Reason vs. carbon crazies

A Rational Response to the Carbon Cult

       In your Jan. 5 editorial “The Kyoto Scorecard” you note the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol, which sought to limit carbon-dioxide emissions in order to stop increases in global temperatures allegedly caused by human activity. Unfortunately, you cite various increases in such emissions in contravention of the protocol while neglecting to cite figures on the actual amount of carbon in the atmosphere and the percentage of increase caused by human sources.

Citing the former, including increases of 20% in the Netherlands, 24% in Canada and 10.3% in the U.S. (which declined to sign the protocol), will only add to the hysteria of calling for carbon taxes and other economically ruinous measures.  However, citing the latter will add much needed rationality to the debate on climate change.

Carbon dioxide is a trace gas currently occupying less than 4/100ths of 1% of atmospheric volume. Although atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide may have doubled since 1950, less than .5% of this increase is attributable to burning of fossil fuels by human kind.  This human caused increase amounts to less than 1/1,000th of 1% of atmospheric volume.  The oceans and the so-called “bio-sphere” – the amalgam of respiration and decay of living organisms – account for the overwhelming remainder of this increase.

Clearly the national debate on climate change should contemplate these facts and the likely cause of increased emission of carbon emissions from sources other than human consumption of fossil fuels.  This likely cause is increased solar activity, which is simultaneously increasing the temperature on Mars.  Unless there is an advanced Martian civilization burning vast amounts of coal and oil, global-warming alarmism needs some serious re-evaluation.  (Letter to the editor, WSJ January 2013, Robert M Petrusak, Fairfax, VA.)  

What the cult will reply to actual reason
       Thanks for this excellent information and analysis on carbon and man’s cause of the coming apocalypse.  The science of global warming was settled in the 1990’s, about the same time we started calling the debate climate change, the better to confuse reason with emotion.  Once science is settled through “consensus” all true believers naturally go on to the next step, which is always government control of that which evil man will not control by himself. 

Once men get into government, they convert miraculously from evil to pure.  In the name of pure science, they now apply government led science to the assessment and collection of additional revenue to pay for anything needed by the government.  The carbon tax is essential to reward and punish all those folks who emit more than their fair share of carbon.  The government’s bureaucrats will determine what this fair share really is.

The fact that we now have evidence that Mars is also warming is really irrelevant to government run science.  When a judge in Boston rules that the EPA has authority to control trace gasses in the atmosphere, it does not matter that these trace elements are essential to life and circulate through every living thing. 

Life on earth is really irrelevant when it is the planet we are trying to save.  Man is the evil on this planet, and is the one who is defiling the earth. 

Once a tax is in place on a scientific element which is invisible, the good folks in government will adjust that tax up and down according to their need for revenue. 

What you don’t understand is that the planet and many of the creatures were here first.  For this reason they have priority.  Any finding of endangerment means all man’s activities on the planet must cease until an environmental impact statement is completed.