The Register reports:
“You can hold back knowledge, but you cannot prevent it from spreading,” Schmidt told his audience at his company’s “How Green Is the Internet? Summit” in Mountain View on Thursday. “You can lie about the effects of climate change, but eventually you’ll be seen as a liar.”
[h/t Climate Depot]
FACT atmosphere contains 0.04% CO2
FACT the increase in CO2 in the last 50 years has been from 0.038 to 0.04
FACT: Increase is .002%
FACT: 98 % of this increase has been from natural sources say the IPCC
FACT 98% of .002 is 0.00196%
FACT: Humans have added .00004%
FACT UK produces 2% of this.
FACT 2% of .00004% is .0000008%
FACT: atmosphere contains approx 1% of water
FACT: water is between 15 to 35 % more effective as a greenhouse gas than C02
FACT: Plants need CO2, O2, water and light to grow.
FACT: Adding CO2 to plants makes them grow faster and lose less water through their leaves.
FACT: Sub saharan Africa is suffering from explosion of plant growth and the planet is greener
FACT to believe you can ‘save the planet’ by reducing CO2 production is an act of faith.
Schmidt should be able to identify specifically those who are liars since his Google company is providing the government with data from emails. Not a good time for companies like Google to be calling people names.
I’d be willing to consider that the alarmists were mistaken but sincere, except we keep finding them with their hands in the cookie jars to their shoulders. I’m sure some alarmists believe what they read and say but the leading figures are either wilfully blind or lying.
To be fair, we’ve got a loon or two and probably a liar or two in the realist ranks but I don’t know who the liars are. They have no leadership in our community.
I wonder how deeply Mr. Schmidt got into the subject. If he thinks the hockey stick is science, then shame on him. The hockey stick fails by missing the medieval warm period and the little ice age. Then its own goodness of fit measures are near zero.
Can he explain how the CO2 forcing gets tripled? positive feed backs would apply to random variation as well as CO2 forcing.
Can he explain the studies that show CO2 results from warming. It lags warming and can not be the cause thereof.
Enough already with the apostle creed of warming. That’s religion and not science.
Better still why dont you look at the reality of global temps vs co2
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/1-s2-0-s0921818112001658-gr11.jpg
Global temps vs models
http://www.thegwpf.org/epic-fail-73-climate-models-vs-observations/
global temps since pdo flip, and since he obviously knows nothing about the weather, that is the cooling cycle of the Pacific, which took over in the late 40s and 50s and led to the 60s/70s weather. where people were screaming ice age
http://models.weatherbell.com/climate/cfsr_t2m_recent.png
I, and many of us that actually work and know the weather, know weather history, would love to get a guy like this in front of his audience and take him apart fact by fact. Ignorance or lying, cant decide which is worse, but calling us liars is reprehensible given the stunning display of knowledge he shows on this matter.
one more thing, there is no link to co2 and temps in history. I am sure as ceo of google you can read a chart, so read this:
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/co2_temperature_historical.png
its one thing to take a stand, Its another to call us liars, when we have the facts that you cant stand up too
Anytime this guy would like to debate any of us, lets go. We will see who is lying and who is in denial.
These guys spout their nonsense and run. Cowards to the nth degree Lets go Mr Schmidt. I’m your huckleberry