The myths of climate change targets

The myths of climate change targets

The reality of climate change has been turned into a political weapon.

Climate change is ever present on earth, and it is probable that climate change is continuous on every planet that has some form of atmosphere, in all of creation. Climate change is natural but here on earth in this period of history, it has become “political”. The science gets warped and woven into political aspirations and objectives.

Instead of serious study and a seeking of global consensus on how to cope with the changes, we have political (and business) careers being made out of a politically contrived controversy. Human debate always gets polarised, money and power can be generated by appearing to lead one set of opinions that are opposed by other opinions. So, the generation of dispute, is preferred (by those gaining power and wealth) to simply finding coping strategies.

A huge amount of debate, many exaggerations and distortions. Hideous amounts of taxpayer’s money, many increases to the real cost of living and all in the name of Net Zero by year 2030 (or 2050 depending where you read)

BUT

Everyone needs to remember these are ARBITRARY figures, they are based on an assumption of what will limit global temperature rises to 1.5 Degrees Celsius and on the assumption that this is desirable.

ALSO NOTE the definition of this arbitrary target;-

It is a target of completely negating the amount of greenhouse gases produced by human activity, to be achieved by reducing emissions and implementing methods of absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

ALL the political pronouncements, all the tax raising measures are about reducing emissions. The target also requires the absorption of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere- Something the trees and growing plants do well without human intervention. All the political enforcement of solar farms etc actually reduce the amount of land where natural absorbing of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere takes place so (typical political activity) they are all noise and coercion while actually defeating their stated aims.

Examine closely the following :- Under the 2015 Paris climate agreement, nearly 200 countries agreed to try to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C by 2100.

To achieve this, CO2 emissions need to fall by nearly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050

What happens after 2100? Does any sane person think that some form of stationary equilibrium will magically occur? The earth will still be circulation round the sun, the earth will still be spinning on its axis (if it is not, we humans will all die anyway) The sun will still vary how it effects our climate. The aging of Earth will still mean the land masses continue to slowly move, earthquakes Tsunamis and volcanic eruptions will continue to occur. The ocean currents and the atmospheric winds will still be in a state of continuous change.

Where in these political pronouncements are the reality checks for the natural changes that occur all the time on this planet and under our particular star (The sun)

How much Carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere by deforestation? How much is due to volcanic activity? Why should British people be coerced, controlled, impoverished to achieve a purely notional artificial target, one that can be rendered totally obsolete by --- for example -- coal burning in China, a war in the middle east etc

Geology shows that the global temperature of this planet is always in a state of change. So is preventing global temperature change just an excuse for all these rules regulations and additional taxes, are they simply a means of controlling people. They (the socialist political masterminds) know that without some sort of grand “cause” the people would never tolerate the imposition of so many controls over their lives.

The biggest lie is that all these rules and restrictions will REVERSE climate change They will not, but by year 2050 the pseudo socialists will have what they want; total control over people and so they will be able to ignore that fact that they have failed to reverse climate change