A great article is at the American Thinker.com, by US climate change critic Guy Mitchell, author of Global Warming: The Great Deception, detailing the main holes in the global warming sham, and how the ideologues are set to wreck Western economies. The very basic idea of a rise in the average temperature of the Earth is an absurdity, supposing some sort of thermal equilibrium which does not exist, since the climate system is dynamic, and undergoing constant change. It is little more than a statistical abstraction, and hardly sufficient to dismantle economies.
“In his book Unsettled, Dr. Steve Koonin uses publicly available data to refute all of the claims of the proponents of the global warming hypothesis as relates to increasing extreme weather events and rising sea levels. In my book Global Warming: The Great Deception, I refute all of the pseudoscience employed by the proponents of the fraudulent global warming hypothesis, using proven first principles of science in the disciplines of thermodynamics, spectroscopy, atmospheric physics, and quantum mechanics.
Peer-reviewed, published scientific research demonstrates that the world's temperature databases for the lower atmosphere, land mass, and oceans depict virtually no increase in the average temperature of the Earth over the period that satellites and submersible floats have measured temperature. Since 1979, NOAA satellites using microwave sounding technology have measured an increase in the average temperature anomaly of the lower troposphere (first 8 km of the Earth's atmosphere) of only 0.13° C/decade, or 0.013° C /yr. Since 2000, when NOAA inaugurated the Argo Float Program, the temperature of the world's oceans has reportedly increased by 0.02° C/decade, or 0.002° C/yr. NOAA reports that the temperature of the Earth's land mass has increased by 2° F during the period 1880–2020, an increase of 0.014 F°/yr., during a time when thermometers were graduated in 1, 3, and 5° F. Arguably, all of these measurements are within the measurement margin of error. Unbiased scientific analysis demonstrates that CO2 has virtually no effect on the Earth's climate; it is all about water vapor.
The concept of an average temperature of the Earth is an abstraction — a figment of the climate scientist's imagination, conjured up in an effort to prove a fraudulent hypothesis. The Earth is never in thermal equilibrium; the temperature of the Earth is different at every point in time and space. The average temperature of the Earth has no meaning in scientific analysis; it cannot be measured, and an effort to calculate it is nonsensical. To set a goal for man to limit the increase in the "average temperature" of the Earth to 1.5° C over any period of time is folly. Temperature is a proxy for the average kinetic energy of the molecules in a system. Man has no more control over the climate of the Earth than the forces of gravity.
If all of this is true (and it is), then why are the U.S. and Western Europe permitting the pseudoscience of global warming to threaten to wreck the world's economies?
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) fired the first salvo in the war on the carbon atom in its seminal report in 1990. It declared that if the world continued to emit CO2 at the then current rate, "this will result in a likely increase in global mean temperature of about 1° C (3.8° F) by 2025." The publicly available temperature data above prove that prediction to be false.
After taking office, President Biden joined the war on the carbon atom by opening a front against the U.S. energy sector. He canceled the Keystone XL pipeline project permit and froze the leasing of prospective oil-producing properties in ANWR. Then, in a further nod to the left wing of the Democrat party, on December 8, 2021, he signed an executive order that set a goal of "100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity (CFE) by 2030, at least half of which will be locally supplied clean energy to meet 24/7 demand."
In 2021, 60% of the electricity produced in the U.S. came from fossil fuel–powered plants, 20% from nuclear plants, and 20% from renewable energy sources. Wind and solar energy production in 2021 accounted for 13% of the total electrical energy output. While it may be possible to increase the capacity of wind and solar electrical production in the next 5–10 years, the big problem remains the unreliability of wind and solar energy sources. They are vulnerable to changes in weather (clouds obstruct sunshine, and the wind does not blow) as well as extreme weather events, as the recent experience in Texas demonstrates. Permitting nuclear power plants remains a challenge. On Feb. 9, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission voted to permit the first nuclear power plant to be built in the U.S. in over 30 years, over the objections of its chairman, who voiced safety concerns.
It is not possible to replace the 60% of electric power production in the U.S. by 2030 with alternative energy sources. Such a mandate would require a rapid increase in wind and solar plant construction and operation, and fossil fuel generation would still be required to serve as a back-up when renewable energy sources fail. Those fossil fuel plants that remained in operation would be required to purchase carbon credits to offset emissions to achieve 100% carbon-free operations. But CO2 emissions will not be reduced by buying carbon credits. The only benefactor of such a policy is those firms that trade carbon credits. The consumer will pay the price for higher, more unreliable energy costs.
It is the height of naïveté to think our economic competitors in the world like China and India will wreck their economies based on a fraudulent global warming hypothesis.”