Within the mainstream set of assumptions, there are many myths relentlessly trumpeted as facts. One of the biggest is the scaremongering over impending climatic disaster due to CO2 induced climate change. Like all the other myths, the story of disastrous climate change can easily be dismantled. The truth can be seen when we bear in mind what we know about Propaganda and take a look at both sides of the argument.

Lets begin a brief exploration of the issues with a few definitions so we know precisely the nature of the concepts in question.

Defining terms

Weather refers to the current state of the atmosphere in terms of temperature and precipitation activity. It is driven by differences in air pressure, temperature and moisture content between one place and another. These differences occur due to the suns rays striking the earth at different angles or the different nature of surfaces being warmed.

Climate is simply long-term weather. Climate is always changing by definition. It is a dynamic system in continuous flux. From the discovery of isotope testing with ice core samples we can deduce the temperature and CO2 record over millennia.

The term ‘climate change’, as used in the mainstream media, is a meaningless slogan. Our climate has been cycling between ice ages and warmer periods for hundreds of millions of years. The debate is NOT about whether climate change is real or if it is happening, this is a misrepresentation of the argument.

Some say that the term ‘climate change’ refers to the difference in the climate that is attributable to human activities.

Global warming is an increase in the average global temperature.

The term Anthropogenic climate change refers to climate change for which human activity is considered responsible due to CO2 release. Some confusion is caused by some people also using the terms ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming’ to refer to the specific changes in either temperature or climate attributable to human activity as well.

The mainstream view of climate change

The official story is this: Because of human economic and industrial activity releasing CO2 into the atmosphere the planet is facing a doomsday scenario of global destruction. The greenhouse effect of the additional CO2 will cause a runaway overheating scenario and consequently, civilisation is threatened. The computer model predictions show that we will destroy the planet. As a result of all this people must reduce energy consumption, which means reduce economic activity and third world countries must not be allowed to industrialise.

This argument ties in with curtailing our materialism and being less decadent for the sake of saving the planet. It also ties in nicely with the anti-capitalists calling for more and more state intervention. It should also be noted that it is anti-trade and anti-capitalist and is against further development and industrialisation. Given that industrialisation brought us all the benefits we enjoy today and changed our lives from the squalor of pre-industrial times to the comforts of modern living, we must give the whole subject a thorough rational scrutinising. It must be understood how high the stakes are.

Key questions are, will an increase in CO2 have the predicted result? Are temperatures really likely to rise as much as claimed by the computer model feedback predictions for each doubling of CO2? In fact, is CO2 the bogeyman, the culprit or the devil it is claimed to be?

What do we all agree upon?

 1. We all agree that climate change happens. There is no disagreement about the fact that the climate changes – at least not in the serious debate. When we hear terms like climate deniers and the like we know we are not dealing with rational debate.