December 11, 2018, GBR post update.
Wednesday, June 23, 2021 :
At this point, we perhaps need to stop and ask ourselves the awkward, yet obvious question, ‘what else does the mainstream-media feverishly lie to us about, every day, every hour, every minute on ‘climate change’, specifically, in this case, The Great Barrier Reef? And, for what purpose, which agenda, whose ideology?’
A remarkable example of media and academic deceit unfolding before your very own eyes, in the case of Ridd Vs James Cook Universirty Vs Academic Freedom (Truth) Vs the survival of enquiry (the survival of human civilisation).
Via GWPF :
Peter Ridd: Great Barrier Reef ‘has completely recovered’ from 2016 bleaching event
Date: 22/06/21 Sky News Australia
Physicist and author Peter Ridd says just about every area of the Great Barrier Reef – according to the statistics – “has completely recovered” since the 2016 bleaching event and is in “no danger”.
(Click to watch)
“The area which was hit by the 2016 bleaching has completely recovered; every area except one has got above average coral cover, some at near-record levels… so actually the statistics make it look wonderful,” he said.
“Our untrustworthy science institutions have now given the Chinese the ammunition to beat us with. We need audits of our own scientists so we can’t be crucified with our own work.
“If climate change is going to affect the Great Barrier Reef, it’s going to affect all the reefs of the world, but they’re only picking on Australia because they don’t like our climate policy – it’s just a political stunt that has been fuelled by our own untrustworthy science institutions.”
GREAT Barrier Reef Recovery – Climatism
“WE need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public’s imagination…
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts…
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest.“
– Prof. Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports
REMEMBER when climate ‘scientists’ said “Corals on Great Barrier Reef will never be the same after back-to-back heat waves“ …
REMEMBER when climate ‘scientists’ said “Global warming has changed the Great Barrier Reef ‘forever’ …
View original post 2,259 more words
PHYS.ORG SCIENTIST ON CLIMATE : “It’s Like The Boy Who Repeatedly Cried Wolf. If I Observe Successive Forecast Failures, I May Be Unwilling To Take Future Forecasts Seriously.”Posted: April 10, 2021
“It’s like the boy who repeatedly cried wolf. If I observe many successive forecast failures, I may be unwilling to take future forecasts seriously.
“The ‘problem’ is not only that all of the expired forecasts were wrong, but also that so many of them never admitted to any uncertainty about the date.”
Every once in a while, ‘a few brave scientists’, driven by verifiable science, empirical data, and an endless supply of failed predictions, feel obliged to tell you a few home truths about ‘climate change’ and the failure of manufactured hysteria, all designed to scare you into submission.
This bothers them, naturally.
Article, via the ‘International Journal of Global Warming’ …
For decades, climate change researchers and activists have used dramatic forecasts to attempt to influence public perception of the problem and as a call to action on climate change. These forecasts have frequently been for events that might be called “apocalyptic,” because they predict cataclysmic events resulting from climate change.
In a new paper published in the International Journal of Global Warming, Carnegie Mellon University’s David Rode and Paul Fischbeck argue that making such forecasts can be counterproductive. “Truly apocalyptic forecasts can only ever be observed in their failure—that is the world did not end as predicted,” says Rode, adjunct research faculty with the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, “and observing a string of repeated apocalyptic forecast failures can undermine the public’s trust in the underlying science.”
Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.
Fischbeck noted, “from a forecasting perspective, the ‘problem’ is not only that all of the expired forecasts were wrong, but also that so many of them never admitted to any uncertainty about the date. About 43% of the forecasts in our dataset made no mention of uncertainty.”
More information: David C. Rode et al, Apocalypse now Communicating extreme forecasts, International Journal of Global Warming (2021). DOI: 10.1504/IJGW.2021.112896
- NO GLOBAL WARMING : Global Temperature Now 0.01 Degrees Below Average | Climatism
- COGNITIVE BIAS : Climate Change Alarmists Refuse To Accept ‘The Science’ That Proves Extreme Weather Events Are NOT Increasing | Climatism
- SNOWFALL Will Signal The Death Of The Global Warming Cult | Climatism
“The polar bear as an icon for climate change is dead
because the distorted predictions made by
polar bear specialists were wrong.”
“This is a lesson for researchers in other areas
who have failed to stop the invasion of
politics into their science.”
Mr. Art Krugler, a leading geothermal engineer and author, along with Vijay Jayaraj, a Climate Researcher who graduated from the University of East Anglia, proposes an interesting perspective into the current phase of the climatic system based around uranium ore deposits.
The authors note, “The recent cooling stands in stark contrast to the alarmist models’ predictions, which predicted progressively warmer temperatures because of the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas concentration.”
While society is forced to only accept the arbitrary value of trace gas, and plant food carbon dioxide as the “climate control knob”, such new perspectives on the complex machinations of our ‘global’ atmosphere, perhaps, heighten the need to stop and pause, in the better interests of science, nature, and the ‘sustainability’ of the human existence.
For “shutting down Nuclear and Coal plants, and installing more renewables and gas-fired turbines will not benefit the world. Renewables, despite the global fanfare, are incapable of providing reliable and affordable electricity. Not having power for several days would be a devastating catastrophe. At present, there are no cheap batteries or even a high-volume source of batteries that can store energy generated by renewables”.
Read on …
New Discoveries that Change “Settled Science” based Climate and Energy Perspectives
By Art Krugler with Vijay Jayaraj
Polar bears had been at the center of the debate surrounding climate change. In my book “POLAR BEARS in the HOT TUB”, I addressed the claims about how the global temperature change was impacting Polar Bears and what caused these changes in temperature.
I explained that the rate at which CO2 was increasing depended on the hydrogen content of fossil fuels and further that there was no connection between CO2 concentration and temperature rise or energy use.
In this, the book’s sequel, I use five data sets to identify the energy source behind the increase in global temperatures since 1980 and the reason for subsequent cooling in recent years.
The sequel is based on five key data sets:
1. A NOAA global temperature map (2013) showing warm and cool areas on the planet.
2. A NOAA global temperature map (2017) identifying alarming temperature “Hot Spots” at geographical locations, especially within the Arctic Circle.
3. A 2020 global temperature map showing the absence of most of those hot spots, especially Arctic areas.
4. The data, discovered by Krugler in 2020, which shows that all of the global hot spots were located above deposits of uranium ore.
5. Historical data that shows low sun spot activity is correlated with mini-ice-ages and major sun spot activity correlates with warming global periods, thus connecting the uranium deposit activity to sunspot activity.
These five new perspectives must alter Global Energy Reports and Policies that have been against the use of fossil fuel.
Here is why.
Disappearance of Existing Hotspots: CO2 Not the Primary Driver of Temperatures
The first data in the book reaffirms one of the most common faults that many climate scientists have been using: CO2 cannot be the primary driver of global average temperatures.
Global temperature maps (for 2016 and 2020) are available from NOAA showing hot areas and colder areas.
NOAA Global Temperature Map – for year 2017
Note the absence of large red [hot] areas, and the many blue [colder] areas appearing in the latest  map.
This cooling stands in stark contrast to the alarmist models’ predictions, which predicted progressively warmer temperatures because of the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas concentration.
The irrefragable connection between Uranium Ore and Thermal Hot spots demonstrates that Uranium ore deposits are the Primary Driver of Global Warming.
The fifth set of data reveals groundbreaking insights into the totally ignored correlation between Uranium ore deposits and thermal hot spots in regions across the globe. A table showing the location and the amount of the top 10 of uranium ore deposits worldwide is given below.
|URANIUM ORE DEPOSITS – TOP 10 as on 12/20/2020|
|RANK||COUNTRY||2015 Reserves in Tonnes||Percent of Total Reserves|
Surprisingly, each of the uranium ore deposits is located beneath a “hot spot”. The data suggests that the warming since 1980 must have been caused by the nuclear reactions in the uranium ore deposits, rather than the current popular theory that blames the Greenhouse Gas blankets.
It is also very important to note that hotspots have disappeared or cooled down considerably during the last 5 years. If these hot spots continue to cool in the future, then the world temperatures will not increase. Instead we would witness a drop-in temperature.
However, there is another critical correlation that determines the future of global average temperature: Sunspots.
Sunspot Activity and Global Temperature
Scientific data prove that the past two mini ice ages correlated with the absence of sunspots and the warmer periods in recent millennia correlated with an increase in sunspot activity.
Average yearly sunspot numbers –
Graph of average yearly sunspot numbers showing the 11-year solar cycle. Image Credit and Source: Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
The increase in sunspot activity also correlated with the global warming that began in the 1980s. Prior to the 1980s, there was no major increase in temperatures despite 200 years of Industrialization and high atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. Sunspots are now at very low levels and cooling is happening, as observed from the global temperature maps above.
According to commentators, the next Cycle 25 is likely to be slightly smaller than Cycle 24 and much lower than the maximum annual sunspot number of 250).
Implications for Energy Policy
Given the non-correlation between CO2 and global temperatures, economies can now shift towards an energy policy that is more fossil friendly as other sources are developed.
Shutting down Nuclear and Coal plants, and installing more renewables and gas fired turbines will not benefit the world. Renewables, despite the global fanfare, are incapable of providing reliable and affordable electricity. Not having power for several days would be a devastating catastrophe. At present, there are no cheap batteries or even a high-volume source of batteries that can store energy generated by renewables.
This requires operating gas turbines to negate the disruptions in renewable generation. It also requires maintaining the supply chain of natural gas from gas well, through gas purification to remove sulphur, to compressors, to pipelines and to gas storage.
Moreover, contrary to popular belief, this policy will continue to drive CO2 levels higher and even worse, increase the cost of power and everything else in society. All efforts to reduce CO2 levels to save our planet are ineffective, costly and counterproductive.
Keeping hydrocarbons in the ground or raising the cost of hydrocarbons will have serious consequences. For example, there is no substitute source (apart form Hydrocarbons) for asphalt for roads, roofs, polyester for clothes, carpets, polyester fiber for tire sidewalls, graphite fiber for lightweight electric cars or for the more than 5000 other products that we depend on an everyday basis. All these are derived from hydrocarbons.
Coal may not be KING but it can be a SAVIOR with no negative factors. Coal, with acid gases removed from the stack gas, provides reliable power from local fuel and also CO2 at ground level for increased production of food from land and sea.
Developing economies, and even some developed economies, will experience immediate and adverse consequences if they shift away from hydrocarbons. The most logical analysis reveals that CO2 and greenhouse gases are not the primary drivers of global temperatures.
With the advent of these new findings on Uranium ore’s correlation with temperature hotspots, it is time policy makers and decision-making institutions pay attention to the simplicity of the climate system and stop restricting themselves to the narrow theory of fossil fuel driven global warming.
About the Author: Mr. Art Krugler is a leading geothermal engineer who has directed design and construction work on binary and flash steam plants in California, Nevada, Utah and Texas, and has contributed to many of the plants in the United States & internationally. He is responsible for 105 MW of co-generation power in Southern California and is a licensed chemical and mechanical engineer in five states.His book Polar Bears in the Hot Tub exposed the lies about the global warming movement and the state of climate reality. This article was co-authored with the help of Vijay Jayaraj, an environmental researcher.
More from Vijay :
- HYPOCRISY of Fossil Fuel Moral Policing : Germany’s Coal Love and the Blacklisting of Australia | Climatism
“Action must be powerful and wide-ranging.
After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment.
It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will.
Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it.
We need to dismantle them all.”
CONTRARY to popular (mainstream media) belief, CO₂ is an odourless, *invisible* trace gas and, thankfully, there are still many brave climate scientists who prioritise the scientific method, real-world observation and empirical evidence over U.N. climate models, fame, career advancement, politics, ideology and activism.
GretaThunberg™️ 2019 :
Climate Science 2020/21 :
Recent warming in Europe/Poland is explained by a 2 W/m²/decade increase in incoming solar radiation (sunshine duration) due to the declining cloud cover since 1980.
CO₂ isn’t mentioned as a factor affecting climate …
- WHERE Are Greta Thunberg And David Attenborough Now? | Climatism
- TEAM GRETA Admits Climate Change Has Nothing To Do With The Environment | Climatism
- GRETA THUNBERG : Script Versus No Script (Must Watch) | Climatism
- HOW DARE HE! United States Led Entire World In Reducing CO₂ Emissions In 2019 | Climatism
- EXTINCTION REBELLION : Imagine If These People Had Real Power? | Climatism
- HYSTERIA MEDS : Eleven Scientific Pills To Quell The ‘Climate Crisis’ Lie | Climatism
CO2 Related :
- SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO₂ Goals | Climatism
- SCIENTIST : Let’s Not Pollute Minds With Carbon Fears | Climatism
- THE Carbon Dioxide Word Game | Climatism
- CO2 In The Atmosphere Is Not Pollution | Climatism
- Bureaucratic Dioxide | Climatism
SUN Related :
- CLIMATE Change For Dummies | Climatism
- THE SUN : Climate Control Knob, Enemy Of The Climate Cult | Climatism
- THE SUN : Climate Changer, Climate Driver, Climate Disruptor | Climatism
- THE Climate Control Knob | Climatism
“Watch for the moment when you’re told ‘science’ means
not asking questions, defying dogma, or challenging ‘consensus’.
That is the literal definition of faith, not science.”
– John Hayward
AN epic Twitter thread by journalist John Hayward that has been circulating the internet for good reason. It is a thoughtful, timely and magnificent piece of writing and cultural insight unpacked here for you to ponder.
One factor in that transformation is the Beautiful Theory phenomenon: the power elite insists its remedies are logical and politically correct so they MUST work, even if the actual evidence shows they obviously don’t.
When Beautiful Theories crash into hard, cold reality and shatter, faith is the glue used by the elites to put their precious ideas back together. They need MILITANT faith to get the job done: true believers eager to crush doubt and compel obedience by making war on the infidels.
Some are swept into the faith because they desperately crave a sense of control over the crisis. They need to believe Something Can Be Done, and they’d rather invest their faith in debunked Beautiful Theories than have no faith at all. Faith is a coin that demands to be spent.
Some crave social approval, and the purveyors of Beautiful Theories have immense political, economic, and cultural power to make their faith seem fashionable. Virtue signalling is such a plague in modern society because the signals are pre-packaged and made very easy to send.
Some aren’t even hoping they can assert control over a crisis by converting to its religion. They’ll settle for just having some MEANING, some simplicity, a sense that the righteous will fare better than the unbelievers, that virtue will be rewarded while sin is punished.
That’s a very common impulse with the Church of Covid, since the Beautiful Theories were so very obviously wrong. There isn’t much left of the faith except the visceral communal satisfaction of hoping unbelievers will be punished for their blasphemies with sickness and death.
That sort of thing happens with all of the crisis religions, although not usually as quickly and obviously as with the Church of Covid. Look at the endless stream of movies about how the world became an apocalyptic hellscape because people didn’t believe in global warming.
The last resort of every crisis religion, the last thing that puts asses in the pews, is that addiction to misery porn, the collective hope that unbelievers will suffer someday, and everyone will admit the True Faith was right all along as Judgement Day crashes down upon them.
The elite will never have the humility to admit they were wrong, and they’ll never give up on politically or financially profitable “solutions” even when they obviously don’t solve the problem. Founding a crisis religion means they never have to say they’re sorry.
That applies to some very longstanding crises, like the War on Poverty, whose nostrums long ago transformed into fantastically expensive articles of religious faith even as mountains of data accumulated that proved they were utter failures, and often made the problems WORSE.
You can look for some telltale signs of a crisis transforming into a religion. The most obvious one is when the high priests tell you the “war” you’ve been drafted into will never end. They become very angry when asked to define success or failure, or lay out exit strategies.
Watch for the moment when you’re told “science” means not asking questions, defying dogma, or challenging “consensus.” That is the literal definition of faith, not science.
Always keep an eye out for Moving Goalposts, which are the signature miracle of crisis religions, their version of parting the waters or loaves and fishes. Crisis religions work very hard to make their faith unfalsifiable by constantly changing the standards of evidence.
Check to see if certain people are accumulating huge amounts of money and power from a crisis. That’s a pretty good sign it’s turning into a religion. A crisis should be solved as quickly and efficiently as possible. Don’t let it fester long enough to become a special interest.
Above all, look for the whiff of ARROGANCE to develop around a crisis. Wise religions and effective crisis managers have something in common: a sense of humility. Crisis religions are militant faiths that quickly become arrogant, smug, and totalitarian.
Dedicated people who truly want to solve a problem will look for evidence their analysis is wrong, or their policies aren’t working, and make adjustments as quickly as possible, no matter the cost or embarrassment to themselves. This is humility.
Crisis religions are arrogant. They reject criticism, insist their Beautiful Theories MUST be right because they’re ideologically pure – they fit snugly into a worldview that must not be challenged. Their plans only fail because their commands were disobeyed or sabotaged.
The high priests of a crisis religion see devils everywhere, leering at them from the rubble of every failure. Only sin can explain why their Beautiful Theories are tarnished. Failure never THEIR fault, so it must be YOURS. They find your lack of faith disturbing.
And you know what? A LOT of people want to see the world that way, including a great many self-described atheists. They hunger for the comfort of faith and the vibrant energy of militancy. They want to be right, and they want the wrong to suffer for their folly.
Conservatives think religious faith in the State is terrifying and wonder why so many embrace it. It’s because uncertainty is much more frightening. A simple false story is better than a complex true one, and with enough faith, maybe we can force the simple story to be true.
- MUST WATCH : Gaslighting, Unending Lockdowns And Climate Change | Climatism
- SURPRISE, SURPRISE! Global Lockdown Every Two Years Needed To Meet Paris CO₂ Goals | Climatism
- COVID19 = CLIMATE CHANGE : The More Afraid You Are, The More You Will Accept | Climatism
- PETA : UN Agenda 21 Will Stop Bushfires And Halt Climate Change | Climatism
“BLIND trust in authority
is the greatest enemy of the truth.”
– Albert Einstein
AS many of you may have read from twitter, I’ve decided to back-off, temporarily, from the constancy of battle against the Left’s ideological crusade against science and reason, in favour of completing my degree in psychology/counselling. A modality that will, most probably, be in ‘yuge’ demand in the coming years, following the Left’s most recent assault on your freedoms and existence, COVID-19. A mutation of the common coronavirus that just happens to fall in a US election year. A natural mutation that has a survival rate of 99.97% (globally). In my country, Australia, the average age-of-death-by-covid is 83. The average age of mortality in Australia is 82, and yet, in Victoria, we are suffering the most draconian lockdown measures in-the-world. The mind boggles…unless you’re a socialist, of course.
SO, in an effort to soothe our collective wounded COVID souls, at the same time, help soothe the ails of the constant barrage of impetuous climate alarmism, set aside twelve minutes of your precious time to view some of the incredible work done by (GBR-climate-science-hero) Jennifer Marohasy, as she documents, with Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall, the pristine, Great Barrier Reef, for all to marvel.
Enjoy and best,
Via Email (1/10/20)
via Dr Jennifer Marohasy
Researcher, Writer & Filmmaker
Keeping You in the Loop
Many of the media headlines that give the impression the Great Barrier Reef is a ruin are based on aerial surveys by one man. The same Terry Hughes who incorrectly claimed the inshore reefs off-Bowen are now mud-flat. Paid not by an oil company, but rather the long-suffering Australian taxpayer through generous research grants, he gets to sit in a light aircraft and fly at about 300 metres altitude every few years and determine (by looking out the window) that the corals are badly bleached.
Hughes is a myth maker. The Great Barrier Reef is still beautiful. There are still colourful corals and curious fish.
Earlier this year, I went to the Ribbon reefs with Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall in search of death and bleaching. Instead we found so much life as I explain in my second short film, just yesterday uploaded to a new page at the Institute of Public Affairs’ website:
The short film will only take 12 minutes of your time. The music was all composed by local Noosa guitarist Mungo Coats.
At the Ribbons, in January, the waters were so warm, the corals so colourful and the fish not at all frightened of me. In fact, as you will see in the film – a giant cod fish looked me in the eye, and more than once! He came back to me, again and again. We swam together. It was magical.
For me, the Ribbons at the Great Barrier Reef, are the most special and awe-inspiring place on this planet. I was so privileged to dive them with Clint Hempsall and so much thanks to Mungo Coats for putting it all to music.
Thanks for caring.
Dr Jennifer Marohasy
Researcher, Writer & Filmmaker
What is the true state of the Great Barrier Reef? If you asked most Australians, they’d say the Great Barrier Reef is at risk of imminent collapse from climate change. It was for questioning this claim, and the quality of science behind it, that eventually led to Dr Peter Ridd being sacked from James Cook University.
In January 2020, Emmy Award winning cameraman Clint Hempsall, and IPA Senior Fellow Jennifer Marohasy decided to find out. They spent a week exploring the Ribbon Reefs 250kms to the north east of Cairns in search of coral bleaching – the process of corals turning white as a result of warmer water temperature, which climate scientists say is being caused by climate change. Some argue 60% of the coral at the Ribbon Reefs was irretrievably bleached in 2016.
If there was extensive bleaching back then, Jennifer and Clint couldn’t find much evidence of it in January this year. What they did find was healthy corals, curious clown fish, a giant potato cod, reef sharks, and an underwater cave. Indeed, much of the coral Clint filmed was growing vertically and would thus be invisible to the aerial surveys underpinning the bleaching scare.
The Ribbon Reefs have coral gardens hanging over underwater cliff-faces that drop 2,000 metres to the sea floor – all washed over twice a day by the warm waters of the South Pacific. There are ten such coral reefs in far north Queensland where they grow over the top of the north eastern edge of Australia’s continental shelf.
GBR Related :
- ALARMISTS U-TURN : Scientists Confirm Great Barrier Reef Is Recovering From Bleaching, Again | Climatism
- GREAT BARRIER REEF SCIENTIST : Coral Can Take The Heat, Unlike ‘Experts’ Crying Wolf | Climatism
MORE GBR :
- GREAT BARRIER REEF Hysteria : Exaggerated Claims And Blatant Falsehoods, Designed To Spread Fear And Belief In A Man-Made Climate Apocalypse | Climatism
- THE Great Barrier Reef is thriving, not dying! (local experts / dive-boat operators) | Climatism
- Great Barrier Reef Expert : Don’t Trust Climate Alarmists | Climatism
- Great Barrier Reef in near pristine condition: dive boat operators | Climatism
- “Dying” Reef Actually Growing | Climatism
- UNESCO ‘Green’ Lights The Reef – Activists Exposed As Liars And Frauds | Climatism
- Not Dead Yet: Great Barrier Reef Coral Cover Up 19 Per Cent In Three Years | Climatism
GBR Must Read :
- Falling Sea Level: The Critical Factor in 2016 Great Barrier Reef Bleaching! | Climatism (MUST READ)
(Climate sceptics/rationalists still waitin’ for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)
Help us to hit back against the bombardment of climate lies costing our communities, economies and livelihoods far, far too much.
Thanks to all those who have donated. Your support and faith in Climatism is highly motivating and greatly appreciated!
Citizen journalists can’t rely on mastheads, rather private donations and honest content.
Click link for more info…
Many thanks, Jamie.
“This means the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will be related to the sum of temperatures in previous years.”
Another inconvenient fact about nature, science and the biosphere, completely ignored by ‘CO2-consensus’ zealots.
This post is prompted by a recent exchange with those reasserting the “consensus” view attributing all additional atmospheric CO2 to humans burning fossil fuels.
The IPCC doctrine which has long been promoted goes as follows. We have a number over here for monthly fossil fuel CO2 emissions, and a number over there for monthly atmospheric CO2. We don’t have good numbers for the rest of it-oceans, soils, biosphere–though rough estimates are orders of magnitude higher, dwarfing human CO2. So we ignore nature and assume it is always a sink, explaining the difference between the two numbers we do have. Easy peasy, science settled.
What about the fact that nature continues to absorb about half of human emissions, even while FF CO2 increased by 60% over the last 2 decades? What about the fact that so far in 2020 FF CO2 has declined significantly with no discernable impact on rising atmospheric…
View original post 521 more words