For thirty or forty years they have been purposefully scaring us. They say that mankind is so actively burning coal, oil and gas that soon the Earth's atmosphere will be oversaturated with carbon dioxide CO2 so much that a general catastrophe will come. In the form of global warming, massive melting of ice, rise in the level of the World Ocean, etc., etc. However, the years go by, and the catastrophe does not come. So maybe it's not as bad as we are told?
KYOTO PROTOCOL
In December 1992, in the Japanese city of Kyoto, the famous Kyoto Protocol was signed - an international agreement on climate change, which obliges the countries that have signed it to significantly reduce or normalize their greenhouse gas emissions. The idea of such an agreement has long been in the air. Since then, when the impact of human activity on the environment has become difficult to ignore. Reduction of forest area and, conversely, an increase in the area of deserts. Pumping oil and gas from the bowels and mining. The disappearance of species of animals and plants. The emergence of the science of ecology and the increase in the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere. Global warming. Scientists and journalists vied with each other about this and many other things throughout the second half of the 20th century. Often in a panicky tone. And we agreed. The Kyoto Protocol is essentiallythe first global environmental agreement in human history. At the same time, based on market mechanisms, since under the protocol, countries have the right to trade quotas for greenhouse gas emissions. The protocol was signed by the absolute majority of countries (not signed by Afghanistan, Andorra, Vatican, Western Sahara). However, as is typical, the USA, which is hugely responsible for industrial damage to the environment, did not ratify the treaty, and Canada, where everything is in order with nature protection, withdrew from the agreement.those who are hugely responsible for industrial damage to the environment did not ratify the treaty, and Canada, where everything is in order with nature protection, withdrew from the agreement.those who are hugely responsible for industrial damage to the environment did not ratify the treaty, and Canada, where everything is in order with nature protection, withdrew from the agreement.
INITIATORS
In recent years, it has come to the point that the Western media simply will not publish an article, even if written by a serious scientist, if the fact of global warming is questioned in it. Absurd? Yes. And yet it is so. Oddly enough, until now very few people know who exactly initiated all this incredible in terms of duration and breadth of coverage of noise associated with global warming. And yet this man is not hiding, and we all know him. This is Al Gore, a former US vice president. In 2007, he published a book called An Inconvenient Truth, followed by a documentary of the same name. Both in the book and in the film, everything that we have already talked about is persistently promoted: global warming, due to an increase in industrial gas emissions into the atmosphere, is inevitable and, if urgent measures are not taken,Disaster awaits the earth. For his "environmental" activities, Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize, and in American schools they introduced a compulsory subject called "Global Warming". And this is despite the fact that serious scientists-climatologists and meteorologists smashed the climate "theory" of politics to smithereens, and the famous American meteorologist William Gray, who created a unique method for predicting tropical hurricanes, called it "ridiculous". You ask why the "scientific" theory of politics is put above the opinions of real scientists? This is the topic for a separate article. We will only recall what has already been said: the United States has so far signed the Kyoto Protocol.which is called "Global Warming". And this is despite the fact that serious scientists-climatologists and meteorologists smashed the climate "theory" of politics to smithereens, and the famous American meteorologist William Gray, who created a unique method for predicting tropical hurricanes, called it "ridiculous". You ask why the "scientific" theory of politics is put above the opinions of real scientists? This is the topic for a separate article. We will only recall what has already been said: the United States has so far signed the Kyoto Protocol.which is called "Global Warming". And this is despite the fact that serious scientists-climatologists and meteorologists smashed the climate "theory" of politics to smithereens, and the famous American meteorologist William Gray, who created a unique method for predicting tropical hurricanes, called it "ridiculous". You ask why the "scientific" theory of politics is put above the opinions of real scientists? This is the topic for a separate article. We will only recall what has already been said: the United States has so far signed the Kyoto Protocol.why is the "scientific" theory of politics placed above the opinions of real scientists? This is the topic for a separate article. We will only recall what has already been said: the United States has so far signed the Kyoto Protocol.why is the "scientific" theory of politics placed above the opinions of real scientists? This is the topic for a separate article. We will only recall what has already been said: the United States has so far signed the Kyoto Protocol.
Promotional video:
THIS EARTH'S CHANGING CLIMATE
Over the past 100 thousand years (the approximate time of human existence on the planet), the climate on our planet has changed repeatedly and quite dramatically. We will not talk about the last great ice age, with the end of which 12 thousand years ago, in fact, the development of civilization began. It is better to recall the Little Ice Age, about which a lot of reliable information has been preserved, since it lasted 500 years - from the beginning of the 14th century to the beginning of the 19th century. Prior to this, the so-called small climatic optimum reigned on Earth with its mild and warm winters and the absence of droughts in the northern hemisphere. This, almost ideal climate, mankind enjoyed for 300 years - from the beginning of the X to the beginning of the XIV century, and he benefited. Judge for yourself. According to some data, the population of Eastern Europe has tripled over these three centuries - from 10 to 31 million people.and in Russia from 6 to 14 million. It was at this time that Iceland and Greenland were settled, grapes were cultivated in the south of Scotland, and rye and wheat were sown in Norway near the Arctic Circle. Prosperity and more! But in 1312, the cold broke out, and everything changed dramatically. Four cold and rainy summers in a row, as well as super-frosty winters, have led to the destruction of vineyards and orchards in England, Scotland, northern France and Germany. The yield of grain and other crops fell sharply. A famine began in Europe, which was later dubbed the "Great", and after which came the plague and peasant uprisings … And this whole trouble lasted about 60 years! Until the 1370s, when temperatures began to rise slowly and crop failures receded. And then, until the beginning of the 19th century, long cold weather hit Europe twice more:from the beginning of the 17th century to the coldest winter of 1664-1665, when birds froze in the air in France and Germany and even the Adriatic Sea was covered with ice, and then from 1740 to the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th century, when the Little Ice Age came to an end …
NOT THE KING OF NATURE
So what does the Earth's climate really depend on? First and foremost, and this has long been proven, from the activity of the Sun. It's no secret that this activity is different in different years and is cyclical. All this has been written about so often that we will not repeat it. We only recall that no one canceled elementary physics, and the more thermal energy a body receives, the more it heats up. In this case, the body is our planet, which receives thermal energy from the Sun. How much is this energy? Imagine that every person on Earth, including babies, has 80 steam engines, each with 400 hp. And they all continuously generate energy. So the total energy generated by these hundreds of billions of machines will be comparable to that that the planet receives from the Sun. Scientists estimate that the amount of energyproduced by man, doubles in 25 years and only after 125 years will it reach 1% of what falls on the Earth from the Sun. These figures alone are enough to understand that the time when the energy activity of our civilization (let's not forget that any energy ultimately becomes thermal) will raise the average temperature on the planet by at least one degree, will come very, very soon. As for the accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere and ocean, modern scientific research, including those carried out by Russian scientists, unequivocally proves that everything is exactly the opposite. Namely: not an increase in the share of CO2 in the atmosphere and ocean (in the latter it is more than 90 times) leads to a warming of the climate, but a warming of the climate,due to changes in solar activity (and some other natural factors) - to an increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases. Moreover, this happens with a "delay" of 500-600 years. Furthermore. Calculations show that even if people, burning fossil fuel, manage to double the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere after 80 years, this will also not lead to an increase in the average temperature on the planet. But on the productivity of agriculture and the effectiveness of restoration of deforested forests will have a very positive impact. Because, as we remember from school, plants "love" carbon dioxide and absorb it with pleasure, releasing pure oxygen in return. What we need.after 80 to double the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, this also will not lead to an increase in the average temperature on the planet. But on the productivity of agriculture and the effectiveness of restoration of deforested forests will have a very positive impact. Because, as we remember from school, plants "love" carbon dioxide and absorb it with pleasure, releasing pure oxygen in return. What we need.after 80 to double the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, this also will not lead to an increase in the average temperature on the planet. But on the productivity of agriculture and the effectiveness of restoration of deforested forests will have a very positive impact. Because, as we remember from school, plants "love" carbon dioxide and absorb it with pleasure, releasing pure oxygen in return. What we need.
Akim Bukhtatov
