The Man-Made Climate Change Hysteria
By: David Deschesne
Editor/Publisher, Fort Fairfield Journal
March 15, 2017
Dihydrogen Monoxide
With all the clamor over Carbon Dioxide pollution these days, what would you think if I told you our environment was also saturated with the chemical compound dihydrogen monoxide? Would it be a reaction of fear and uncertainty? Should we start an environmentalist movement to ban dihydrogen monoxide? How about a global tax to help reduce its levels? Sound like a good idea?
The popular cable television show hosted by Penn & Teller addressed that issue ten years ago by sending a lady to an environmentalist rally to circulate a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide, or at least petition the government to control its levels.
She told people who considered signing the petition that dihydrogen monoxide is “a chemical that is found in reservoirs and lakes, pesticides. Different kinds of companies are using this - Styrofoam companies, nuclear companies and now when they’re using it in pesticides, when we’re washing our food, it’s not coming out. Which of course means it ends up in our grocery stores and in our baby’s food and stuff like that. It causes excessive sweating and urination.”
The passionate people at the environmentalist rally signed the petition one right after another without even asking what dihydrogen monoxide was.
About now, I probably have a few chemists and science teachers chuckling so I’ll let all you other readers in on the joke. Dihydrogen monoxide’s chemical equation is H2O, and is commonly known as water.
That’s right, couched in serious, alarmist “environmentalist” tones, the petitioner was able to get otherwise well-meaning people to sign a petition banning water. Since most people are not chemists or science teachers, they wouldn’t readily recognize the scientific term for water and would naturally, if sufficiently scared, cast their vote to abolish it. Penn & Teller concluded that it seems most people aren’t thinkers as much as they are followers. Adolph Hitler also came to the same conclusion around seventy years ago, when he wrote his book, Mein Kampf.
While this would be an excellent study on groupthink and the dangers of democracy (democracy is rule by the will of the majority), I’m going to stick to the environmental side of the topic for now.
Carbon Dioxide
With environmentalist demagogues using hype and rhetoric to sway public opinion on carbon dioxide, we should examine it a little more closely.
Carbon dioxide (CO2), which is also known as carbonic acid gas, is a colorless, odorless gas which exists naturally in our Earth’s atmosphere. It is comprised of one carbon atom and two oxygen atoms.
All mammals, fish and birds, some insects and bacteria burn carbon and oxygen in the course of their normal metabolism. The carbon comes primarily from the sugar/carbohydrates they eat and the oxygen is either breathed in, or absorbed. A natural byproduct of such organic metabolism is carbon dioxide. For all the hype it’s received, carbon dioxide makes up a relatively small 0.038% of the Earth’s atmosphere; way behind Oxygen (21%) and Nitrogen (78%) - both of which are also colorless, odorless gasses.
Photosynthesis
While carbon dioxide is dangerous to the aforementioned life forms on Earth, there is one type of life form that thrives quite well in a carbon dioxide environment. In fact, it actually uses that gas as part of its food supply.
Virtually all forms of plants, flowers, grass and trees use a process called photosynthesis to form carbon dioxide into more useful compounds. Plants harness the energy of sunlight absorbed by chlorophyll to build carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and the hydrogen in water. This reaction is often referred to as assimilation or fixation of carbon.
In the course of photosynthesis the hydrogen in water is used to transform carbon dioxide into carbohydrate; simultaneously the oxygen of the water is liberated as free oxygen gas and returned back into the Earth’s atmosphere. Green plants may transform the carbohydrates into fats, proteins and many other substances.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica (1958 ed), plants remove an estimated 1011 tons of carbon dioxide from the earth’s atmosphere per year and land plants grow faster when provided with more carbon dioxide than is found in nature (op cit. Vol. 17, p. 848).
So, the more carbon dioxide that is put into the air, the faster plants grow and remove it.
With carbon dioxide as the fundamental building block of all life forms (humans and animals eat plants), perhaps instead of passing restrictions on its production or some global taxing system to reduce its quantities, we should simply be planting more trees and flowers.
At only 0.038 percent of the Earth’s atmosphere, carbon dioxide isn’t really as much of a problem as most environmentalists would lead us to believe...neither is “dihydrogen monoxide.”
Greenhouse Effect
Environmentalist extremists will point to the planet Venus and its extremely high heat as evidence of excessive carbon dioxide producing some sort of “Greenhouse Effect.”
However, as late as 1959, Venus’ ground temperature was calculated to be only 17 degrees Celsius, three degrees above the mean annual temperature of the Earth before being updated to 800 degrees. Also, in a report from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in 1962 on the Mariner II spacecraft that orbited Venus, JPL scientists noted that “light does not even penetrate the cloud cover,” and “very little greenhouse effect could realize itself under such conditions.” (see Worlds in Collision, ©1967 Immanuel Velikovsky, p. 7).
So, we really don’t know why Venus is as hot as it appears to be. Velikovsky theorizes it may be petroleum fires burning on the planet, but there is currently no way to prove that theory (ibid, p. 370)
Another point to consider is Venus is 26 million miles closer to the sun than the earth is, so more of the sun’s energy hits it than the earth’s. Carbon dioxide and greenhouse effects have nothing to do with that, either.
The earth, however, has some pretty ingenious ways of cooling itself. I’ve heard it said that an average size tree absorbing sunlight cools the air with the same amount of BTU’s as twenty average size home air conditioners.
Ozone Layer
We’ve also been scared to death about the deteriorating effects man’s products have had on the ozone layer of the earth’s atmosphere. Ozone (O3) is both produced and destroyed by absorption of ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Most of it is found at high altitudes.
UV light with a wavelength less than about 2,000 Angstroms (A) produces Ozone, while UV light in wavelengths in the range of 3,000-2,000 A destroys it. This cycle is continued by the sun’s rays on a daily basis. (see Encyclopedia Britannica, 1958 ed., Vol. 16, p. 1001).
In addition to UV radiation, ozone is also produced by an electrical discharge on oxygen in the air. On a small scale, commercial “Ozone generators” pass air over electrically charged plates - on a planetary scale, ozone is created by lightening storms in our earth’s atmosphere. There is a lighting storm occurring somewhere on Earth every second of the day.
Ozone helps shield our planet from harmful UV rays, while it’s the Earth’s electromagnetic field that protects us from damaging microwave, gamma rays and X-rays by deflecting them before they enter our atmosphere.
UV rays are not responsible for warming the earth, rather it’s the sun’s infrared rays that do that. Common forms of UV light used by man come in the form of “black lights” used by D.J.’s and UV lights in kitchens and supermarket delis to kill airborne bacteria.
Now that I have shown you how the rhetoric of environmentalists can convince any well-meaning, but uninformed person to sign a petition to ban water, and how our ecosystem pretty much takes care of itself in regards to Carbon Dioxide and Ozone, we can all now direct our energy toward combating the real threats to our continued liberty, freedom and existence on this big, beautiful, blue ball.
On Global Climate Change
The Mammoth
A Wooly Mammoth is an elephant from the Pleistocene period, a time period that ended around 10,000 years ago. Its size was about the same as our existing Indian elephant.1 A typical Mammoth would weigh anywhere from 10,000 to 12,000 pounds.
The mammoth belonged to the family of elephants. Its tusks were sometimes as much as ten feet long. Its teeth were highly developed and their “density” was greater than in any other stage in the evolution of the elephants; apparently they did not succumb in the struggle for survival as an unfit product of evolution. The extinction of the mammoth is thought to have coincided with the end of the last glacial period.2
In 1799 the frozen bodies of 10,000 year-old mammoths were found in the tundras of Siberia. The corpses were so well preserved that sledge dogs ate the flesh unharmed. In B Digby’s book The Mammoth (1926) he noted an observation by D.F. Hertz; “The flesh is fibrous and marbled with fat” and “looks as well as frozen beef.”
Darwin admitted that he was unable to find an explanation for the extermination of the mammoth, an animal better developed than the elephant, which did survive.3
“In conformity with the theory of evolution, Darwin’s supporters supposed that a gradual sinking of the land forced the mammoths to the hills, where they found themselves isolated by marshes. However, if geological processes are slow, the mammoths would not have been trapped on the isolated hills. Besides, this theory cannot be true because the animals did not die of starvation. In their stomachs and between their teeth undigested grass and leaves were found. This, too, proves that they died from a sudden cause...as the bodies of the animals were found not decomposed but well preserved in blocks of ice, the change in temperature must have followed their death very closely or even caused it.”4
So, how do you get a 10,000 pound animal to freeze so quickly that there is no decomposition of his body, or the food in his teeth and stomach? Some have considered the earth underwent a sort of “flash freeze” in the past - a freeze that happened extremely quickly, perhaps within minutes or hours.
Several postulations for the flash freeze have been offered, from a comet colliding with the earth, the earth’s axis tipping, or the moon’s ceasing to revolve on its axis causing a change in the gravitational pull on the earth’s core and affecting the weather in very drastic ways.
It is beyond the scope of this editorial to determine what caused the flash freeze, it is simply enough to admit that one must have happened.
Antarctica
The continent of Antarctica, at the Earth’s South Pole, is currently under a sheet of ice, but it wasn’t always in that condition. Today, Antarctica does not have a single tree on it, but it must have been covered at one time by forests since coal deposits have been discovered there.5
“The Piri Reis map, a section of a larger world map of ancient times, found in 1929 amid the clutter of the former harem of the ousted Sultan of Turkey, clearly shows the true coast of Antarctica as it would be without the covering of ice, as well as the topography of the interior.”6
Antarctica appears on mapas mundi (World Maps) from the fifteenth and even fourteenth centuries A.D. - hundreds of years before the discovery of Antarctica - and the continent is shown ice free.7
It is an intriguing fact that Antarctica was once dry land, but now is covered by ice, all without man even playing a role - I’m sure this would stump some environmentalists who attribute all of the earth’s climate changes to man’s pollution.
Global “Cooling?”
Dr. David Deming, geophysicist and adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis, and associate professor of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma noted in a December 19, 2007 Washington Times editorial; “Unexpected bitter cold swept the entire Southern Hemisphere in 2007. Johannesburg, South Africa, had the first significant snowfall in 26 years. Australia experienced the coldest June ever. In northeastern Australia, the city of Townsville underwent the longest period of continually cold weather since 1941. In New Zealand, the weather turned so cold that vineyards were endangered.”
Dr. Deming goes on to illustrate many areas of lower than normal temperatures citing a “global cooling” of sorts, much to the chagrin of Carbon Dioxide fear mongerers in the Environmental Extremist movement.
More recently snow actually fell in the Sahara Desert—one of the hottest places on Earth. But, I guess we can blame that on greenhouse gasses, too.
Conclusion
My point here is that in the past, the Earth has undergone massive climate change without man or man’s pollution as contributing factors. Today, we have been lulled into believing that a global tax, or Carbon Dioxide reduction will save us from “Climate Change,” when in reality the Earth is going to go through its natural cycles no matter how much pollution we cut, or how much tax money we raise.
The truth about the proposed carbon taxes is, they’re designed to take money from the industrialized countries and give it to the non-producing countries as a sort of global government welfare scheme.
While clean air to breathe should be a primary concern, using rhetoric and scare tactics to force through a global tax should never be resorted to, since money will not help us when God once again decides to change earth’s climate.
Notes
1. Encyclopedia Britannica, 1958 ed., vol. 14, p. 756
2. World in Collision, ©1950 Immanuel Velikovsky, p. 41
3. Ivory and the Elephant in Art, in Archaeology, and in Science, ©1916 G.F. Kunz, p. 236.
4 Worlds in Collision, pp. 42-43
5. ibid, p. 37
6. The Bermuda Triangle , ©1974 Charles Berlitz, p. 155
7. Divine Encounters, ©1955 Zecharia Sitchin, pp.99-100.
