Note to AOC: Carbon-Based Fuels Don’t Effect the Climate

Just a week or two ago, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez popped-off by stating, “We will have blood on our hands’ if we don’t act on climate change.”

Sheesh.

So, let’s hear from an expert.

“The conclusion we have reached is that the world, the global climate, is not very sensitive to carbon dioxide,” John Christie, Ph.D.

Dr. John Christie knows more about the earth’s atmospheric temperature than anyone.  That’s because he is in charge of the satellite data that records the temperature on every square inch of the planet.  Not only will Dr. Christie tell you that global warming has not occurred for the better part of two decades, but he will also let you know that carbon fuels are not scary, but in fact beneficial for the betterment of human life.

In an interview with CNS News Christie says,

We have a “moral imperative” to burn carbon dioxide-emitting fossil fuels because the energy they provide is a “liberator” of humanity, says Dr. John Christy, a climatologist and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, Huntsville.

“We are not morally bad people for taking carbon and turning it into the energy that offers life to humanity in a world that would otherwise be brutal,” Christy wrote in a recent oped. “On the contrary, we are good people for doing so.”

Carbon-based energy, which is “the most affordable and reliable source of energy in demand today, liberates people from poverty,” Christy explained. “Without energy, life is brutal and short.”

Pointing out that it was “warmer 4,000 to 5,000 years ago than it is today,” Christy said that the computer models cited by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicted global warming that is “three times” what the satellite data shows is the Earth’s actual temperature. “It demonstrates we do not know how to model the climate system, in my view.”

He goes on to say that,“All the datasets show some slight warming (+0.11 degrees Celsius per decade since Nov. 16, 1978), some more than others,” he told CNSNews.com. “But still, the amount of warming is much, much less than what was anticipated from climate models, and that’s what I’ve been showing and demonstrating in various venues, including Congress.

“In a congressional hearing last May, I demonstrated that the models are significantly above in their temperature projection from where we actually are right now. So if you go back 36 years to 1979 and run the models, they all show lots of warming. The real world shows very little warming” despite rising levels of CO2.

On May 13, Christy told the House Committee on Natural Resources that even if the U.S. completely eliminated its fossil fuel emissions, so that “there would be no industry, no cars, no utilities, no people” – the impact on global temperatures would be “so tiny as to be immeasurable.”

“The two largest impacts on temperature are the El Ninos in the Pacific as well as volcanic eruptions, which shade the Earth when they put the dust and smoke in the stratosphere. So once you account for both of those, there’s not a whole lot of warming in the planet,” Christy told CNSNews.com.

“The conclusion we have reached is that the world, the global climate, is not very sensitive to carbon dioxide. And that can occur if the climate responds in its many facets to release heat – when you add the heat from carbon dioxide. So carbon dioxide does allow more heat to be retained in the climate system, but the climate system also has many ways to allow an increased release of heat into space.

Guess such facts are too much for Bernie and AOC to honestly comprehend.

Posted in Category: , , Tagged:

Brian Sussman

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply

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

Share This