A tit for tat always ensues when engaging in discourse regarding a cult-like theme, and please keep in mind that contradictory science is not used here because it’s unnecessary to evaluate the validity of Climate Change Calamitous Claims, known as the FourCees in jovial circles. A focused, unbiased and logical examination of their own data and science suffices, and for entertainment purposes, it really is “tip for tap” and was first used in the 16th century.

I recently traveled through the Angeles National Forest and couldn’t help but notice how much greener the mountains were when compared to four years ago. Kept debating whether I was the victim of hallucinations but old pictures verified my suspicion. But for the sake of honesty, it’s winter now and the previous pictures were taken during the summer.

Then the eccentric question hit: What if higher CO2 emissions are saving the Earth? Plants do feed on the nasty gas. Could it be that the multitude of scientists are mistaken? It wouldn’t be the first time, and the great majority of them only repeat the data and opinions supplied by a select few, like trained cockatoos.

There are plenty of studies across an abundance of fields that are eventually discredited or challenged by other studies, and one of the simplest scientific debates pertains to the benefits of coffee. It’s between the human and the roasted bean. In short, it’s a vicious cycle where one day it’s the miracle juice, and then the next is closer to an unreliable witch’s potion. Certainly the experts are never wrong, some will say, except when they are.

To address the premise of unquestionable expertise, an old story must be brought to light because this song has been played far too many times. You can read the article published by The Guardian at your own leisure, and take note of the experts that contributed to the Climate Change report, over 15 years ago.

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

Reliable and verifiable sources are always used here without exception, and the secret report was not the product of unhinged conspiracy theorists seeking ad clicks on the web. However it may have opened a window into the Pentagon’s expertise, and may explain why the U.S. has been bogged down in a war in Afghanistan for a little over 18 years, a futile attempt to deliver democracy to an uncivilized country. In addition, it’s important to highlight that although Britain is not “Siberian” yet, the capital is now ironically called Londonistan, placing it much closer to the Russian frozen tundra, culturally speaking.

Now back to the science. The world’s oldest fossil forest was recently discovered in upstate New York, and dates back 385 million years. That was in the Devonian period, during which “a drastic drop in CO2 levels led to a cooling of the earth, which may have caused an extinction at the end of the period.”

“That’s sort of the opposite of what we’re experiencing today, with the possibility of an extinction as well,” Stein said.

Obviously one is informed that extinction is always inevitable regardless of CO2 levels—thus the convenient word “Change”—and the favorite inconclusive words of Mr. Stein are “may” and “possibility.” Although the typical environmental activist simply looks at the headline and avoids connecting the dots because they may end up uncovering inconvenient logic, we must investigate a bit further and look at the Devonian period and the claim that “Evidence of mass extinction associated with climate change 375 million years ago discovered in Central Asia.” Here’s the excerpt that matters:

In the Devonian period, Waters explained, the world was experiencing super greenhouse climate conditions. This means that it was very warm, there probably were no ice caps, there was a lot carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (with estimates of 4,000 parts per million).

“As plant communities expanded onto land to form the first forests, they depleted the carbon dioxide (CO2) that was in the atmosphere,” Waters said. “CO2 levels dropped to 400 ppm toward the end of the Devonian. It got colder. There were glaciation events and the rapid change in the climate caused severe extinction in the tropics and the existing coral reefs became extinct.” By comparison, the world’s current CO2 level is very close to 400 ppm.

Never mind greenhouse—it was super greenhouse—and forests were born with CO2 readings at 10 times the current level of 400 ppm, which was referred to as a state of CO2 depletion. Yet here we are sailing across oceans like Vikings on a mission, avoiding fossil fuels, subscribing to cutesy mottos, and spreading the word that Armageddon is coming while pretending that we understand the complex concept cleverly named Climate Change. Needless to say, scientists always offer some kind of explanation that brings the cult members back into the fold, and will always dismiss the simple, annoying questions as being… well, simple.

Borrowing from a previous post titled “Climate Change, CO2 And You,” let’s remind everyone of the conditions during the mid-Pliocene period.

The Arctic was literally smoking, and getting to the beach was a lot faster. Funky volcanoes aside, why were CO2 levels and temperatures during the mid-Pliocene period equivalent to current readings? Here’s the verifiable truth: Population on Earth was extremely smaller 3 million years ago, Chevys, Volkswagens and Rolls-Royce jet engines were not around, fossil fuels were undisturbed, and wood burning was all the rage. Could a reading of 500 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere provide an unparalleled bounty of forest green?

Here’s the core question: What caused CO2 to reach 4,000 ppm during the Devonian period? Now let’s take it a step further and ask whether CO2 at 1,000 ppm would convert current deserts into luscious landscapes, and deliver a sliver of socio-economic equality by sinking the wealthy elites on the coasts and deliver beachfront property to the less fortunate. In addition, someone must feed 10 billion people and urban organic farming sounds fantastic while petting a unicorn, but will not deliver the required nutrients.

Having examined Climate Change logic, data, and science from a macro perspective, one thing is certain: There’s a lot of clueless Chicken Little noise!

---