About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

2 Replies to “What do you know! A counter-culture bit of art that is, dare I say it, actually counter culture!”

  1. One of the claims in the video is that only 3 percent of CO2 comes from human emissions. That’s simply not accurate. First of all, volcanoes contribute very little compared to our own emissions. If they did, we would see enormous variability in CO2 levels, as big volcanic eruptions occurred, or did not, year by year. We don’t see that. So maybe he’s talking about plant decay and decomposition.

    There IS a natural cycle of plant growth and decay. It processes a lot of carbon into (and then back out, and back in, etc.) yearly. More than our own emissions. BUT— this cycle, like the hydrological cycle of rain and evaporation, contributes nothing, one way or the other, netted out over the year, to world atmospheric CO2 levels.

    To count that part of the cycle that adds CO2 to the atmosphere, so as to make our own fossil fuel contribution seem small in comparison, is to miss the point. THERE IS NO PART OF FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION THAT TAKES CO2 OUT.

    What WE add, stays in the atmosphere, year over year. True, some of it is dissolved in the oceans. That makes the oceans more acid, which is another problem, but it no longer drives up temperatures. The rest, the part that stays, does.

  2. Sorry anonymous, you should do your homework before you comment:

    The human contribution to CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere is around 3.207%. This is not controversial; it is something most scientists agree on. Kilez HAS done his homework and he is spot on. I dont’ have time to google for links but you will find this even in the IPCC reports.

    No sensible person argues that CO2 does not cause warming or that more CO2 does not cause more warming. The whole question is: HOW MUCH more warming?

    That’s it. The whole enchilada. CO2 does not have a linear warming effect, but a logarithmic effect. This means that doubling the CO2 concentration on its own does not cause a doubling of warming; the effect tapers off. A full 3/4 of the “catastrophic” warming the alarmists scream about would come from increased water vapour.

    This so far only occurs in their models (computers) and has not been observed in the real world. Clouds (water vapour) are not even an input into the models!! In fact, while CO2 concentrations have gone up about 13% over the last decade the temperatures have stayed flat and even declined a small amount.

    You’ve been had! Do what Kilez has done; think for yourself and don’t just swallow the politically correct line.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *