Some scientists call it bunk, especially the overreaction to it. While I acknowledge long-term warming, I think the influence of CO2 is vastly overstated, and that the benefits of a modest reduction in it will be negligible.
From his book Heaven + Earth, Australian professor
Ian Plimer, >>>
Dr Plimer states :
The Earth is an evolving dynamic system. Current changes in climate, sea level and ice are within variability. Atmospheric CO2 is the lowest for 500 million years. Climate has always been driven by the Sun, the Earth’s orbit and plate tectonics and the oceans, atmosphere and life respond. Humans have made their mark on the planet, thrived in warm times and struggled in cool times. The hypothesis tha humans can actually change climate is unsupported by evidence from geology, archaeology, history and astronomy. The hypothesis is rejected. A new ignorance fills the yawning spiritual gap in Western society. Climate change politics is religious fundamentalism masquerading as science. Its triumph is computer models unrelated to observations in nature. There has been no critical due diligence of the science of climate change, dogma dominates, sceptics are pilloried and 17th Century thinking promotes prophets of doom, guilt and penance. When plate tectonics ceases and the world runs out of new rocks, there will be a tipping point and irreversible climate change. Don’t wait up.
Will Happer is another, highly-respected physicist out of Princeton, who compares the anti-CO2 crowd to the prohibitionists prior to the passage of the 18th Amendment. Dr. Happer says:
The earth's climate really is strongly affected by the greenhouse effect, although the physics is not the same as that which makes real, glassed-in greenhouses work. Without greenhouse warming, the earth would be much too cold to sustain its current abundance of life. However, at least 90% of greenhouse warming is due to water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide is a bit player. There is little argument in the scientific community that a direct effect of doubling the CO2 concentration will be a small increase of the earth's temperature -- on the order of one degree. Additional increments of CO2 will cause relatively less direct warming because we already have so much CO2 in the atmosphere that it has blocked most of the infrared radiation that it can. It is like putting an additional ski hat on your head when you already have a nice warm one below it, but you're only wearing a windbreaker. To really get warmer, you need to add a warmer jacket. The IPCC thinks that this extra jacket is water vapor and clouds.
Despite the advanced levels of these 3 highly respected scientists, the core of what they say is not that much different than what I myself was saying back in the 1960s, when I got a BA in Geography at CCNY and later taught classes there. When I talked about greenhouse effect. the notion was new, and people thought I was talking about growing plants.
The 10 Most-Respected Global Warming Skeptics (businessinsider.com)
apple.news
