The Global Statist War on the BuildingBlock of Life

I applaud Mike Kaulbars for not censoring this GreenFyre discussion which I see as rather embarrassing to the alarmists who seek to enlist the force of the Global State’s guns and prisons to suppress the welfare of the living for fear of an asserted future catastrophic effect on global temperature from the couple of spectral lines of the CO2 molecule which is the anabolic half of the respiratory cycle of life .

The Libertarian Party Statement of Principles  “challenge[s] the cult of the omnipotent state” . We see here the deification of the State and its agencies . The utterances of NASA are unequivocal and unbiased despite their guru Hansen comparing the coal trains which supply the electricity which empowers this very conversation to nazi death trains , and the condemnation of this fraud by their last astronaut to have walked on the Moon . Any group which questions the State funded view and believes in the superior intelligence , imperfect tho it is , of a citizenry optimizing the welfare of their families in a free market , undistorted by forced ( ie , State ) cash flows is denigrated and its arguments and evidence dismissed by the most perversely ill logic .

One of Harry Browne’s favorite classical liberal observations was that War is the lifeblood of the State . For the State to justify its use of Force , it must induce fear of an enemy . When it runs out of external enemies , it criminalizes its own citizens . In this iteration , the Global State is trying to criminalize our making a bit more carbon available to the biosphere from previous lush epochs to power our connected lives .

As sort of a Pavlovian experiment , I mentioned the pompous but talented Christopher Monkton wondering if it would trigger a cascade of abuse against all connected with this feared opponent  without regard the fact that I was abstracting an incident at a Heartland Conference where he gave me exactly the same crap about not even glancing at anything other peer reviewed publications which  the ecoStatists on the blog were dissing me with .  Yep .   Sorry blogs like this are the max I have time for .

There also was a bunch of twatter , siccing the Dunning-Kruger effect on those of us deigning to question their core science . It’s essentially the claim : You’re dumber than you think you are but I am as bright as I think I am .    Well , back at you , baby .

It’s been established that none of the alarmists in the thread know that albedo ( reflectivity ) never occurs in the calculation of the temperature of a radiantly heated gray ( flat spectrum ) ball .  That only comes in when you have a colored spectrum .

Here’s more of a highschool level question :

Here’s some basic data : thermometer records ( centigrade ) from some of the first cities to keep them going back to 1820 and beyond . Looks pretty linear to me .

Historic Temperatures

The concentration of atmospheric CO2 is said to have increased from about 28 molecules per 100,000 to 39 over that period , an increase of about 39% .  Our temperature over that period increased from about 287.0 kelvin to 287.7 , or about 0.24% .  Assuming that total increase in our temperature is due to CO2 , what is the simple extrapolated increase in our temperature for another 39% increase in CO2 concentration ? Is that frightening ?

Weighing against that fear , one might consider how much plant life is starving for those extra CO2 molecules :

3 comments for “The Global Statist War on the BuildingBlock of Life

  1. August 22, 2011 at 6:26 pm

    Bizarrely stupid and uneducated response .

    Those thermometer records range over the most populated third of the Northern Hemisphere , from Minneapolis USA to St Petersburg Russia over periods of a 180 years at a minimum .

    Yes , the simple extrapolation of the rather linear trend over those close to 2 centuries and more ignores ANY causal hypothesis . As you should have learned in Middle School , it simply extends the record of the past into the future . Where is there anything in those data to claim something is radically increasing that slope ?

    If you want to get into the physics , go to my website . Here’s the most essential data :

    It appears you have no answer to the undeniable fact that plants love any increase in the CO2 out of which ( along with H2O & ash ) they build themselves . Where does that boon to the planet’s productivity weigh in your “green” balance of good versus evil ?

  2. simith
    August 22, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    bizarrely terrible article

    Central England Temperature is not global. Second, the early part of the CET record is not reliable enough to derive short term trends. Third, calculating warming from CO2 as % increase in CO2 vs % increase in temperature is ridiculous. Completely ignores aerosol cooling and assumes the oceans have no thermal inertia.

  3. June 22, 2011 at 12:01 pm

    Excellent article, and also PP. Suggested for repost at .

Comments are closed.