predict this scenario are science fiction.

2. Scientists estimate that 150-200 species of plant, insect, bird and mammal normally become extinct every 24 hours. 

3. Higher sea-levels actually deposit more sand on a beach. It is the lower sea-levels that cause erosion that undermines the sand.

4. Solar panels can supply the national grid, between latitudes 35°N-35°S. That means any solar panels south of Kaitaia are a net energy drain, and subsidised by the taxpayer.

5. Wind turbines consume fossil fuels massively in manufacture. There are 14000 inactive units in the world. The blades chop up native birds, supplying less than 1% of electricity needs.

6. More people die of cold than by heat.

7. Electric vehicles all run on electricity produced by fossil fuels.

8. Polar bear numbers are increasing, not diminishing. They are not seen in winter simply because they are all hibernating in snow-caves.

9. Mankind has survived at least one hundred ice ages, maybe more.

10. The temperature difference between Invercargill and Kaitaia is 7°C. Travellers do not step from the plane and die. Yet we are told that 2° per century is something humans cannot adapt to.  

11. One whale’s belch emits 40x more methane than one cow. Are whales are killing the planet?

12. One human exhales 40,000ppm of CO2 before each new breath.

13. Earth’s natural state is ice age. It has spent 80% of its geological history iced up.

14. The planet has warmed by only 1°C in the last 8,000 years.

15. Before the 1990s and digital dials, there were only glass thermometers and they could not accurately measure tenths. 

16. Universal sea level is still immeasurable with today’s technology.

17. Most (70%) of the world is still unexplored e.g. S America, Canada, Australia, Greenland, Russia, Arctic circle, and the many uninhabited islands.

18. 99% of life (biomass) lives in the ocean, less than 1% of life roams on land. Man constitutes 0.01% of life.

19. The rain forests could all be burned down immediately making zero difference to the world’s climate.

20. Barometric pressures are controlled by the moon’s declination cycle. This in turn controls cloud density. 

21. Satellites only photograph the tops of clouds. The direction of sea-swells determines the path of cyclones.

22. CO2, being heavier than air, only reaches the atmosphere by being thrust from volcanoes.

23. CO2 came down from the atmosphere 450 million years ago, when vegetation evolved and sucked it out. It all belongs in the atmosphere, and is trying to "go home.".

24. There is always water in the atmosphere. It is called relative humidity. Humans call it rain when it approaches 100%. We can never run out of water in air.

25. Most earthquakes and volcanoes are undetectable, as they occur under the sea. The tide of the land is really a daily earthquake.

26. We need 30 centuries of data to comment on weather/climate 100 years from now. 

27. We, the Master Race have decided we own the weather. What childish arrogance.

28. Humans are the only species not able to predict earthquakes. Even ants get warnings.

29. Because weather systems come from the sea, volcanic clouds have no lasting effect on climate.

30. An “average” is not a real quantity, but an idea. A “record” is an idea of an idea.

31. There are only about 3000 temperature gathering stations left, after the closure of stations just prior to the international climate conferences, that showed warmer conditions in the past.

32. Temperature recorders are deliberately placed in warm areas, such as airports. There is no standardisation of positioning.

33. The temperature recorders are mostly in cities, which means that 98% of the globe is unrepresented.

34. Atmosphere is Greek for wind. Wind is the movement of air. Air is made up of layers, each with varying and constantly changing and swapping temperatures.

35. The weather does not wait until the emissions from engines reach the air, and then decide what to be. 

36. Only 3% of all the water in the world is in the atmosphere at any one time. 

37. The earth is still emerging from the last ice age at 8 millionths of a degree per day warming. Some people claim the ability to sense that (but not an earthquake). 

38. Warmer winters bring less ice and snow to highways and shipping lanes, saving millions to world economies, also reducing deaths and increasing productivity.

39. Life proliferates in warmth, therefore would welcome global warming, which is why more species are found at or near the equator.

40. Look out the window. Where is the Climate Catastrophe? Where is the Climate Emergency? What Crisis? 

Go outside and play.