John Weaver | Rejoining the Paris Climate Accords

Commentary
Share on facebook
Share
Share on twitter
Tweet
Share on email
Email

The Joe Biden administration will rejoin the Paris Climate Accords after President Donald Trump left the accords for good reasons.

First, the world’s No. 1 and 3 polluters (China-India) of carbon dioxide emissions were exempted in the accords and were free to continue and even increase pollution until 2030. Both of those nations have plans to build thousands of new CO2-polluting coal-fired power plants that will increase their pollution, exacerbating the world problem.

Secondly, “rich” nations were expected to contribute money to help poorer nations implement pollution reduction programs: The poor nations could take the money with no obligation to implement any changes. Accordingly, as it turns out, the only “rich” nation in sight is America. China, the biggest polluter, the second largest economy (soon to be first), is considered a developing nation. Trump, recognizing the absurdity and anti-American nature of these accords, withdrew.

Biden and his Climate Czar John Kerry, who travels the world via private jet, emitting more pollution than most small cities, believes the accords are just what the world needs. This begs the question of what is the “climate change” fuss all about?

The central scientific fact of climate change theories is that the atmospheric level of CO2 gas has about doubled over the last hundred years. Everything else in the diatribe sphere about climate change is based on assumptions, calculations and models that try to predict how climate is affected by CO2 levels. The main idea, they say, is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that will capture and retain heat. The more CO2, the more heat to be held, hence warming the entire planet with dire consequences.

Know that CO2 is a naturally occurring gas necessary for nearly all life on Earth to exist. Plants, from trees and grass to seaweeds and algae, literally eat CO2 and emit oxygen that most animals, land and sea, require to survive. 

No CO2 means no plants, which results in a barren, lifeless planet with no animals, including humans. It should be obvious to anyone that an atmosphere with no CO2 would be the real catastrophe; the barren-Earth scenario; the inevitable fate of planet Earth at some point in the future.

For a billion years the ecosystem has been scrubbing CO2 from the atmosphere from a point where its concentration was 20 times higher than current levels. The trillions upon trillions of tons of carbon so scrubbed from the atmosphere didn’t disappear and still exist today, trapped forever in the form of fossil fuels. That is, trapped forever unless the fuel is burned at some point to provide energy for human civilization.

Viewed from this perspective, the use of fossil fuels, far from being a scourge to life on Earth as climate alarmists would claim, is instead a necessary replenishment of a resource vital to the continuation of life. Evidence of more CO2/More Life is already apparent. Satellite images reveal new green zones around the planet.

Climate alarmists base their dire predictions on the idea that temperatures will rise, causing polar ice caps to melt, seas to rise, storms to devastate the planet, and human habitat to disappear. We’ll all die! Anyone questioning these predictions is summarily derided as a “climate denier.” But how good are the predictions?

There’s no science verifying a general rise in annual temperature caused by increases in CO2, nor is there “science” verifying the draconian consequences of such rises predicted by alarmists. There are only models that predict rises based on individual modelers’ assumptions about how CO2 affects temperature. To date, the models have been grossly inaccurate, over-predicting temperature increases that haven’t occurred. Nevertheless, modelers persist and various “politician-scientists” are happy to trumpet their unverified results to achieve political and personal ends. Al Gore is a prime example.

Gore flunked or barely passed science classes in college. However, he excelled in bloviation as if he were an expert. Since leaving the vice presidency in 2000, he has enriched himself in more than $100 million traveling the world in his private jet, lecturing on climate change, scaring people, especially young impressionable people like Greta Thunberg. He tells of the dire consequences to come and produces films with massive factual errors, like predicting in the 1990s that all Arctic sea ice would disappear within seven years; not true 25 years later. He also predicted the imminent extinction of polar bears, which, according to population surveys, are thriving.

Another prime example is Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. AOC claims a degree in economics from Boston University and, judging from her public statements on economics, should sue to get her money back. She learned her science while working as a bartender opening beers. Her insane “green new deal” based on the fiction that the world ends in 11 years, has gained political traction among Democrats. Of course, when the world doesn’t end in 11 years as predicted, AOC will claim the “green new deal” saved the world and she’ll run for president.

John Weaver is a more-than-20-year resident of Santa Clarita. He carries degrees in physics and mathematics from Carnegie Institute of Technology (Now Carnegie Mellon University). “Right Here, Right Now” appears on Saturdays and rotates among local Republicans.

Related To This Story

Latest NEWS