Humans inhale air of ~78% N2 gas, ~21% O2 gas, a variable % water vapor gas, and many trace gases including 0.09% argon gas, ~0.04% CO2 gas, etc. Then humans exhale ~78% N2, ~16% O2, a variable % of water vapor gas, ~0.09% argon, and ~4% CO2. In other words, humans exhale CO2 that is about 100 times more concentrated than the air they inhaled a moment before. Where does that CO2 go?

The measured, not computer modeled, not estimated, net increase of CO2 from all sources, combining all human CO2 sources and sinks and all natural CO2 sources and sinks, for 2020 was only 0.000258% of the atmosphere.  Measured by NOAA-Scripps Oceanographic, publicly available data (1) (2020 data are used here because 2021 data have not been finalized.)  This means for 2020 the net amount of CO2 added to the atmosphere by humans (including fossil fuel use, cement production, land use, breathing, etc) could not have exceeded 0.000258% of the atmosphere and was probably much less. Then 2.58 ppm net global average increase for 2020 divided by 414.24 ppm net global average CO2 concentration is 0.6%. The maximum possible average net human CO2 addition to the atmosphere for 2020 could not have exceeded 0.6%.

It is the maximum possible net CO2 emitted by humans because that amount includes CO2 emissions from all sources and CO2 absorption by all sinks, both natural and human. CO2 is always, day and night, everywhere, (24 hours X 365 days per year) being absorbed by the environment, mostly ocean surface and plants, and simultaneously always being emitted.  (CO2 gas is continuously colliding with ocean surface, which is ~71% of Earth’s surface. CO2 gas is highly soluble in water and ocean.  All decaying biological material is emitting CO2. CO2 is highly soluble in water and sea water.) “Net” CO2 means CO2 absorption subtracted from CO2 emission. Subtracting the CO2 concentration of 2019 from the CO2 concentration of 2020, results in on 2.58 ppm or only 0.000258% of the atmosphere on average. Thus, for 2020 net human CO2 addition to the atmosphere cannot exceed and must be less than 0.000258% of atmosphere and less than 0.6% of total CO2.

According to NOAA’s measurements, for year 1970, net CO2 in air from all sources and sinks was 325.68 ppm.  That was a net increase from 1969 of 1.06 ppm due to all sources and sinks, natural and human.  For 2020, net CO2 in air from all sources and sinks was 414.24 ppm, an increase of 2.58 ppm from 2019, due to all CO2 sources and sinks, natural and human.  That is 0.000258% increase in CO2 for 2020.  Subtracting: 414.24 minus 325.68 equals 88.56 ppm, which is the measured net CO2 increase in 50 years, for a 50-year average of 1.77 ppm per year increase, due to all sources and sinks, natural and human.  That is a 0.000177% per year average increase.  Remember your exhaled breath is ~4% CO2 with each exhaled breath, higher if you are exercising.  Net CO2 due to all sources and sinks has grown only 27% in 50 years, 88.56 ppm, which might sound like a lot, except remember it is starting from a very low CO2 concentration; for 1970 CO2 was 325.68 ppm.  

In the graph below, the red line is approximately 1% representing the sum of all rare gases in air. Beneath that is the purple line which graphs the net global average CO2 concentration from 1970 to 2020 computed and reported by NOAA, 325.68 ppm in 1970 to 414.24 ppm in 2020; these data are not detrended. Beneath that is the dashed green line which graphs the annual CO2 increase, the net of all CO2 sources and CO2 sinks, from 1.6 ppm per year for 1970 to 2.58 ppm per year for 2020, which is the maximum possible human emissions for each year.

“The threshold for plant survival is 150 ppm, CO2 fell to 180 ppm during the most recent glacial maximum 20,000 years ago.” (2) The ONLY way CO2 gets into plants for photosynthesis is by absorbing CO2 from air.  Plant photosynthesis produces carbohydrates which feed all life on earth and in the process produce oxygen as a by-product.   Late Carboniferous to Early Permian time (315 mya — 270 mya) is the only known time-period in the last 600 million years when both atmospheric CO2 and temperatures were as low as they are today (Quaternary Period).  In the lush and abundant life of the Triassic and Jurassic Periods, a period over 100 million years long, CO2 is estimated to have been 4 and 5 times higher than 1970.  

Billions of dollars just foolishly and ignorantly passed into U.S. law by Democrats, as well as the $9 TRILLION per year estimated by McKinsey & Co, global bankers, Foreign Affairs Magazine, State Department,  EPA, academics living on government grants, UN, WHO, EU, WEF, politicians in over 150 countries, computer gamers masquerading as climate scientists, complicit mainstream media, Greta, Gore, etc., the amount they claim is needed to control human-produced CO2, all of that is a fraud, a total and tragic waste of resources.  And this fraud has been ongoing for over 50 years. 

It is ludicrous to believe that CO2 is the temperature control knob for the Earth, as claimed by the United Nations.  But, on top of that, there are the impossible economics and engineering which are proposed, being built and installed today to transition from a productive fossil-fuel-powered economy to an impossible dystopian future fantasy world that will fail, as described below.  This travesty continues because people fall for the mantra of fear propaganda, continue to elect politicians who support it, and allow teachers to teach it.

Only concerned voters and parents can stop this fraud.

The article at the following link is by James Freeman:

(1) NOAA data:

(2) Patrick Moore, PhD. 08/30/2022

#ClimateChange #IPCC #GlobalWarming #ClimateCrisis #Sustainability #NetZero #EPA #EndangermentFinding #CO2 #ClimatePolicy #EnergyPolicy #FossilFuel #Henry’sLaw

New report highlights the staggering cost of green ‘delusions.’

By James Freeman

Aug. 26, 2022 4:50 pm ET

Even if you’re never hit by a 7-ton blade falling from the night sky, alternative energy will fail you. Regardless of facts or feelings about the climate, there are reasons why wind and solar power are not replacing fossil fuels. Wind and solar are also no substitute for nuclear power.

The government of California can issue as many proclamations and prohibitions as it wants against gasoline-powered vehicles. No doubt the Biden administration will enjoy spending the ocean of tax dollars now earmarked for low-intensity energy sources. But reality will stubbornly remain.

In a new report due out next week from the Manhattan Institute, Mark Mills takes on the “dangerous delusion” of a global energy transition that eliminates the use of fossil fuels. Surveying energy markets and public policy around the world, Mr. Mills asks readers to “consider that years of hypertrophied rhetoric and trillions of dollars of spending and subsidies on a transition have not significantly changed the energy landscape.” He notes:

Civilization still depends on hydrocarbons for 84% of all energy, a mere two percentage points lower than two decades ago. Solar and wind technologies today supply barely 5% of global energy. Electric vehicles still offset less than 0.5% of world oil demand.

Mr. Mills then explains why the global appetite for energy is not heading south:

One can begin with a reality that cannot be blinked away: energy is needed for everything that is fabricated, grown, operated, or moved… digital devices and hardware—the most complex products ever produced at scale—require, on average, about 1,000 times more energy to fabricate, pound for pound, than the products that dominated the 20th century… it takes nearly as much energy to make one smartphone as it does one refrigerator, even though the latter weighs 1,000 times more. The world produces nearly 10 times more smartphones a year than refrigerators. Thus, the global fabrication of smartphones now uses 15% as much energy as does the entire automotive industry, even though a car weighs 10,000 times more than a smartphone. The global Cloud, society’s newest and biggest infrastructure, uses twice as much electricity as the entire nation of Japan. And then, of course, there are all the other common, vital needs for energy, from heating and cooling homes to producing food and delivering freight.

Advocates of a carbon-free world underestimate not only how much energy the world already uses, but how much more energy the world will yet demand… In America, there are nearly as many vehicles as people, while in most of the world, fewer than 1 in 20 people have a car. More than 80% of the world population has yet to take a single flight.

He then proceeds to take on the argument that wind and solar power are now becoming competitive with fossil fuels:

Claims that wind, solar, and [electrical vehicles] have reached cost parity with traditional energy sources or modes of transportation are not based on evidence. Even before the latest period of rising energy prices, Germany and Britain—both further down the grid transition path than the U.S.— have seen average electricity rates rise 60%–110% over the past two decades. The same pattern is visible in Australia and Canada. It’s also apparent in U.S. states and regions where mandates have resulted in grids with a higher share of wind/solar energy. In general, overall U.S. residential electricity costs rose over the past 20 years. But those rates should have declined because of the collapse in the cost of natural gas and coal—the two energy sources that, together, supplied nearly 70% of electricity in that period. Instead, rates have been pushed higher thanks to elevated spending on the otherwise unneeded infrastructure required to transmit wind/solar-generated electricity, as well as the increased costs to keep lights on during “droughts” of wind and sun that come from also keeping conventional power plants available (like having an extra, fully fueled car parked and ready to go) in effect by spending on two grids.

None of the above accounts for the costs hidden as taxpayer-funded subsidies that were intended to make alternative energy cheaper. Added up over the past two decades, the cumulative subsidies across the world for biofuels, wind, and solar approach about $5 trillion, all of that to supply roughly 5% of global energy.

Whether it’s to cool a home, heat steel, or power a data center, the eternal engineering challenge has always been to find the lowest-cost way to make energy available when it’s needed to meet inherently variable demands, especially in the face of inevitable challenges from nature’s attacks as well as supply chain and machine failures. Oil, natural gas, coal, and even wood and water are easy to store in very large volumes at very low cost, but not so electricity. Hence, grid-scale electric availability has been made possible by using electricity-producing machines (turbines) that can be turned on when needed, fueled by large quantities of primary energy sources (such as natural gas, coal, and flowing water) that are easily and inexpensively stored. Such metrics characterize, for now, more than 80% of U.S. electricity production and more than 90% of transportation. The U.S., on average, has about one to two months’ worth of national demand in storage for each kind of hydrocarbon. Such enormous quantities are possible because it costs less than $1 a barrel per month to store oil or the energy equivalent of natural gas. Storing coal is even cheaper. Thus, over the past century, engineers achieved the feat of building a nation-spanning group of electricity grids that powers nearly everything, anytime, while still consuming less than 3% of the GDP.

Storing electricity itself—the output from solar/wind machines—remains extremely expensive despite the vaunted battery revolution. Lithium batteries, a Nobel-winning invention, are some 400% better than lead-acid batteries in terms of energy stored per unit of weight (which is critical for vehicles). And the costs for lithium batteries have declined more than 10-fold in the past two decades. Even so, it costs at least $30 to store the energy equivalent of one barrel of oil using lithium batteries. That alone explains why, regardless of mandates and subsidies, batteries aren’t a solution at grid scales for days, never mind weeks, of storage.

President Joe Biden is unlikely to listen to such an explanation and who knows if he would even understand it. But reality’s not going anywhere.

#ClimateChange #IPCC #GlobalWarming #ClimateCrisis #Sustainability #NetZero #EPA #EndangermentFinding #CO2 #ClimatePolicy #EnergyPolicy #FossilFuel #Henry’sLaw

“Even if President Trump had classified records in his possession, they were protected. All former Presidents get a federally funded office, security clearances, Secret Service protection, and secure facilities (SCIFs) for classified records.” – @mrddmia

Mike Davis is the founder and president of Unsilenced Majority, an organization dedicated to opposing Cancel Culture and fighting back against the woke mob and their enablers. As the former Chief Counsel for Nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, Davis also leads the Article III Project (A3P), established to defend constitutionalist judges and the rule of law, and the Internet Accountability Project (IAP), an advocacy organization fighting to rein in Big Tech.

As Chief Counsel for Nominations, Davis advised Chairman Grassley and other senators on the confirmation of federal judges and senior Executive Branch appointees, serving as staff lead for 30 hearings and 41 markup meetings. He oversaw the floor votes for 278 nominees, including the confirmations of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the record number of circuit judges confirmed during President Trump’s first two years in office.

Davis has served in all three branches of the federal government, including for President George W. Bush, the Justice Department, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and current Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. Davis also led the outside support team for Justice Gorsuch’s successful confirmation to the Supreme Court.

Before returning to public service in 2017, Davis spent nearly ten years as a civil litigator in Denver, working at one of the largest law firms in the world and one of the top-ranked law firms in Colorado before running his own law practice for more than five years.

Davis is from Des Moines, Iowa. He received his Bachelor of Arts in 2000 and Juris Doctor in 2004, both from the University of Iowa. In 2017, Davis received Iowa Law’s “Emerging Leader Award.” Davis also serves on the University of Iowa Political Science Advisory Board.

Dystopian Sci-Fi Short Film. Premiered Aug 18, 2022 5 minutes

“We were “told that in times of crisis it is better to put up and shut up than to undermine the authorities. But look where that has got us. An economic crisis, a health-service crisis and an education crisis are now engulfing the nation.” ~ @FraserMyers

https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/08/26/lockdown-and-the-price-of-suppressing-dissent/

Martin Kulldorff Epidemiologist. Biostatistician. Infectious disease outbreaks. Vaccine safety. Harvard professor (on leave). Free SaTScan, TreeScan & RSequential software.

@MartinKulldorff

“It will take decades, but the only way to gradually restore trust in the scientific community is to first come clean about the misguided, disastrous and unscientific covid policies that too many scientists supported.”

People in government now use your money to promote left-wing advocacy, disguised as science. The problem goes all the way to the White House. The co-head of President Biden’s “Scientific Integrity Task Force,” Jane Lubchenco, just got caught abusing science. Yet she still has her job.

Don’t White House officials care about scientific integrity? “They could not care less,” says science writer Andrew Follett. “Her job from their perspective is to generate papers that rationalize and justify the regulations they want to impose.”

Today’s bad government science goes well beyond the White House. Your tax money is used for gibberish. That’s how people like comedian Steven Crowder are able to hoax so-called “experts” in absurd.

And this problem includes all countries.

Here is the trailer for the movie Soylent Green, starring Charleton Heston, based in New York City in 2022. The dystopian Sci-Fi movie Soylent Green was released in 1973.

According to some reports received privately, now in 2022 euthanasia is being promoted by the tyranny in Canada.

Trailer: https://www.imdb.com/video/vi2020082969/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk

“Remember Tuesday is Soylent Green Day.”

SPOILER ALERT: Here is a fun review of the video. Spoiler alert. https://youtu.be/Hk-Hu1VvVpY

Humans inhale air of ~78% N2 gas, ~21% O2 gas, a variable % water vapor gas, and many trace gases including 0.09% argon gas, ~0.04% CO2 gas, etc. Then humans exhale ~78% N2, ~16% O2, a variable % of water vapor gas, ~0.09% argon, and ~4% CO2. In other words, humans exhale CO2 that is about 100 times more concentrated than the air they inhaled a moment before. Where does that CO2 go?

The measured, not computer modeled nor estimated, net increase of CO2 from all sources, combining all human CO2 sources and sinks and all natural CO2 sources and sinks, for 2020 was 0.000258%. Measured by NOAA-Scripps Oceanographic. This means for 2020 the net amount of CO2 from humans could not have exceeded 0.000258% of the atmosphere, and was probably much less. The maximum possible amount of net human CO2 as a percent of net global CO2 for 2020 could not have exceeded 0.6%.

It is the maximum possible net amount of CO2 emitted by humans because that amount includes CO2 emissions from all sources and CO2 absorption by all sinks. CO2 is always, day and night, everywhere, (24 hours X 365 days per year) being absorbed by the environment, mostly ocean surface and plants, and simultaneously always being emitted. (CO2 gas is continuously colliding with ocean surface, which is ~71% of Earth’s surface. CO2 gas is highly soluble in water and ocean.) The “net amount” of CO2 means total CO2 absorption subtracted from total CO2 emission. The difference is the net increase (or growth) in net CO2 from 2019 to 2020, which was only 0.000258%. Thus for 2020 net human CO2 increase cannot exceed and must be less than 0.00025% of atmosphere and less than 0.6% of total CO2.

Consulting firm McKinsey & Co., supported by the UN, WHO, WEF, the governments of over 150 countries, many world bankers, and most mainstream media, and most academic institutions want you to spend $9 TRILLION dollars per year each year for decades into the future because they claim without proof that human CO2 emissions are dangerous.

There is no real-world evidence from the environment that so-called renewable or sustainable energy reduces net global CO2 concentration, nor does renewable or sustainable energy reduce global warming or climate change. There is strong engineering evidence that net zero CO2 emissions is impossible, deadly dangerous, and financially unaffordable. Climate modelers admit their models are wrong. It is a scam. You are their sucker. Would you like some snake oil along with your scam? You will either push back, or they will separate you from your property and your sovereignty.

Climate fraudsters have been building their scam for over 50 years.  The laughably absurd response by proponents of the scam include only ad hominem efforts to change the subject, offered by so-called climate scientists (really computer gamers), along with attacks on the messengers who now number in the many thousands.

Caveat emptor

“Judicial Watch obtained the records [466 pages and 663 pages] in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services No.1:21-cv-02418) filed after Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious disease failed to respond to a June 8, 2021, FOIA request for:”

“Access to biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines used to treat and/or prevent SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19.“

“The Pfizer records include a report, which was approved in February 2021, on the animal trials on the distribution of the the Pfizer COVID vaccine in rat subjects. In a section titled “Safety Pharmacology,” the report notes, “No safety pharmacology studies were conducted with BNT162b2 [the BioNTech vaccine] as they are not considered necessary for the development of vaccines according to the WHO guideline (WHO, 2005).”

“Similarly, under “Pharmacodynamic Drug Interactions,” is “Nonclinical studies evaluating pharmacodynamic drug interactions with BNT162B2 were not conducted as they are generally not considered necessary to support development and licensure of vaccine products for infectious diseases (WHO, 2005).”…

“Under the heading, “Genotoxicity” is: “No genotoxicity studies are planned for BNT162b2 as the components of the vaccine constructs are lipids and RNA that are not expected to have genotoxic potential (WHO, 2005).” Similarly, “Carcinogenicity studies with BNT162b2 have not been conducted as the components of the vaccine construct are lipids and RNA and are not expected to have carcinogenic or tumorigenic potential.”

“Also included in the Pfizer records is a report, approved in January 2021, titled “Pharmacokinetics Tabulated Summary.” A table in the report shows the biodistribution of the lipid nanoparticles (LNP) containing mRNA used in the vaccine using rats as the clinical trial subjects reports LNPs accumulating after 48 hours, especially in the lymph nodes, ovaries, small intestine and spleen.”

Recall that the people of the world were told that these vaccines, mRNA and LNP remain in the region of the injection, normally one of the upper arm muscles.

“In a November 4.2020, report submitted to the FDA regarding the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine, … notes that metabolism, excretion and pharmacokinetic interactions with other drugs were not studied in this trial because they are “not applicable to vaccines.” It is also noted that “biodistribution studies have not been conducted with Ad26.COV2.S.””

“A table in the report shows that the vaccine virus continued to appear in the rabbits’ iliac lymph nodes 180 days after injection.”

Judicial Watch. Study Found Lipid Nanoparticles Materials Outside Injection Site in Test Animals. Verdict. Aug 22, 2022. Vol. 28. Issue 8. p.13-17. https://www.judicialwatch.org/nanoparticles-materials-outside-injection-site/

Bolded characters by Bud