Global Warming

I have always been frustrated by the major idiocy surrounding global warming, so now, in light of the international meetings currently taking place on the subject, I have decided to open this up for discussion on the forums. I will copy this post to a thread in the newly established “Real Science” forum, so we can discuss it.


First, I will just say flat out that global warming is fake. I don’t know for sure why it has been invented, and I’ll try not to speculate on that in this post, but it is nevertheless an outright fabrication.

One of the major tenets of global warming is the hole in the ozone layer, so I’ll start there. The global warming people claim that the ozone hole is causing, or at least contributing to, global warming.  But think about it.  Ozone is a greenhouse gas.  It insulates the earth.  The absence of ozone would leave the earth colder than before, not warmer, so a hole in the ozone layer would by no means warm the earth! And even if it would warm the earth, it is created by the polar vortex, which only happens over Antarctica, and only from August to November (there is a weak polar vortex over the North Pole, but its effects are inconsequential). This means that, because of how it is made, the ozone hole cannot spread past Antarctica, so it would have virtually no effect on the world as a whole.

CFCs were banned because of the ozone hole, but they actually have very little effect on the ozone hole. CFCs affect the ozone layer at the hole by something like 5-10% (I don’t have internet access right now, so this is off the top of my head—it might even have been .05-.1%, but I’m being liberal just in case). This may seem significant until you realize that the ozone layer fluctuates naturally by over 50% at the ozone hole.  Furthermore, not a single human calamity has been linked to the ozone hole, but something like 40 million human deaths have resulted from the absence of CFCs (again, I’m operating straight from my mind, without internet—I think it was actually more like 44 million, but I’m giving the other side the benefit of the doubt).

Now on to carbon dioxide. While it is true that the CO2 content in the atmosphere has been increasing lately, we have not seen a substantial change in the actual global temperature of the earth. From the early 1900s to the 2000s, CO2 content in the air has increase from ~290 ppm to ~375 ppm, approximately a 25% increase in 100 years. During this time, the global temperature has increased by about .5 degrees C, or about .7 degrees F.  In addition, combustion, the main (if not the only) way humans release CO2 into the atmosphere, also releases other gases into the atmosphere that reflect light, causing a cooling effect. Then there’s a report from Harvard University on their review of over 240 scientific studies on global temperatures in the past which indicates that the earth was significantly warmer between 800 and 1300 AD than it is today (I have a textbook I am using as a reference now).  I don’t think they had much factory activity in the Middle Ages, and I doubt all those burning castles exceeded our current CO2 output. Also, remember that .7 degrees of warming that happened in the last 100 years? Most of that happened before humans were burning much fuel, and before the CO2 levels really started to rise.

The final topic I will address here is the ice caps. It is true that some ice caps are melting. For example, the Larsen B ice shelf has experienced a fair amount of shrinkage over the past few years (the textbook I am currently referencing doesn’t say how much). However, just a few hundred miles over, the ice sheets on the west side of Antarctica have been thickening.

If you have any more aspects of global warming you would like me to address, I’d love to hear them.


One thought on “Global Warming

  1. C. M. - 2 Cor. 10:5 June 11, 2018 / 19:37

    Hi Olorin,

    Excellent exposition on global warming. I have nothing more scientific to add, only that I do propose to have an answer to your question of why people made this whole thing up. The cycle goes something like this:

    1) if they can convince enough people (and this education has been going on for years, starting with science textbooks in schools) that global warming is real, then they can
    2) create laws and regulations to oversee and control emissions (I think this gives politicians something else to talk about, fight and dehumanize each other over :P),
    3) control the manufacturing economy in general and especially automobiles by forcing companies to decrease emissions (which uses resources – time, money, people – that can be used more efficiently on researching a variety of other things to better our society/technology)
    4) I think their method of creating jobs to improve our economy involves something like: increasing regulations for manufacturers = increasing government jobs that help oversee those companies (just think of the lawsuits) + increasing jobs in those companies to read, comprehend, follow, and manage their companies in a way that adheres to those regulations, which I’m sure are updated quite often.

    P.S. I have nothing against keeping our environment/Earth clean; only against people making things up outright and other people being ignorant enough to believe/support them.

    What do you think?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s