In December 2020, the then Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern called climate change ‘one of the greatest challenges of our time’, declared a “Climate Emergency” and pledged a carbon-neutral government by 2025
The declaration of a climate emergency was supported by the Green Party and Maori Party and opposed by the National and Act parties.
Speaking in parliament after its introduction, Ardern said the country must “act with urgency”.
“This declaration is an acknowledgement of the next generation. An acknowledgement of the burden that they will carry if we do not get this right and do not take action now,” she said.
“It is up to us to make sure we demonstrate a plan for action, and a reason for hope.”
Her government passed the Zero Carbon Act 2019 which commits New Zealand to reducing emissions, and set up a Climate Change Commission tasked with putting the country on a path to net zero emissions by 2050 – made New Zealand one of few countries to have a zero-emissions goal enshrined in law.
The declaration also said the government will “demonstrate what is possible to other sectors of the economy by reducing the government’s own emissions and becoming a carbon-neutral government by 2025”.
But opposition parties described the move as a publicity stunt, with the National Party leader calling it “virtue signalling”.
We have been indoctrinated with the lie that CO2 is bad for the environment and that we need to reduce our emissions down to zero if we want to save the planet from burning up.
Well I have to tell you that this is the biggest lie of all and if by some chance we were ever able to get the emissions down to zero that would be the day that life on earth would stop.
As reported on Voice Media February 7th
2024, Greenpeace co-founder, Dr. Patrick Moore, demolished the lie that CO2 is somehow bad for the environment stating the following:
"Carbon dioxide is the currency of life, and the most important building block for all life on earth... The optimum level of CO2 for plant growth is about five times higher [than the concentration of CO2 present in the atmosphere today], yet the alarmists warn it is already too high. They must be challenged every day by every person who knows the truth in this matter.
CO2 is the gas of life, and we should celebrate CO2 rather than denigrate it, as is the fashion today."
Let’s look at the facts around CO2:
What percentage is CO₂ in the atmosphere?
Approximately 0.04 percent
It is a naturally occurring chemical compound that is present in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide exists in the Earth's atmosphere at a concentration of approximately 0.04 percent (400 parts per million) by volume.
Water vapour can vary from 0 to 4% and is the dominant greenhouse gas in our atmosphere.
Of all of the CO₂ emitted into the atmosphere, what percentage is produced by humans?
Depending on the estimates anywhere from 3.6% to 5% is produced by humans.
That is actually 3.6% to 5% of that 0.04 per cent in the atmosphere.
It is a fact that there is a distinct possibility that life could come close to extinguishing itself, due to a shortage of CO₂, which is essential for life on Earth.
The IPCC in 2007 stated that:
“We should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”
CO₂ is the “Gas of Life” the most important building block for all life on Earth. All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children rather than the demonization of CO₂, that “carbon” is a “pollutant” that threatens the continuation of life.
We know for a fact that CO₂ is essential for life and that it must be at a certain level in the atmosphere for the survival of plants, which are the primary food for all the other species alive today. Should we not encourage our citizens, students, teachers, politicians, scientists, and other leaders to celebrate CO₂ as the giver of life that it is?
It is a proven fact that plants, including trees and all our food crops, are capable of growing much faster at higher levels of CO₂ than present in the atmosphere today. Even at the today’s concentration of 400 ppm plants are relatively starved for nutrition. The optimum level of CO₂ for plant growth is about 5 times higher, 2000 ppm, yet the alarmists warn it is already too high. They must be challenged every day by every person who knows the truth in this matter. CO₂ is the giver of life and we should celebrate CO₂ rather than denigrate it as is the fashion today.
We may be witnessing the “Greening of the Earth” as higher levels of CO₂, promote increased growth of plants around the world, which has been confirmed by scientists with CSIRO in Australia, in Germany, and in North America.
If CO₂ levels in the atmosphere were to fall to below a minimum of 150 ppm the survival of plants will be threatened and if plants die all the animals, insects, and other invertebrates that depend on the plants for their survival will also die.
How long will it be at the present level of CO₂ depletion until most or all of life on Earth is threatened with extinction by lack of CO₂ in the atmosphere?
Climate change activists say that food production is destroying the planet but in fact the food producers rely on the land to make a living and the vast majority use best practical options to ensure that they maintain or improve the land they use for their food production operations.
It is now a well-established practice for them to put back native species of plants and trees where possible and to increase biodiversity by making ponds and lakes where wetland plants, insects, and waterfowl can become established.
Yes like any other sector of the population, there will always be a small number of food producers who believe they can ignore the rules and the food production industry supports these bad apples being removed from the industry for the benefit of all citizens and the environment.
The food producers believe that land should be used for food production in a sustainable manner and that we get the food security that is required to ensure our populations survival.
We need to remember that carbon dioxide is the gas of life, indeed the backbone of life on Earth rather than the devil that it is being portrayed as by many environmental commentators.
New Zealand has a problem where these commentators operate in a ‘bubble’ far removed from the views of ordinary people?
But in fact our situation is more akin to the views expressed by British historian Sir Niall Ferguson, a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute, who claims the climate change phenomenon is “A bogus ideology” that hardly anyone really believes in, but everyone has to parrot unless they are prepared to be labelled as climate deniers.
Is fear of being labelled “climate deniers” - to be pilloried by the press and scoffed at by opponents - the real reason New Zealand Politicians are too scared to challenge this ideology?
The reality is that the current Coalition and the previous Labour Government have did nothing to help the environment given their continued use of incorrect facts as a basis for making emissions policies, including Labour’s declaration of a climate emergency.
Depending on the estimates anywhere from 3.6% to 5% of the CO2 in earth’s atmosphere is produced by humans.
That is actually 3.6% to 5% of that 0.04 per cent in the atmosphere.
Even if we used the top figure of 5% that still means that there is 95% of CO2 in the atmosphere that is naturally produced from issues such as oceans degassing.
I fail to understand how this 95% of CO2 can be disregarded and the claims made that the 5% produced by humans is going to cause the planet to burn up.
How does nature identify the 5% produced by humans and then only take that into account? Obviously it doesn’t but the climate change warriors would have us believe that that’s the way it happens.
I have yet to see anyone produce a scientifically proven answer to this claim that anthropogenic CO2 and Methane are going to cause catastrophic global warming.
In fact one of New Zealand’s respected business leaders, Mr Harry Mowbray, who majored in physics and chemistry and along with his engineering skills, has spent his whole life in industry and business getting his head around these sorts of problems.
When people become adamant about doom and gloom regarding greenhouse gases he has asked them "What specific aspect of science convinced you that anthropogenic CO2 and Methane are going to cause catastrophic global warming?" No one, including the IPCC, has ever answered that satisfactorily for him.
He has been actively seeking the answer to that question for over 30 years.
The truth is that when he found he could not explain the science to people, he then came up with his $100,000.00 challenge, which people could claim if they gave him scientifically proven empirical data linking anthropogenic CO2 to any significant temperature change.
That was his way to challenge people to ask the deep and meaningful question of the science world. He was called a climate change denier so he put up another $100,000.00 for people to tell him when the temperature of the world was stable and once they find it tell him if that is what we are aiming for.
The truth is the temperature has never been stable.
I urge you, particularly if you believe in catastrophic anthropogenic CO2 and Methane warming to contact Harry and have a serious discussion, produce the scientific empirical evidence and make a claim on his $100,000 challenge.
But I must warn you that I have yet to see any evidence from any person, scientist or other, which has proved the link between anthropogenic CO2 & Methane and significant global temperature change and you will need to provide unchallengeable proof of your claim.
I personally believe that human induced global warming has nothing to do with the environment; it’s got everything to do with a mechanism for unelected people to gain power, influence, occupational advancement and monetary reward.
An Australian Senator, Malcolm Roberts asked the CSIRO if they could give him a few scientific papers that proved human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming and the CSIRO presented him with “one” scientific paper which wasn’t on the subject, so he asked them again “can you please show me that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming?”
They couldn’t.
This is a question that has been asked of scientists around the world for 25 years or more; been asked of journalists; been asked of politicians and no one has been able to prove from the scientific literature that human emissions of carbon dioxide drive global warming.
The same reason why no-one has been able to come forward and claim the money from Harry’s challenge is that they can’t prove a scientific relationship between anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and global warming.
But even if we took the view that human emissions of CO2 (5% of the total) did drive global warming, then we would have to show that the other 95% doesn’t drive global warming. That’s never been shown.
So we have built a whole empire around global warming based on something that cannot be shown.
.svg){kind=logo}
By Andy Loader, Poke the Bear