FR ^ | May 31, 2017 | cc
First - to hear Big Media and the Climate-Panic Lobby tell it, we humans are the only major source of the "pollutant" CO2. But there's actually another, even bigger "polluter" - Mother Nature. Every year, volcanoes produce about 20 times as much CO2 as humans - a whopping 95% of the total. So even if we all shut down every single engine, furnace, and fire on Earth and all went back to living in cold dark caves, total CO2 output would ONLY be reduced by 5% ... which is nothing. Worse, volcanic output is highly variable, so even any painful sacrifices we make could easily be negated by an extra-heavy year of eruptions. Obviously, any political agreement that only reduces human output by a few percentage points (and leaves out big polluters like China and India) is, in the total scheme of things, useless.
The second issue here that the Panickers don't like to talk about is that there is NO "climate-change smoking gun". That is, there is NO clear, NO direct, NO scientifically-proven linkage between human CO2 production and climate change - there's only a simplistic, inferred, implied one (a "rise" in world temps over the last ~150 years, the same time that human industry grew a lot). THAT'S why the Panickers always have to mention phrases like "the great consensus among scientists" or "95% of scientists believe", to try and impress the skeptical public. Problem is, Science is not (and never was) a popular contest or democracy where the idea with the most number of followers wins ... in fact, many times it has been the lone rebel who bucked the "established consensus" who discovered a scientific truth - Galileo, Pasteur, even the Wright Brothers. So please be aware of, and challenge, this false argument whenever the cowards try to use it to shut down the debate.