What if there is no Climate Emergency?

Written by Ed Hoskins

Screenshot 2019-09-25 at 12.10.57.png

What if there is no Catastrophic Risk from Man-made Global Warming ? What if Man-made Climate Change really is a non-problem ? But what if there is a Global Cooling Catastrophe in the offing ?

It is the propaganda of Catastrophic Global Warming / Climate Change alarmists that has illogically conflated Carbon Dioxide, the beneficial trace gas that sustains all life on earth and which can cause some minor warming, with real and dangerous pollutants to create the “Great Global Warming Scare / Climate Change Scare / Climate Emergency / etcetera”.

The role of Atmospheric CO2

To establish realistic policy the following points about man-made CO2 emissions need to be recognised:

  • The warming Greenhouse effect is essential to all life on earth, without it at ~+33°C planet Earth would be a very cold and inhospitable place indeed.
  • Most of the greenhouse effect, (more than ~90% – 95%) arises from water  as vapour and clouds in the atmosphere.


  • The role of water as vapour or clouds is fully acknowledged by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, even though they concentrate their alarmist views on Man-made CO2 emissions.  The role of Man-made emissions and climate impact is their mandate after all.

(page 666 of the IPCC assessment.)

  • Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide CO2 is not pollutant.
  • The world needs its atmospheric CO2 for the survival and fertilisation of plant life.
  • Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide is the very stuff of life.
  • Atmospheric CO2 is essential for PHOTOSYNTHESIS, it supports all life on earth.

At about half the current atmospheric concentration of CO2, plant Photosynthesis falters and the world soon dies.  In comparison with the Geological past the World is now in a period of CO2 starvation, because most of the CO2, once at least 10 times more abundant in the atmosphere at the time when plants evolved, has since been sequestered in the oceans as limestone.

CO2 concentration came close to that fatally low level, (~150 ppmv), during the last ice age, 110,000BC – 10,000BC.  The dangerously low level of atmospheric CO2 could well be exceeded in any coming Ice Age.

Colder oceans absorb more CO2 and ocean life sequesters it as limestone.  This is the way our world will eventually die of atmospheric CO2 starvation in a future glacial period.

Increased CO2 concentration promotes plant growth throughout the planet and reduces the water needs of plants.  According to NASA, ~15% extra green growth across the planet is already attributed to the relatively recent increase in CO2 concentration.


Man-kind as a whole contributes only a small amount of the CO2 in the Carbon cycle, (~3% per annum), and any extra atmospheric CO2 is rapidly absorbed by the oceans and the biosphere, (with a half-life of ~5 years).

If any extra CO2 were to have some minor warming effect, it would be all to the good.  Atmospheric CO2, whether Man-made or mostly naturally occurring, cannot therefore be considered as a pollutant.


The diminishing warming effectiveness of increased atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

There is no direct straight-line relationship between CO2 concentration and temperature.

The effectiveness of CO2 as a warming Greenhouse gas rapidly diminishes logarithmically as concentration increases.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 10.06.07.pngA concentration of atmospheric CO2 greater than 200 ppmv equivalent to ~77% of CO2’s Greenhouse effectiveness is absolutely essential to maintain all plant life and thus all life on earth.  Plant life will be extinguished at ~150ppmv.

CO2 is not causing global warming

At the current level of ~400 ppmv, ~87% of the effectiveness of CO2 as a Greenhouse gas is exhausted.

Screenshot 2019-06-29 at 14.26.41

At only 13% of CO2 effectiveness remaining, so little of its power as a greenhouse gas now remains that there is no possibility of ever reaching the “much feared” +2°C temperature rise or more predicted by alarmists, that they think will be caused by future Man-made CO2 emissions.

Alarmists consider that level of +2°C to be catastrophic and sadly they have convinced many of the Western world’s politicians.  Economically this is not so, and any increase up-to +2°C would be beneficial.  Global temperature would then approach the very abundant period of the previous Eemian interglacial epoch 110,000 years ago.


But now increasing CO2 in the atmosphere can only lead to very limited further warming and certainly not to any catastrophic and any dangerous temperature increase.  The assumptions are set out below.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 14.02.30.png

Logarithmic diminution operates as follows:


  • 77% of the CO2 greenhouse effect of CO2, 0 – 200 ppmv, is essential to maintain and fertilise plant life and thus all life on earth.
  • If it is assumed that all the increase from 300ppmv – 400ppmv is Man-made it would give 4.2% of the Greenhouse effect and a temperature rise of between 0.14°C – 0.07°C
  • A possible immediate future rise from 400ppmv – 500ppmv could only give a rise of between 0.11°C – 0.05°C
  • A later rise of CO2 from 500ppmv – 1000ppmv, were it to occur, can only give a further rise of between 0.33°C – 0.17°C
  • This ignores the statement by the IPCC that only 50% of CO2 increase is Man-made, which would reduce these increased temperature values by half.
  • This also ignores the assumption made in Climate models that there is massive positive and escalating feedback from further increasing CO2 emissions:  even if such feedback was proven, any continuing warming from CO2 emissions would still remain marginal as a result of the logarithmic diminution effect.

So, it is now likely that the impact of rising CO2 concentrations on global temperature, even at its greatest assessed effectiveness, is not only marginally insignificant for temperature rise but is also in fact beneficial.

To bring the Developing world up to the level of development of China, as indicated by CO2 emissions/head, over the coming decades their CO2 emissions are bound to escalate by at least a further 20 billion tonnes per annum, (+~60%).  So all the attempts by Western Nations to control global temperature by the limitation of their own CO2 emissions from combustion of fossil fuels can now only ever have marginal or immeasurable further effect.


Therefore, all de-carbonisation efforts by Western Nations are misguided and irrelevant.

Fossil fuels are a gift of nature.  They are like a battery of energy created by sunlight several million years ago.  They have enabled all the civilised development in the West and will continue to support the growth in prosperity of the developing world.  Fossil fuels are not running out.  Fracking developments can occur almost anywhere worldwide.  For example there are 300 years’ worth of Coal in the UK alone.

Nonetheless there is a coming Climate catastrophe

That catastrophe is the exact opposite of the “we are all going to fry narrative” of the Climate alarmists.  It presages a very scary future for Man-kind and the biosphere in the comparatively near-term:

  • According to reliable Ice Core records the last millennium 1000 – 2000 AD was the coldest of our current Holocene interglacial.
  • The world has already been cooling at ~0.14°C / millennium, ~20 times the earlier rate since before Roman times, in fact since ~1000 BC.


Screenshot 2019-09-25 at 18.08.58.png

  • But as can be seen in the rapid Recovery from the last Ice Age, 10,000 years ago, when temperature increased at a rate of ~+2.5°C / millennium, the world’s Climate can change radically and suddenly.
  • There is every reason to suspect that the World could meet a similar falling temperature cliff at the coming end of our present Holocene epoch, this century, next century or this millennium, similar to the end of the previous Eemian interglacial.

Screenshot 2019-10-06 at 10.31.02.png

  • The modern short pulse of beneficial Global warming stopped some 20 years ago and recent global temperatures are now stable or declining.
  • At 11,000 years old, our congenial, warm Holocene interglacial is coming towards its end. The Holocene has been responsible for all man-kind’s advances, from living in caves to microprocessors.
  • The world will very soon, (in geological time), revert to another period of true glaciation, again resulting in mile high ice sheets over New York. With much lower sea levels this was state of Western Europe only 16,000 years ago and gives an idea of what the new Ice Age look like in due course.

Screenshot 2019-06-30 at 21.05.21.png

  • The prospect of even moving in a cooling direction is something to be truly scared about, both for the biosphere and for man-kind.
  • Some immediate cooling now seems likely in the near term, (this century), as a result of the state of the current Solar cycle.

How The Sun Affects Temperatures On Earth

  • The weather gets worse in colder times.
  • Cold fatally reduces agricultural productivity.
  • Cooling is already be becoming evident.

Screenshot 2019-09-23 at 10.16.42.png

And trying to control Man-made CO2 emissions in the Western world will do nothing to ameliorate the coming Cold Climate Catastrophe.


Spending any effort, for solely emotional and childish reasons, without true cost benefit analysis and without full engineering due diligence, let alone at GDP scale costs, trying to stop the UK’s 1% or the EU’s 10% of something that has not been happening for 3 millennia has to be monumentally ill-advised.


It should be understood that the real reason for Green thinking is to bring Energy and Economic catastrophe to the capitalistic Western world.

Green thinking should be regarded as a continuation of the “Cold War”.

Russia, China and India are mocking the way Western governments have been induced by “Green” thinking to promote their policies of abject self-harm at great national cost and to no perceptible benefit.  This is supported by Western “useful idiots” (Lenin’s term).  Lenin held them in utter contempt. 

The developing and Eastern worlds are certainly not going to be meekly following the deranged example of the “virtue signalling” West.


Read more at edmhdotme.wordpress.com

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Comments (3)

  • Avatar



    You are a lukewarmist! Can’t you figure out that CO2 has no warming effect at all because the cooler air cannot heat the warmer surface. Therefore when co2 reradiates heat, the heat will go upward toward the cooler space rather than the warmer surface.

  • Avatar

    Kevin Doyle


    The fundamental error in ALL ‘Greenhouse Effect’ theory and discussion is the fabled 33 degrees of missing temperature (difference between surface at 15 C, and outgoing radiation at -18 C.).
    A satellite observing outgoing radiation sees an ‘average’ of -18 C., which is entirely correct.
    If the surface of Earth is 15 C., and at altitude of 5 km approximately -20 C., and at altitude of 10 km approximately -50 C.; then what might we imagine the ‘average temperature’ of the surface plus atmosphere is?
    Hint: All molecules with mass and heat radiate, they just do it at different wavelengths.
    Answer: Somewhere between +15 C and -50 C. Possibly -18 C.

    Thought question #1: What is ‘average temperature’ of the 5,000 m deep ocean? Surface temp between +5 and +25 C. Temperature at 1,000 m depth is +5 (maximum). Temperature at 5,000 m depth is 0 to +1 C.
    Thought question #2: Is the temperature of the Sun the ‘core surface temperature’, or the composite average of surface to outer atmosphere of Sun?

  • Avatar

    T L Winslow


    [[The fundamental error in ALL ‘Greenhouse Effect’ theory and discussion is the fabled 33 degrees of missing temperature (difference between surface at 15 C, and outgoing radiation at -18 C.).]]

    Duh, for some short portions of the day only. It’s dynamic not static.

    [[Thought question #2: Is the temperature of the Sun the ‘core surface temperature’, or the composite average of surface to outer atmosphere of Sun?]]

    That’s mixed-up thinking. The temperature of any material is based on its internal kinetic energy, that is, internal physical whizzing of molecules after absorption of radiation at particular wavelengths, hence the temperature of the Sun changes from core to surface in a temperature profile. After the radiation leaves the Sun’s upper atmosphere as Planck radiation, it has no temperature because that’s a property of matter only. After the radiation hits the Earth’s atmosphere it begins to add kinetic energy to susceptible molecules, raising their temperatures. The surface temperatures are mainly raised by penetrating solar IR, causing the surface to switch to a higher temperature Planck radiation curve that is heavy in IR and rises through the afternoon then declines. “Average” temperature is a pretty useless concoction that is easily misused, and it would be better to record maximum and minimum temperatures as the Earth turns.

    Between the surface and space that outgoing IR is heavily modified by the atmosphere. Observing Earth’s radiation from a satellite can’t tell you what the core temperature is, nor the surface temperature, nor the temperature profile in the atmosphere, nor especially what happened to the surface IR on the way. A mangled Planck curve will be measured, from which the so-called climate scientists try to extract too much to justify their fake CO2-driven global warming theory. Don’t fall for it. Only the Sun warms the Earth’s surface, and the atmosphere just cools it. The Earth is a giant chimney and leaky blanket, not a greenhouse, and all that greenhouse thinking and jargon has to go, it really has to go. Attempts to find a “radiation balance” between the Sun’s incoming radiation and the Earth’s outgoing radiation is doomed because the atmosphere is a heat engine that turns a lot of the radiation into work to generate wind and storms. Such radiation balance thinking might work for the Moon, but not Earth. The atmosphere doesn’t generate the climate, the Sun does.

    Click the link above and study climate science with me and clear the swamp without Donald Trump.

Comments are closed