Dear Editor,
- The Greenhouse effect is not feasible because Co2 does not hold heat for long periods of time when separated from it’s heat source. Much of air pollution that is emitted falls to the ground, becomes smog, and is absorbed into the ground. Much of it is also dissipated and diluted by air. Raw Co2 is therefore the prominent chemical element. As stated before, Co2 does not trap heat for long after being separated from it’s heat source, almost immediately in fact. Therefore, whatever Co2 reaches close to the atmosphere could only trap heat from the sun, which would hold no effect as that heat is already present with or without Co2. And of course, that heat is lost in areas when the sun recedes. In order to have any present effect as far as climate change goes, the Co2 would have to trap heat from the sun and dispense itself closer to the ground. This would not work because between the ground and atmosphere, the elevation becomes increasingly colder, therefore the Co2 would not hold heat through zone in which temperature is immensely cold.
- The general belief used to be that the ozone layer is depleting, so that the sun’s rays affect the Earth in stronger quantity. Why did it change to the Greenhouse Effect? That is highly untrustworthy.
- The Danish Meteorological Institute recorded a 50% ice growth in the Arctic, as well as a 510 billion ton ice growth in Greenland, from 2016-2019, most prominently 2018. Why has that not been mentioned by common news media? I would trust Denmark’s government before America’s government, and most governments in the United Nations, including England’s. Denmark’s government is much more liberating and out-of-the-way then most governments in the United Nations, and unlike governments endorsing climate change, has nothing to gain by showing evidence against the subject.
4. NASA, the most prominent trusted source for climate change information, has been wrong on more then one account of the Arctic’s future as well as the future of climate change in general. NASA’s most popular and authoritative climatologist Hansen, forecasted that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2013, a forecast that was wildly incorrect. Then, it was forecasted that the Arctic be ice-free “within weeks,” even though trillions of tons in ice remained. Why would so many people trust this organization, an asset of a corrupted, dishonest government?
5. The general seasonal temperatures have not risen. Spring, summer, fall, and winter are still generally the same. In fact, some areas of the west coast have been colder in the past two years, particularly Arizona, an American state known for heinously hot temperatures. The last summer was a day-to-day average of five-to-ten degrees colder then previous summers. Many areas of Texas are also colder, even since the early 1970’s. In August, areas of Texas averaged 100+ degrees at night, while those same areas today average 85 degrees in August. Many parts of Canada remain in winter nine out of twelve months, without temperatures rising. If our Co2 emissions were changing the climate, especially on the scale that Governments and Media outlets present them to be, surely the seasonal temperatures would have been immensely different in the west coast and in Canada. In fact, if climate change is currently causing ice to melt in the Arctic, Canada should’ve been the first to be affected by flooding causing by climate change, and no flooding has yet to be mentioned in Canada.
6. The 1998-2012 Global Warming hiatus speaks to the unpredictability of climate. From 1998-2012 the Arctic ice supposedly halted from receding.
7. Climate Change has happened before. Take the Medieval Warming Period for example. In early 1300 A.D, ice was rapidly lost in the Arctic and Greenland. So much ice was lost in Greenland that many tribes of Vikings were able to colonize it. They were able to raise crops, stock and live without pnuemonia threatening their population. The period carried on for several decades, and following it was the mini-ice age in which that ice was restored, and then some. This speaks to the high possibility that the climate change supposedly done today is natural causes.
8. Undersea Volcanic Activity has gained prominence since 2013, and this fact has been unmentioned by common media and governments. Unsurprisingly of course. An example would be the undersea eruption that occurred in the Mariana Backarc Trench in 2013, which was recorded by marine biologist Bill Chadwick and his research team. According to Chadwick, an eruption can warm a considerable amount of surface land for several years. This has never been a mentioned possibility for lost sea ice, which is quite untrustworthy.
9. There are plenty of scientists that do not believe in the general climate change theory, and many of them are practically shoved away by the International Panel of Climate Change, as well as common news media.
If the general mainstream population knew these facts, they would likely not have nearly as much faith in the general Climate Change theory as they do. Common news media and many governments, most prominently the American government, have practically manipulated them. Not just by scaring them, but also by using the average human urge of siding with an agenda and following that agenda, whether they are genuinely concerned with that agenda’s policies or not. Climate Change is a theory that is far from solidly cemented, and lacks solidity to determine the fate of Earth.
Matt Blair
Kingman
