For years, CO2 has been presented as the cause of harmful global warming
by all kinds of dubious means.
Based on this false thesis, laws are passed and taxes levied to
reduce CO2 emissions to a minimum.
The European Green Deal was presented by the European Commission under Ursula
von der Leyen at the end of 2019.
It is a concept with the aim of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions in the
EU to zero by 2050, making it the first continent to become climate-neutral.
The Green Deal is to become a central component of the EU's climate policy.
Due to this policy and its laws, the energy supply is heading straight for a collapse, agriculture,
the food supply, the car industry, prosperity and much more are being
systematically destroyed.
This destruction is being deliberately falsely justified in favor of the global climate and
humanity is being betrayed and sold out through untruths.
In the following documentation you can see a presentation in diagrams, which
Mr. Friedhelm Rostan has kindly provided.
In it, he refers to studies by independent scientists that clearly refute
the false theory that CO2 is the culprit behind global warming.
1. is climate change really a threat?
And if so, how?
This graph shows the temperature curve in relation to the Earth's temperature over the millennia as
well as a time axis with average Earth temperatures:
The blue areas show cold periods, the orange areas show warm periods.
The last epoch of this kind is the Little Ice Age.
This illustration refers to glacier ice drilling.
The temperature on earth and the CO2 content of the air are displayed over the time axis.
Here the period from 22,000 years ago to 10,000 years ago is considered.
In the case of temperature changes, it can be seen that a change in the CO2 content only follows after
some time, namely around 600 to 1,300 years later.
This indicates that the change in the CO2 content of the air cannot be
the cause of the temperature change, but rather its consequence.
Scientists who have tracked down the causes of long-term climate change over
the past decades are geologist Jan Veizer from Bochum and astrophysicist
Nir Shaviv from Israel.
Together they came up with the idea that there must be a connection between cosmic
radiation and the water cycle on Earth.
Stronger cosmic rays produce more clouds and thus cause cooling.
But how does it work?
Henrik Svensmark and Eigil Friis Christensen followed in the 1990s.
They discovered that a lower magnetic field of the sun leads to fewer sunspots, which in
turn causes the solar wind to weaken.
As a result, more cosmic radiation reaches the Earth, which leads
to a greater cloud cover below 3,200 m.
As a result, more sunlight is reflected into space, making the earth colder.
This relationship is widely recognized by serious climate scientists.
This image shows that the average air temperature on Earth has alternated periodically between
increases and decreases over the last 3200 years.
A temperature cycle of around 1,000 years is superimposed on a temperature
cycle of around 230 years.
It was warm at the time of the Roman Empire, cold during the Migration Period, warm again in the Middle
Ages, cold during the Renaissance, and temperatures have been rising again since around the 18th century.
The climate is therefore determined by the sun.
The 200-year cycle of sunspots reached its maximum around the turn of the millennium.
It has not been as active as it was around the year 2000 for 9,000 years!
2 Co2 and the greenhouse effect: truth and lies about the vital trace gas
The greenhouse effect, better known as the atmospheric effect, raises the average temperature on
earth from - 18° C by 33 degrees Celsius to + 15° C, as experts have calculated
with the help of physical radiation laws.
60 % of this, i.e. 20 degrees, is water vapor and only 15 %, i.e. 5 degrees, is carbon dioxide.
How does the greenhouse effect work?
The so-called greenhouse effect is the Earth's radiation balance:
The sun radiates energy onto the earth, mainly light.
The earth absorbs most of the light, heats up and reflects a small amount.
The Earth also radiates heat into space.
Some gases in the atmosphere, mainly water vapor, but also CO2, absorb
some of the Earth's heat radiation, causing the atmosphere to warm up.
In a nutshell:
The greenhouse effect is the absorption of parts of the Earth's heat radiation by water
vapor, CO2 and other gases in the air.
It leads to an increase in temperature on Earth.
Absorption: Certain gases can absorb thermal radiation and convert it
into kinetic energy (= heating).
This occurs at wavelengths that do not emanate from the sun, but from the earth's surface.
If the radiation of a certain wavelength is utilized, it is considered saturated.
One then speaks of saturated absorption bands.
The absorption bands of CO2 are largely saturated.
Conclusion: On
page 16 of the excerpt "Can humans save the climate?" writes Bennett and his team:
The greenhouse effect of an increase in the carbon dioxide content in the atmosphere
is largely reduced by the already existing saturation of the only relevant absorption band.
This fact in itself calls into question the sense of climate protection measures.
So don't be afraid of more CO2 in the atmosphere!
This graph shows conceivable dependencies between CO2 quantity and temperature.
The upper green curve is exponential.
Linear in the middle.
And the lower curve is logarithmic.
It turned out that the dependency is logarithmic in reality.
This means that each additional unit
CO2 contributes less to the temperature increase than its predecessor.
So as the CO2 concentration increases, the situation becomes more and more relaxed!
This diagram shows that every additional CO2 in the air has less and
less effect on the earth's temperature!
The next diagram shows that CO2 is actually the gas of life.
The yield of the harvest increases as the CO2 content rises.
Let's summarize: Climate
change has exclusively astrophysical causes.
Some, however, claim that it comes from the greenhouse effect
of CO2. This does exist, but it is practically ineffective.
The so demonized CO2 is actually the gas of life!
So why the hysterical cries of a climate catastrophe?
3. Who is behind the biggest lie in human history?
A German manager and business journalist has witnessed the development of
the climate lie at first hand: Hartmut Bachmann.
He writes in his book "The Lie of the Climate Catastrophe":
There is no climate catastrophe.
It is a fiction.
It was born as an idea, as a shocking buzzword 20 years ago (mid-1986).
It then found its way into commercial circles, where there was little hesitation about how it could be marketed.
The advertising was put up.
The media rushed to be the first to take part in a gigantic business that is now taking on a life
of its own, supported by corresponding laws.
Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation, said: "We have to
ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we are doing the right thing in terms
of economic and environmental policy.
David Brower, a member of the Sierra Club and founder of various environmental
organizations, including Friends of the Earth,
explains: "The goal now is a socialist redistribution society, which
is the proper custodian of nature and the only hope for society.
Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister, speaks out:
It doesn't matter if the science of global warming is out-and-out mendacious.
[...] Climate change offers the best opportunity to bring justice and equality to the world.
Prof. Stephen Schneider, lead author of many IPCC reports,
reports: "We have to create frightening scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements
and not make a fuss about any doubts.
[...] Each of us must decide for ourselves whether we prefer
to be honest or effective.
Michael Crichton described the effects of such statements and views
in his thriller "World in Fear":
When the search for truth is confused with the pursuit of political interests,
the quest for knowledge is reduced to the pursuit of power.
[... ] This is why the intertwining of science and politics is a terrible combination.
[...] We have to make sure that what we present to the world as
knowledge is actually objective and honest.
The Federal Environment Agency has also confirmed that the absorption bands
of CO2 are already largely saturated.
This means that newly added CO2 can only slightly increase the greenhouse effect.
Here is an enlightening addition to Myth
97: 97% of all scientists agree that the current global warming
is due to man-made CO2 emissions.
The analysis of 12,000 scientific publications was divided into categories.
Two categories, to which the majority of the papers had been assigned,
were eliminated as irrelevant.
This dubious, selective choice of target group achieved the desired result of 97%.
Finally, an addition to the topic: Can humans save the climate?
This was the title of the 2015 Paris Climate Conference organized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Has a global reduction in CO2 emissions by 2030 now been agreed in the so-called Paris Agreement?
Not at all!
The reduction commitments of the most important countries result in
a significant increase in CO2 emissions.
Conclusion: Germany's climate policy with its rigid targets can at best reduce the planned increase
in global emissions by 1.6 %.
Shutting down German coal-fired power plants would only
reduce global emissions by 0.55%.
The Paris Climate Agreement allows China to achieve an enormous increase in CO2 emissions, compared
to which Europe's savings are negligible.
China and India are building and operating large numbers of new coal-fired power plants, while Germany
wants to shut down its own to save the planet.
At this point, even people who consider CO2 to be harmful to the climate can see that
the policy of redistributing CO2 emissions has nothing to do with climate protection.
Germany's climate policy of wanting to save the planet is a pretext
for further redistribution plans.
Neither our country nor the world's population will be done any favors if we continue to fall for this climate rescue lie.