CST: A Lack Of Air Pollution Is Bad For Global Warming?

Collapsing Science Today; Oh, Dear Lord, these climate alarmists are nuts. You can’t really say they have jumped the shark, because that happened a long, long time ago. Yet, you can see where their priorities lie, namely, support for a fake science over real environmental issues, much like how Al Gore takes money from big polluters: Why cleaner air could speed global warming

You’re likely to hear a chorus of dire warnings as we approach Earth Day, but there’s a serious shortage few pundits are talking about: air pollution. That’s right, the world is running short on air pollution, and if we continue to cut back on smoke pouring forth from industrial smokestacks, the increase in global warming could be profound.

Cleaner air, one of the signature achievements of the U.S. environmental movement, is certainly worth celebrating. Scientists estimate that the U.S. Clean Air Act has cut a major air pollutant called sulfate aerosols, for example, by 30% to 50% since the 1980s, helping greatly reduce cases of asthma and other respiratory problems.

But even as industrialized and developing nations alike steadily reduce aerosol pollution — caused primarily by burning coal — climate scientists are beginning to understand just how much these tiny particles have helped keep the planet cool. A silent benefit of sulfates, in fact, is that they’ve been helpfully blocking sunlight from striking the Earth for many decades, by brightening clouds and expanding their coverage. Emerging science suggests that their underappreciated impact has been incredible.

Unfortunately, the writer is serious. We need more air pollution to offset anthropogenic global warming.

Researchers believe greenhouse gases such as CO2 have committed the Earth to an eventual warming of roughly 4 degrees Fahrenheit, a quarter of which the planet has already experienced. Thanks to cooling by aerosols starting in the 1940s, however, the planet has only felt a portion of that greenhouse warming. In the 1980s, sulfate pollution dropped as Western nations enhanced pollution controls, and as a result, global warming accelerated.

I wonder if this will be their new meme, that pollution caused temps to drop down from the 40’s through 70’s? Even so, the temps were still much higher during the Medieval Warm Period and other earlier warm periods.

Seriously, alarmists, you need to come back to reality, and work with us to reduce actual environmental issues.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

2 Responses to “CST: A Lack Of Air Pollution Is Bad For Global Warming?”

  1. […] points out:  If pollution causes global warming, what else can cause it?  Lack of pollution.  Yea, that causes global warming, too. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Dems: Imminent, Inevitable ChangeGlobal Warming […]

  2. Opinionated Vogon says:

    Years ago Dr Jack Wheeler posted an article about a simple solution to global warming which uses our existing airliners to seed the troposphere with sulfates. The planes would need a dual tank/fuel modification so they could carry both low and high sulfur fuels. The jets would use the low sulfur fuels at for take off and landing and climbs and descents, but once at altitude would switch to the high sulfur fuel. They would also need to adjust their altitude so they fly a little higher than they do today.

    The article discussed changing solar radiation and how it effected cloud formation at higher altitudes in the atmosphere.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8190 access attempts in the last 7 days.