CO2 Debunked

CO2 THEORY DEBUNKED

Today we can see that climate has changed. But what does it mean? When, people are saying that there are more hurricanes or drouths or earthquake, it creates craziness from each side. As humans, living in the moment, we cannot see the difference on the yearly basis. But 45-50 years ago in Kiev, the capital of Ukraine, or Soviet Union back then, my father and I, we would go to the November 7th yearly parades. On that day I remember it could be a wet snow, the snow which falls down and melts right away. Only at the end of the November the winter would start and would end during April. This is almost 5 months of winter. Now even in December there could be nice warmly day in Kiev. 45 years and the winter period shrunk from 5 to 2 at most months. Even this life fact is not good enough for scientific conclusion, because we need to exam the data, charts and trends, to understand what happened, what is going on and what will be going on and what needs to be done.

The mainstream scientists, which ones considered to be 97% out of all scientists, popularized the idea that CO2 from HUMANS is causing the global warming, connecting it to the Industrial Revolution. The IPCC, which is the leading body in the science for climate change came out in August 2021 and made it clear that indeed humans are the only to blame for global warming.

The mainstream scientists made many strange politically driven conclusions and even fudged their most important graph to support their idea that humans are guilty of climate change.

Please ask yourself this question: "WHAT WE ARE DOING, WHEN WE ARE FIGHTING CO2 EMISSIONS AS THE MAIN CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING, IF CO2 EVEN DID NOT START GLOBAL WARMING?"

1) On the page 27 of their report, the IPCC's scientists showed to the world "the near-linear relationship" between increase in human's emissions and subsequent increase in the global temperature. Don't be confused by the world "cumulative CO2 emissions", potentially thinking that it has to do with nature too. No, because the IPCC's scientists talk about 5 scenarios, where they consider different volume of input of HUMAN emissions only.

The problem with this chart is that the scientists significantly shrunk the time or extended the time periods along the horizontal axis. But if we equally extend the time periods, there will be no "near-linear relationship" between CO2 and global temperatures. Thus, the IPCC fudged their report.

2) Showing fudged report by the IPCC is not evidence that global warming depends on human activities or not, and it is not the evidence that the Industrial Revolution did not start the global warming. Thus, let's understand why humans could not possibly started global warming.
But let's understand first how the Industrial Revolution was supposed change the climate. Apparently, the humans were supposed to emit lots of CO2 gas into the atmosphere due to their activities. The CO2 gas would become a part of greenhouse gases and create an extra pressure on climate. But scientists must understand that there must be extreme changes in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere prior to the changes in the global temperature, plus there must be enough TIME for the greenhouse gas, including CO2 gas, generate its effect on climate.
For thousands of years prior to change in the trend of the global temperature, which happened in the beginning of the 1900's,

the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 280 parts per million. Thus, we would expect that the change in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere prior to change in trend of the global temperature at the beginning of 1900's would be significant to trigger the climate change. However, the difference from at least 1000 years prior to 1910 was only 20 points (20 parts per million) or about 7% (7%=20/280).

The change of 20 parts per million of the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is crazy insignificant to change the climate and create the momentum to the global warming.

Change of 7% of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere would equate to less than 2% (1.82%=7%*26%/100) of CO2 contribution to the Greenhouse Effect. Less than 2% change of Greenhouse Effect would not make any difference to the change in climate.

Thus, we just debunked the unsubstantiated hypothesis that climate change was due to CO2 deposits from human activity. We also showing here that mainstream scientists simply fudged their main chart to show that the emissions of CO2 from human activity and increase in global average temperature has "near-linear" relationship.
Scientists should listen the lecture of Professor Richard Alley from Penn State University to understand the relationship between CO2 and the global temperature.

This link: https://youtu.be/3UVb--2-PBg?t=2125 will take directly to the moment, where Prof. Alley explains that first there is an energy from the sun, then the earth reacts and creates the CO2 gas, which goes into the atmosphere and becomes as a part of greenhouse gas and creates an amplifying effect on the increase in temperature. But the accumulation of extra 20 parts per million of CO2 in the atmosphere prior to the change in trend of the global temperature, global sea levels, levels of methane at the beginning of 1900's could not be enough to start the climate change. Even now, CO2 amplifies the global warming, but is/was not the main cause. Thus, we are going to the wrong direction with mainstream scientists, and we are not fighting climate change.