ABC News Watch
An Honest Climate Debate
And Then There's Physics
Australian Climate Madness
Bishop Hill
Bob Tisdale - Climate Observations
C3 Headlines
Chew The Fat
Climate Audit
Climate Change Dispatch
Climate Common Sense
Climate Conferences - Heartland
Climate Conversation Group
Climate Depot
Climate Edinburgh
Climate Etc.
Climate Lessons
Climate of Sophistry
Climate Physics
Climate Realists
Climate Resistance
Climate Sanity
Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr.
Climate Skeptic
Clive Best
Co2 Insanity
CO2 Science
Deep Climate
Dr. Roy Spencer, PhD
Dr. Tim Ball
Enthusiasm, Scepticism and Science
Errors in IPCC climate science
Geoffchambers's Blog
Global Climate Scam
Global Warming Hoax
Global Warming or is it Global Cooling?
Global Warming Science
Gore Lied
Green Hell Blog
Greenhouse Bullcrap
Greenie Watch
Grumpy Denier
Gust Of Hot Air
Harmless Sky
Heliogenic Climate Change
Ice Age Now
James Taylor - Forbes
Jennifer Marohasy
Jo Nova
Junk Science
Kiwi Thinker
Minnesotans For Global Warming
Musings from the Chiefio
News Busters
No Cap And Trade
No Frakking Consensus
No Tricks Zone
NOAA/ESRL Trends in CO2
Not A Lot Of People Know That
Notes on a Scandal
Planet Gore
Plants Need CO2
Polar Bear Science
Principia Scientific International
Real Science
Really Real Climate
Roger Pielke Jr.'s Blog
Talking About the Weather
Tallbloke's Talkshop
The Air Vent
The Australian Climate Sceptics
The Big Green Lie
The Carbon Sense Coalition
The Cosmic Tusk
The Global Warming Challenge
The Global Warming Policy Foundation
The Hockey Schtick
The Inconvenient Skeptic
The IPCC Report
The Next Grand Minimum
The Reference Frame
The Resilient Earth
The Science of Doom
The SPPI Blog
The View From Here
Tom Nelson
Tory Aardvark
Troy's Scratchpad
Trust, yet verify
VK3BBRs Blog
Watts Up With That

Bob Tisdale
Cato Institute
Climate Central
Climate Resistance
Climate Review
Climate Scam
CO2 Is Green
CO2 Science
Coyote Blog
Dr David Evans
Friends of Science
Galileo Movement
Global Stewardship
I Love Carbondioxide
MagicJava TV
Michael Coffman
Minnesotans For Global Warming
No Cap And Trade Group
Not Evil Just Wrong
Plants Need CO2
Question The Hype
Stefan Molyneux
Steve Goreham
Taxing Air
The Heartland Institute
The Independent Institute
Tom Harris ICSC
Weather Action TV

Richard Lindzen, PhD
Roy Spencer, PhD

The Carbon Sense Coalition

All about carbon in life, energy and the atmosphere

Publish: Fri 26 Nov 2021 - 1:54 PM
Website: The Carbon Sense Coalition
Twitter: @carbsense
Source: View Original

Dr Patrick Moore has Ph.D. in ecology and is a veteran of peace and environmental activism having faced down the harpoons of whaling ships as a founding member of Greenpeace. In this video explains the benefits of increasing levels of CO2 in the environment.

Where is today’s additional atmospheric carbon dioxide coming from?
Publish: Fri 05 Nov 2021 - 11:24 AM
Website: The Carbon Sense Coalition
Twitter: @carbsense
Source: View Original

By Andrew Kenny

We need to be careful. Climate alarm is nonsense. The idea that rising CO2 will cause dangerous change is nonsense. Actually, it will have no [significant] effect on the climate but a wonderful effect on plant life.

But the recent rise in CO2 (since about 1850) is because of man burning fossil fuels. (It is not because of volcanoes.) We can see that by the fact the extra CO2 contains no C14. We can also see that in the graphs of temperatures and CO2 levels over the last ten thousand years. We must not only accept that but be proud of it. Rising CO2 has done the planet a power of good.

CO2 certainly is a GHG. But above about 150 ppm its warming effect is miniscule. Or at least we thought it was miniscule until the recent Wijngarden-Happer paper showed it has no effect at all. [They might have said “almost no effect”] This theory explains that there is no correlation between CO2 and global temps over the last 550 million years (except for a negative correlation during the ice ages).

South Africa in spring. In 2021, Earth’s climate is as wonderful as it ever has been.

Switzerland in winter. With the sun going into a phase of reduced sun spot activity the climate may be getting colder.

Would Einstein be a global warming skeptic if alive today?
Publish: Fri 29 Oct 2021 - 11:16 AM
Website: The Carbon Sense Coalition
Twitter: @carbsense
Source: View Original

By Will Happer

Albert Einstein would almost certainly have been a global warming skeptic if he were alive today. Many distinguished, contemporary scientists are skeptics too.

We are lucky that Einstein left a rich legacy of pithy quotes that reveal how he would probably relate to today’s cult of global warming alarmists.

Take the oft repeated propaganda that 97 percent of scientists support global-warming alarmism.

Quite aside from the falseness of the claim, Einstein would have remembered the famous attack on himself, “A Hundred Scientists Against Einstein,” published in Germany in 1931. His response was, “If I were wrong, one would have been enough.”

His view of groupthink was summarized in another comment: “In order to be a member of a flock of sheep, one must, above all, be a sheep oneself!”

Or take the oft repeated statement by climate alarmists, most of whom have little real knowledge about any science: “The science is settled!”

Science, and especially a scientific topic as complicated as the Earth’s climate, is never settled. No credible astronomer, for example, would ever say we know everything about the universe. As Einstein put it, “We still do not know one thousandth of one percent of what nature has revealed to us.”

Einstein himself had shown that Isaac Newton’s wildly successful law of universal gravitation had major deficiencies.

For example, Newtonian gravitation had no room for the gravitational waves, whose existence, at exactly the level Einstein predicted, was first demonstrated by my Princeton friends, Joe Taylor and Russell A. Hulse, for which they received a richly deserved Nobel Prize in 1993.

Most importantly, Einstein would have paid close attention to how well the establishment theory of global warming agreed with experiment. He famously stated: “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right. A single experiment can prove me wrong.”

The earth has done the kind of experiment Einstein had in mind. It has warmed at a much slower rate, two or three times slower, than models have predicted.

To make matters worse for alarmists, no one knows how much of the relatively small warming is due to increased carbon dioxide.

After all, quite similar warming was observed more than a century ago when CO2 could not have played a role. The alarmist narrative has been proven wrong by experimental observation.

With his reverence for observational fact, Einstein would have been repulsed by the Orwellian demonization of CO2 as “carbon pollution.”

Satellites show that the modest increase of CO2 in the past few decades has produced a measurable greening of the Earth, especially in arid regions.

Plants “breathe in” CO2 and “exhale” oxygen. Commercial growers add as much CO2 as they can afford to their greenhouses, to improve the quality of their flowers, fruits and other plant products. Adult humans breathe out about two pounds of the “pollutant” CO2 per day.

Over most of geological history, concentrations of atmospheric CO2 have been much higher than those today. Both plant and animal life were more abundant when the atmosphere was enriched with three or four times more CO2 than today’s levels.

Climate alarmists are having a difficult time justifying their claims with science.

The Earth stubbornly refuses to warm as quickly as establishment models predict. Extreme weather is not becoming more frequent. Sea levels are rising at about the same rate as they did in the 1800′s. Crop yields break previous records year after year.

Rather than address honest scientific concerns, alarmists attack skeptics as “deniers,” a word deliberately chosen to vilify the person, along with CO2.

Einstein was subject to similar attacks, by envious, prejudiced contemporaries. His advice on how to deal with this was: “Weak people revenge. Strong people forgive. Intelligent people ignore.”


Will Happer is a professor of physics, emeritus at Princeton University and member of the CO2 Coalition. Readers may write him at 258 Jadwin Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544

New Book by Ian Plimer: “Green Murder”
Publish: Mon 18 Oct 2021 - 3:22 PM
Website: The Carbon Sense Coalition
Twitter: @carbsense
Source: View Original

Click the image to download the PDF which includes an order form. Or visit–Ian-Plimer_p_463.html

Science and Anti-Science: the Net Zero debate
Publish: Thu 14 Oct 2021 - 9:09 AM
Website: The Carbon Sense Coalition
Twitter: @carbsense
Source: View Original

By G M Derrick

The Net Zero steamrollers are now flattening all in their path, driven by global business and financial interests, the Business Council of Australia, a future king of England and compliant media groups that include the unlikely bedfellows of the ABC and now News Corp. None of these would have the foggiest idea of any actual science. They parrot slogans that start with false claims of a globe on fire, and end with an equally false claim of a globe under water, spreading fear and exaggeration through an unknowing populace. But knowledge of actual science?? None really.

These groups barely understand the difference between the element Carbon, a basic building block of mankind and plantkind, and the compound carbon dioxide, a harmless gas that greens our planet and keeps agriculture viable. They know nothing about Sunspot frequency curves, and that we have been through low-frequency Cycle 24 and are entering Cycle 25, resembling conditions of the Little Ice Age and earlier cool periods; they have never heard of Radiative Absorption curves for Earth’s atmosphere, where water vapour dominates above CO2 in making our planet liveable; and they have never heard of our everyday cooling clouds, and the associated Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) which influence our planetary temperatures but whose complexity defies modelling, explaining why the IPCC climate models are simply not fit for purpose, except for spreading fright and alarm onto a gullible public.

The Net Zero propagandists are quick to point to a social cost of carbon, which some alarmist literature claims is about $50 per tonne of CO2 emitted [1]. What they fail to mention are the social benefits of the same carbon or CO2. A nation’s wealth and GDP are directly proportional to energy used, which is the great economic engine of the planet, lifting us from the short and brutal lives of our ancestors and insulating us from the vagaries of weather. Increasing world population will always need more energy. Calculations [2] show that for each additional tonne of CO 2 produced from that energy use, we get $4,380 in additional goods and services in growing food, making steel, building houses and cars, catching fish and supplying hundreds of other applications that we take for granted in a modern world.

So, for a harmless gas, we have a social cost of CO2 at about $50/t of CO2 emitted, versus a social benefit of about $4,500/t of CO 2 emitted. Do the maths!!

As a nation we must be careful what we wish for in our misguided rush to embrace the false dawn and sloganeering of these Net Zero know-nothings.

[1] Environmental Defence Fund:
[2] Eschenbach, W., 2018