Jim Steele
Earth benefits from increasing greening that reverberates through entire ecosystems! Rising CO2 and its fertilization effects makes ecosystems more robust and more resilient. Greening debunks claims by enemies of climate truth that rising Co2 is causing ecosystem collapse!
Transcript
There’s been great news that Earth has been greening, and more greening means more photosynthesis, which is the foundation of all food webs. This means more resilient ecosystems. But, the enemies of climate truth want you to believe rising CO2 is killing plants and creating deadly tipping points. NASA posted this illustration showing from 1982 to 2009, using a leaf area index, that the planet was benefiting from a persistent and widespread increase in the growing season. Up to 50% of the global vegetated area had increased its leaf area, and scientists determined 70% of that greening was due to CO2’s fertilization effects, which benefits are reverberating throughout entire ecosystems. In contrast, just 4% of the globe showed decreasing vegetation, or browning.
Now, justifiably, Jordan Peterson told his 5 million followers that rising CO2 has been a great benefit to our world’s ecosystems. CO2 is essential for plants, but as a result of his political heresy, Peterson became a target of the climate crisis thought police and the bogus fact-checking by Rosh, who is intent on convincing you the greening trend was stopped and the climate crisis remains. But greening benefits have not been restricted to land plants. Between 1998 and 2018, scientists determined the Arctic Ocean’s plankton had also increased the ocean’s primary production by 57%. More food for fish and seals means more food for polar bears, contributing to the observed increasing bear populations. Such thriving ecosystems make ordinary thinking people mistrust doomsday narratives like Greta Thunberg’s rant that ecosystems are collapsing and people and animals are dying.
So, to support Greta’s fears and counteract any wrong thinking from greening’s good news, publicity stunts around the world organized people dressed in white lab coats proclaiming “the science is clear, there is a climate crisis.” Such contradictory evidence and narratives gravely affect people vulnerable to delusional disorders, making them unable to know what’s real and what is imagined. Before, only lone wackos told us the planet’s end is near, and now, thanks to organized media campaigns, elementary school children are taught our world is dying. Hordes of older people cry we have only 12 years to save the planet. They convince our children with delusions that the Earth is on fire, oceans are boiling, and that they will die from climate change.
So, how can so many people believe doomsday politics in a greening world? This is where the climate crisis thought police intervene to ensure you embrace their catastrophic version of reality, so that you will act the way they want us to, supposedly to save the planet. Rosh Salgado D’Arcy is getting his PhD in climate communications. His tweets, Tik Toks, and videos denigrate critical thinking skeptics as deniers. He reveals that a university degree in climate communications is really a euphemism for the biased training of climate crisis thought police, mastering PhD levels of Orwellian doublespeak. Rosh wants you to believe CO2’s observed benefits were fleeting and can’t be trusted, that rising CO2 only has a net negative effect on the future. But fact-checking Rosh reveals his deception; in Orwellian pig logic, all science is equal, but some science is more equal than others.
Climate communicators don’t promote research which, when its facts debunk a good climate crisis narrative. So, a 2019 study by Winkler that determined 40% of the Earth’s natural vegetation still shows significant increasing trends in leaf area. Rosh doesn’t communicate those results. However, Rosh eagerly communicates shaky conclusions by Chen 2022 that support his doomsday forecast, as if that is the only imagined reality people should ever believe. W. Rosh highlights Chen’s claim that greening has reversed across 90% of the global vegetated areas since the year 2000. In contrast to Winkler’s 40%, Chen claims greening only continues in just 10% of the global vegetated areas due to a warming tipping point. Rosh backs that imagined reality up with a Scientific American article by The Washington Post, well-known alarmist journalist Chelsea Harvey, that also promotes Chen’s meme that the greening stopped 20 years ago.
Rosh dishonestly ignores that Chen’s 2022 study presents very contradictory results, so your view of reality solely depends on which graph you want to embrace to determine trends in leaf area. Results from three different satellite databases and models were used. Using the AVHRR database and linear regression statistic, Chen’s results contradicted Chen’s conclusions, showing increased greening has not stopped but has continued since the year 2000, with peak greening at the study’s conclusion in 2018. I highlighted their gray trend line with red. Their second database, designated GLASS, also showed peak greening in 2018. Likewise, a linear regression determined the greening trend has continued since the year 2000. However, by using different statistical models that look for assumed turning points, Chen argued that since the late 1990s, the Earth was browning, despite the most recent increase in greening. Chen’s browning trend is highlighted by my blue line. The third database used by Chen 2022, labeled LAI3g, diverges from the other two databases, with its outlier data for leaf area dramatically dropping off in the last few years. Still, linear regressions show a slight overall rising trend in the Earth’s greening. But Chen’s use of LAI3g data presents other serious problems. The original 2016 study promoting the Earth’s greening trend and CO2’s fertilization effect, they also use the same LAI3g database. However, while the 2016 showed peak greening around 2010 and 2011, Chen’s version suspiciously moves the greening peak back to the 1990s. Here’s the green arrows for comparison. By that sleight of hand, Chen’s 20-year browning trend was created, yet Rosh never communicates these scientific problems to the public.
So why would Rosh and Chelsea Harvey emphasize the dubious science of Chen 2022? Apparently, it was the best support for their climate crisis narratives. Chen justified his exaggerated browning and, I quote, “on the inhibitive effects of excessive optimal temperatures,” which sounds like too much of a good thing. They also emphasized increased drying out of the land. So Rosh finishes his so-called fact check of greening and Jordan Peterson by proclaiming his climate belief that the net effect of rising CO2 is bad for plants. To that end, he regurgitates the fabricated meme that CO2 has increased the intensity of heat waves, even though that requires Rosh to ignore EPA data showing, in truth, observed heat waves were worse in the 1930s, with no increasing trend. Rosh’s false narrative also suggested rising CO2 is causing greater intensity of rainfall and droughts, but scientists have found only 6% of the world has experienced any significant decrease in rainfall (the orange areas), and most of that decrease happens over the oceans. The remaining reduced areas of rainfall partially explain the local areas of browning. So, for pushing false realities, increasing people’s delusional disorders, and for uncritically pushing the party line that demonizes CO2, despite the Earth’s greening and greater resilience, Rosh wins our Enemy of Truth award. So, when you see his climate tweets or TikTok, realize it’s just Rosh’s hogwash. Thank you.
Related
