The business with the CO2 thesis  

 

April 22, 2021

 

 

There is a lot of theses and contributors about the climate and no agreement on the CO2 thesis, although this is always claimed. But the CO2 thesis is a business for NOGs, Politicians (CO2 taxes), climate institutes (collects millions € taxpayers annually), CO2-certification dealer, the media and so on. We need an open discussion without discriminating against climate policy critics.

 

For environmental management we need sewage treatment plants, filters, recycling and protection of forests and seas, worldwide. Much money for "climate protection" would be much better invested in real environmental projects in the developing countries. 

 

The precondition for environmental protection is a functioning economy with a strong middle class. Environmental management does not work with poverty or socalsm.

 

Green harassment is ruining companies in Europe, that have successfully managed environmental protection for decades and developed products for them. Then you have no money and no more technology for environmental protection and see what stinking air and dirty water. My 1991 book on environmental management was sold out long before Greta was born.

 

http://www.europa-konzept.eu/umweltmanagement-statt-co2-abzockerei/umweltmanagement/

 

 

 

CO2-thesis refuted since 100 years

 

Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927), physicist, chemist and Nobel laureate, a relative of Greta Thunberg, developed the CO2 thesis, which was refuted during his lifetime. By the way, he judged the global warming positively, there would be fewer crop failures and famines. There are many counter-theses, but critics of the IPCC have been systematically discriminated for years.

 

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Arrhenius

 

https://www.en24.news/ca/2019/09/court-judges-against-the-creator-of-the-climate-change-hockey-stick.html

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

 

 

Even an ordinary weather forecast requires high-performance computers to process the complex amounts of data. A longer-term prognosis I therefore consider impossible, by the way, also for the scientists who criticize the co2-thesis.

 

http://www.europa-konzept.eu/umweltmanagement-statt-co2-abzockerei/die-ipcc-und-ihre-kritiker/

 

 

IPCC and the critical institutions

 

The leading representatives of the CO2 thesis are the members of the ICPP, also called a global climate. The intergovernmental Committee on Climate Change (IPCC) was launched, according to the official declaration, to provide decision-makers and other climate change an objective source of information about climate change. The IPCC provides its reports at regular intervals to politicians, and they will immediately become standard reference works that are used intensively of politicians, professionals and students. The IPCC reports form a crucial basis for climate conferencing.

 

The official requirements for IPCC reports

(Quote from the website of the IPCC 2011)

"They should be politically neutral, although they have to deal objectively with politically relevant scientific, technical and socio-economic factors. They should satisfy high scientific and technical standards and, as far as possible, reflect a variety of opinions and expertise and a broad geographic distribution."

 

These requirements have never met the IPCC reports, otherwise they would also have to quote the critics. On the contrary, these are systematically discriminated against for years. If the representatives of a ruling doctrine need that, something is lazy, that was always in the world history.

 

Of course, the organizations that propagate the climate is governed by state. That costs millions annually. For example, the Potsdam Institute is financed to equal parts of the federal government and country. In 2016, the institute received a total of about 11.7 million euros of institutional promotion, which came about 10.4 million euro third-party funds for research projects. Research at the PIK is organized in four interdisciplinary research areas.

 

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to present a comprehensive, authoritative, and realistic assessment of the science and economics of global warming. Because it is not a government agency, and because its members are not predisposed to believe climate change is caused by human greenhouse gas emissions, NIPCC is able to offer an independent “second opinion” of the evidence reviewed – or not reviewed – by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on the issue of global warming.

Nongovernment International Panel On Climate Change = NIPCC, also called the international non-governmental commission for climate change. In 2003 there was a meeting in Milan, in which the basic idea was developed to the NIPCC. In 2007 she was then founded under this name.

http://climatechangereconsidered.org/

 

The European Institute for Climate & Energie E.V. (Eike). This is a merger of natural, mind and economists, engineers, publicists and politicians. Eike was founded in February 2007 and finances itself from voluntary contributions of its members as well as donations. EIKE offers the members and partners a platform for the discussion and publication.

https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu

 

In history, ice times for people were always a big problem, this is in one of the most interesting books on the subject, of the former ETH Professor Kenneth J. Hsu. Unfortunately you get the book only antiqar.

 

https://www.lesestoff.ch/detail/ISBN-9783280024065/Hsü-Kenneth-J./Klima-macht-Geschichte

 

 

Contrainroductive climate policy: Examples from Germany

 

The parties CDU and Greens in Baden-Württemberg want to build 1000 new wind turbines. Wind shrouds are not environmentally friendly, they kill birds and insects, shit landscapes and for the creation you need a lot of gray energy.

https://www.cdu-bw.de/data/documents/2021/04/03/3-6068d11b30226.pdf

 

Also in Hessen Green Ministers approved the deforestation of forests for wind turbines and a piece of highway.

 

https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/geplante-rodung-des-dannenroeder-forsts-gruene-zerreissprobe-16977832.html?utm_content=buffer3c528&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=GEPC%253Ds30

 

https://www.zdf.de/politik/laenderspiegel/buergerprotest-gegen-autobahnbau-100.html

 

Wind turbines may be useful in flat land, wherever a wind blows. Otherwise, a mix of different types of energy production is recommended, e.g. Solar energy and nuclear energy.

 

 

Cover photo

 

painted and photographed by Regula Heinzelmann

 

 

 

 

 

 

Druckversion Druckversion | Sitemap
© Regula Heinzelmann