One of the more convincing evidence is a report by Happer and Lindzen to a US Senate committee that defined the "Net Zero Con."
Happer and Lindzen present the best case so far.
An itemised series of evidence that demonstrates the folly and conflict of interest where United nations funded “science” uses conjecture, assumption, and in many cases misleading disinformation using exaggerated computer modelling instead of empirical actual evidence.
Much like the “Fergonesque” Covid predictions of 2020 that made analogy with the 1918 Spanish flu and scaled up to a possible 200milion would die of Covid.
Not that there was any evidence to confirm Spanish flu was a flu, or that Covid as Sars-Cov2 is a virus.
Again as pseudo-science nonsense using assumption, and conjecture where science is never settled anyway; Pasteur v Béchamp.
As with Anthropological Climate change, more a fearmongering by expert hysteria than actual science.
As with Covid, a Net Zero debate suppressed, and corrupted by those with financial gain, and/or globalist motives.
Happer and Lindzen; “As career physicists, science demonstrates there is no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2, thus no scientific basis for the proposed rule, and, if adopted, disastrous consequences for people worldwide and the U.S. because it would reduce CO2 and the use of fossil”
These are emeritus Professors with successful careers in related research in Climatology, the Atmosphere, the Planet, and Energy.
Comment and Declaration on the SEC’s Proposed Rule “The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors,”
Thus, in our opinion, science demonstrates that there is no climate emergency and no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2. Therefore, there is no reliable scientific evidence that supports the SEC proposed rule.
Further, contrary to what is commonly reported, CO2 is essential to life on earth.
Without CO2, there would be no photosynthesis, and thus no plant food and not enough oxygen to breathe.
Moreover, without fossil fuels there will be no reliable, low-cost energy worldwide and less CO2 for photosynthesis making food. Eliminating fossil fuels and reducing CO2 emissions will be disastrous for the United States and the rest of the word, especially for lower-income
Details in my Substack
https://open.substack.com/pub/johnblundell/p/the-flawed-policies-of-net-zero?r=3fft71&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
One of the more convincing evidence is a report by Happer and Lindzen to a US Senate committee that defined the "Net Zero Con."
Happer and Lindzen present the best case so far.
An itemised series of evidence that demonstrates the folly and conflict of interest where United nations funded “science” uses conjecture, assumption, and in many cases misleading disinformation using exaggerated computer modelling instead of empirical actual evidence.
Much like the “Fergonesque” Covid predictions of 2020 that made analogy with the 1918 Spanish flu and scaled up to a possible 200milion would die of Covid.
Not that there was any evidence to confirm Spanish flu was a flu, or that Covid as Sars-Cov2 is a virus.
Again as pseudo-science nonsense using assumption, and conjecture where science is never settled anyway; Pasteur v Béchamp.
As with Anthropological Climate change, more a fearmongering by expert hysteria than actual science.
As with Covid, a Net Zero debate suppressed, and corrupted by those with financial gain, and/or globalist motives.
Happer and Lindzen; “As career physicists, science demonstrates there is no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2, thus no scientific basis for the proposed rule, and, if adopted, disastrous consequences for people worldwide and the U.S. because it would reduce CO2 and the use of fossil”
These are emeritus Professors with successful careers in related research in Climatology, the Atmosphere, the Planet, and Energy.
Comment and Declaration on the SEC’s Proposed Rule “The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors,”
File No. S7-10-22, 87 Fed. Reg. 21334 (April 11,2022)
Their conclusion
IV. CONCLUSION
Thus, in our opinion, science demonstrates that there is no climate emergency and no climate related risk caused by fossil fuels and CO2. Therefore, there is no reliable scientific evidence that supports the SEC proposed rule.
Further, contrary to what is commonly reported, CO2 is essential to life on earth.
Without CO2, there would be no photosynthesis, and thus no plant food and not enough oxygen to breathe.
Moreover, without fossil fuels there will be no reliable, low-cost energy worldwide and less CO2 for photosynthesis making food. Eliminating fossil fuels and reducing CO2 emissions will be disastrous for the United States and the rest of the word, especially for lower-income
people.
https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Happer-Lindzen-SEC-6-17-22.pdf
How to Check Disclosure of Vote Rigging on an Industrial Scale https://sleazeexpo.wordpress.com/crux-votegateuk-legal-proof-of-5-voting-categories/