Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer: In Defense of Carbon Dioxide
Our mission is to educate the public on the positive effects of additional atmospheric CO2 and help prevent the inadvertent negative impact to human, plant and animal life if we reduce CO2
 
Home
 
    
Why CO2 is Good
 
    
Climate Change
 
    
Politics are Not Green
 
    
News & Media
 
    
Stay Informed
 
    
About Us
 
    
 
 
In the news
  Posted on: Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Print  Print     Email  Email    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
  Facebook   Share link on Twitter Tweet   Shared 3 times
Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer: In Defense of Carbon Dioxide
Source: The Wall Street Journal

Of all of the world's chemical compounds, none has a worse reputation than carbon dioxide. Thanks to the single-minded demonization of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control of energy production, the conventional wisdom about carbon dioxide is that it is a dangerous pollutant. That's simply not the case. Contrary to what some would have us believe, increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will benefit the increasing population on the planet by increasing agricultural productivity.

The cessation of observed global warming for the past decade or so has shown how exaggerated NASA's and most other computer predictions of human-caused warming have been—and how little correlation warming has with concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide. As many scientists have pointed out, variations in global temperature correlate much better with solar activity and with complicated cycles of the oceans and atmosphere. There isn't the slightest evidence that more carbon dioxide has caused more extreme weather.

The current levels of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere, approaching 400 parts per million, are low by the standards of geological and plant evolutionary history. Levels were 3,000 ppm, or more, until the Paleogene period (beginning about 65 million years ago). For most plants, and for the animals and humans that use them, more carbon dioxide, far from being a "pollutant" in need of reduction, would be a benefit. This is already widely recognized by operators of commercial greenhouses, who artificially increase the carbon dioxide levels to 1,000 ppm or more to improve the growth and quality of their plants.


Click here for the full article
Post a comment
Name/Nickname:
(required)
Email Address: (must be a valid address)
(will not be published or shared)
Comments: (plain text only)
 
Recent Articles:
2/17/12   STEWARD: Voodoo Environomics
2/15/12   Flowers Love CO2
2/6/12   The Sun: O Inconstant Star!
1/29/12   Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
1/27/12   No Need to Panic About Global Warming
1/25/12   Dr. David Evans: The Skeptic's Case
1/10/12   Will Replicated Global Warming Science Make Mann Go Ape?
1/7/12   Taking Fears of Acid Oceans With a Grain of Salt
1/3/12   Antarctic Temperature Trends
5/26/11   No Long-term Trend in Atlantic Hurricane Numbers
9/1/10   Meltdown of the climate 'consensus'
5/21/10   Prominent Princeton Scientist Dr. Happer Testifies to Congress
11/4/09   Plants need more CO2, not less
8/28/09   Utah governor says climate change debate not over
8/13/09   Earth’s Warming Rate Overestimated
8/13/09   U.N. Crying “Wolf” on Climate Change?
8/11/09   No Influence of ‘Global Warming’ on Atlantic Hurricane Numbers
8/6/09   2009 Atlantic Hurricane Season Forecast Lowered
8/6/09   Cosmic Rays Have Significant Climate Effect
8/6/09   Nobel Halo Fades Fast for Climate Change Panel
8/6/09   Pine trees grow better under elevated CO2 conditions
8/6/09   Scores of German Scientists Dissent Over Global Warming Claims
8/3/09   Save the Planet: Have Fewer Kids
7/29/09   Major Science Group 'Startled' By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears!
7/26/09   Resisting climate hysteria
Search Archives:
Print  Print    Email  Email    RSS Feed  RSS Feed
  Facebook   Share link on Twitter Tweet   Shared 3 times

** For additional peer-reviewed scientific references and an in-depth discussion of the science supporting our position, please visit Climate Change Reconsidered: The Report of the Nongovernmental Planel on Climate Change (www.climatechangereconsidered.org), or CO2 Science (www.co2science.org).
 
 
 
RELATED CONTENT




More Videos & Media ...


More CO2 Facts

Read a series of facts to dispell the myths that address the hysteria of too much carbon dioxide in our atmosphere

Read more >>

Myths

Plants need CO2 addresses the myth that purveyed the public dialog around CO2

Read more >>