The Carbon Lie by Ommission or the Elephant in the Room

I entered the following search term in Google

what is the biggest source of co2?





That natural sources of carbon overwhelm human emissions is even agreed by the IPCC


I don't think the arrows are to scale

From the IPCC figures in the image above, humans account for ~3.7% of Co2 which means natural sources are ~96.3%. [Note my search term did not include the words ‘human’]. Why would this rather starling fact be hidden beneath so many layers of propaganda? I asked a basic question and it feels like everyone is reluctant to provide a simple answer – nature dwarfs mankind. If the climate is that sensitive to Co2 then this should not matter. This evasion gets you thinking. By how much do these natural amounts vary, surely with the multiple changes in earth’s environment – from internal and external sources – it cannot have remained static can it? Like everything else in IPCC land Co2 is flatlined and presumed, like our climate, to be in some paradisiacal equilibrium of 270 parts per million. Is natural Co2 the elephant in the room or the excommunicated family member no one is allowed to talk about?
Google images were not much better
The only image on the first page that answered my basic question was from
So why was it that hard? Is it because by answering that simple question we can see how illogical the whole Co2 meme is? Often more is revealed by what is not said and more importantly why it is left unsaid.


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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s