Highlights

Per capita consumption of energy is the measure- disproportionately applicable to the Western world-Biased reports of Global warming and Climate Change used to deny equity in energy consumption-Human activity is disproportionately blamed.

Quotations for Consideration

• “On what principle is it, that when we see nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?” – Matt Ridley.
•  “The activist is the man, who gets down into the dirty water and cleans up the river.” – Ross Perot.
• “There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain” – A. N. Whitehead (1911)
•  “To hold that progress has only been at the cost of environmental degradation, to more people being exposed to greater pollution and suffering greatly from such effects, is being selectively short sighted.” – Matt Ridley.
• “It is worth noting the contradiction in the position of many climate change activists. They often cite the predictions of climate change models as if it were a near certainty that the future will unfold as described. But on the subject of Geo-engineering such as proposals to spray aerosols into the Arctic atmosphere in the expectation that they would increase sunlight reflection and decrease warming – they are opposed on the grounds that we know so little about the complex interactions of the atmosphere that we cannot possibly predict the outcome of such schemes. They can’t have it both ways” – Dan Gardener

Key Concepts

• Changes in Global Climate are evident, but how damaging are they really?
• We may be responsible for some environmental damage, but – for all or most of it?
• Should our response be to ‘roll back the clock’, or chase impractical goals, or should it be to work to encourage innovation and to harness better Technologies to solve the problem?
• Since humans have adapted to living at varying temperatures, from the Arctic to the Equator, there is no reason to worry about small changes in temperature whatever its cause. Ofcourse, we can and should plan to mitigate any such adverse effects.
• Context is very important when trying to understand things.
• Are we really responsible for Global Warming or is it that we just like to imagine and arrogate to ourselves such capability or are we missing the real reasons for the major Negative Environmental effects – Planetary, Solar or Cosmic?

Key Metrics

• Human beings comprise only about 0.01 percent of the total biomass on the Earth, or 2.5 percent of all animal biomass on the Earth.
• It is calculated that if all eight billion people of the world were to be settled in India at the same population density as of some of the major cities they would only occupy as much space as given below:

1. At population density of Mumbai – all will fit in Rajasthan.
2. At the population density of Kolkata – all will fit in Maharashtra
3. At the population density of Chennai -all will fit in AP + Telangana + Karnataka + Mizoram
4. At the population density of Delhi – all will fit in Jharkhand + MP+ Maharashtra.

Also;

1. Plants require Co₂ to survive. Below 150 ppm, plants die. When Global warming scare began, the Co₂ levels were at 180 ppm, and we were being warned that we could not allow the level to go beyond 200 ppm. However how is it that nobody warned us about the danger of going to lower CO₂ ppm levels. Today it is about 425 ppm, and the global green cover has increased by 20 percent.
2. The increase in Co₂ levels lead to less consumption of water by plants and increased O₂ levels. Studying the effects of increasing Co₂ levels on humans, without factoring in the mitigating effect of increased O₂ levels is biased reporting.
3. Earth’s atmosphere consists of multiple layers, and hence acts as multiple Green- houses, most of which are not responsible for the reflection of the Sun’s energy, an this must be properly taken into account, not as one Green- house. Not factoring in this is misleading.
4. Proper understanding of all such factors, lead io the belief that Co₂ levels can go upto even 6000 ppm without any harm to us humans or to the Planet. Let us say, that 4000 ppm, with the associated increase in O₂ levels, would be safe.
5. It may also be noted that as CO₂, Methane, water vapour, etc. the so – called polluting gases, are actually transparent and are not what we are shown as pollution. The soot from dirty fires and from dust in the air, and the unburnt fuel from inefficient engines are what the photographs of the climate activists show.

Today we are deluged by a flood of environmental and climatic statistics and their interpretations, all threatening us with dire and even Catastrophic climatic conditions that we are told are sure to arise in the near future.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8