CEOCFO Magazine, PO Box 340
Palm Harbor, FL 34682-0340
Phone: 727-480-7070

Email: info@ceocfocontact.com

Weekly Digital Publication IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS WITH Top   CORPORATE EXECUTIVES (727) 480-7070 info@ceocfocontact.com FIND INTERVIEWS AND ARTICLES

Business Services | Solutions
Medical | Biotech
Cannabis  | Hemp
Banking | FinTech | Capital
Government Services
Public Companies
 Industrial | Resources

Clean Tech  
Global | Canadian



Lynn Fosse, Senior Editor

Steve Alexander, Associate Editor

Bud Wayne, Marketing
& Production Manager

Christy Rivers - Editorial Associate


Print - PDF







I am NOT a scientist or an economist, but I do conduct a lot of research. I speak with many experts in various fields, and I love acquiring knowledge. The opinions expressed in this article are my own. They are straight to the point, hard hitting and presented in a take no prisoners' manner. I am NOT an anti-vaxxer, nor do I subscribe to any crazy conspiracy theories. On the contrary, I am a proponent of vaccines so long as they are safe. Vaccines have played an important part in the safety of the public and have eradicated the threat of diseases like polio and the measles, and we need to continue research to develop new vaccines in the future.


For other writings and literary works by Emil Malak please visit:
 https://emil-malak.com/

Its climate “derange” not climate change

It is the planet’s natural evolution, not greenhouse gases

 

This is a money grab and a control mechanism

 

Our survival depends on our ability to understand and adapt to the planet’s ongoing evolution. Such evolution has nothing to do with the less than 1% contribution of human emission of greenhouse gases. The latest incidents of supposed “climate change” disasters such as hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, forest fires, and rising sea levels are constantly being falsely attributed to global warming. These are natural occurrences that have been around if the Earth itself. Any increase in these occurrences needs to be properly attributed to our resilient earth’s natural evolution. They conveniently blame mythical “manmade climate change” for any natural occurrence that is going to happen anyway.

 

Pseudoscientists base their phony theories on factual misconceptions. Their claims cannot be reconciled scientifically or mathematically. How can man’s miniscule emissions totaling less than 1% of all greenhouse gas emissions possibly be responsible for any changes that may or may not be taking place? We must be able to adapt to Earth’s natural cyclical changes. A deep and detailed historic analysis is needed before jumping to premature conclusions. I have always been a big proponent of keeping our oceans and environment clean and free of pollution. We need to come down on those countries that use the ocean as a garbage bin and make every effort to curb overfishing. I am a fan of electric cars, and in favor of expanding alternative forms of energy like hydrogen, wind and solar. But only if they can be more economical. Currently, the manufacturing process for alternative energy equipment creates as large or more of a carbon footprint than using traditional fossil fuels. 

 

Associating natural disasters with climate change is comparing apples and oranges

 

To be clear, the present push for reformations in the name of climate change will make no difference to the climate or to rising seas. We will still have to face all the same major weather changes, natural disasters, and the disappearance of small islands, even if we were to achieve zero emissions. I fully support making every effort to lessen the impact of toxic air pollution and to reduce all forms of manmade pollution. We all want to breathe clean air and swim in plastic free oceans. We need to stop overfishing, increase plankton and algae in our oceans through advanced technological farming.

 

The next industrial revolution will be based on the improvement of nanotechnology that could make high precision machinery much more productive and attainable. Even smaller than nano is the future for more advanced technology supported by artificial intelligence.

Even if we were to somehow rid the planet of all man produced carbon dioxide, methane gas, oil, coal, and greenhouse gases and achieve zero net emissions, it would not make the slightest bit of difference to the climate. Warming temperatures, floods, fires, and rising sea levels would still be here and maybe even stronger because this is all part of the Earth’s natural evolution.

 

The numbers they put forth simply do not make sense. The totality of the pollutants they are trying to eliminate accounts for less than 1% of all the gases in the atmosphere. Around half or less of these gases of the one percent is the result of natural emissions escaping from volcanoes, forest fires and animal and human rear ends. More than 99% of the atmosphere is made up of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). We do need to adjust through innovative engineering, but not because those adjustments will make one iota of difference to the climate and the phony climate warriors know that is true.

 

If these self-proclaimed climate change heroes really believed in their hearts the garbage, they are telling us, their beliefs would reflect in their behavior. They want us to take public transportation or drive around in Priuses while they take limousine motorcades to get to their private jets so they can fly around the world telling us what awful people we are. Someone that truly believes the world is dying and will be unrecognizable ten years from now as they so often say, would conduct themselves very differently than what we are seeing from these power-hungry hypocrites.

Man caused CO2 and methane emissions are not affecting the global climate


We are being scammed by pseudoscience

 

Climate change pushing politicians are either naïve or power hungry

 

I am challenging the flawed, socialist driven, fear based pseudoscientific theories that have been manufactured by conflicted scientists to mislead the world about the cause

of climate change. They falsely attribute global warming to human consumption and behavior. Greenhouse gases and CO2 emissions that are the result of human behavior do NOT cause the climate to change.

 

It is not possible that the miniscule amount of human caused emissions relative to the atmosphere could affect the planet so adversely. Activists want us to believe the planet is a delicate and frail flower barely clinging to life and will cease to exist unless we change our behaviors. Nothing can be further from the truth. The planet is robust and strong. It has been around for billions of years and will continue to be here for billions more after we are all gone. How dare we be so arrogant as to think that we can destroy the Earth in all its majesty. We live on a durable planet that was made to change and adapt. It is simply not possible that human caused emissions can change the climate of the planet. Let’s not be so full of ourselves. We are less than a spec in an immeasurably vast universe.

 

Climate change activists have successfully branded carbon dioxide as a pollutant in the eyes of most people. They have turned this gas that is necessary to sustain life on the earth into a villain. It’s not enough that they have mischaracterized CO2, but they have also taken aim at methane. Without methane, the earth would not be livable. Most of the methane in the atmosphere does not even come from people, but from natural sources such as livestock, wetlands, and the ocean. What’s next? Will activists propose inserting plugs into the rectums of cows and bulls to reduce methane emissions? If some had their way, they would let all the livestock die off and force everyone to be vegans. Methane is short lived, staying in the atmosphere far less than CO2. Furthermore, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are only minor trace gases and cannot possibly influence earth’s climate. They are proven to have no measurable effect on climate change.

 

World leaders are the true polluters

What happened to Zoom?

 

I am trying hard to get my head around something. This week world leaders from 120 countries were in Glasgow for the COP26 global climate summit. They flew in on their oversized, jet fuel burning, atmosphere polluting private jets. Then they hit the town in their large motorcades comprised of many, many gas guzzling limousines, escorted by hundreds of motorcycle riding police officers. One can only imagine the incredible breadth and depth of the carbon footprint and pollution those world leaders inflicted on the planet so they can gather to discuss how to save the planet from large carbon footprint polluters. Does that make any sense at all? In one week, the wannabe saviors of the planet probably polluted the atmosphere more than a small country can do in one year, for the sole purpose of coming together to tell us how horrible we are and that we need to pollute less. Here’s an idea, how about next time they do not gather in person. Haven’t they heard of Zoom? We live in an age of great communication technology. They could have more easily met through video conference and would have avoided all that unnecessary pollution and expense. This clearly exposes their hypocrisy and shows they don’t really believe the horse manure they are shoving down our throats every day. It’s all about power. Always has been and always will be.

 

As I have often said, all of this is nothing more than window dressing. It will not have the least bit of effect on the climate, because the things they are going after do not affect the climate. Rather than waste time and resources in these exercises in futility, we should be focusing on advancements in engineering and artificial intelligence to develop methods to measure, absorb and convert gases. I support green technology and going after polluting nations, but let’s not lie to ourselves and to the world by fabricating a crisis and turning it into a phony apocalyptic scenario.

I fully support local efforts to reduce the 1% carbon and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but understanding the present emission rate has ZERO effect on current and future climate change

 

Even if efforts to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 are successful it will not have any impact on climate change around the world. The pseudoscience of manmade climate change which attempts to compel people into futile behavioral changes is bogus and not based on actual data. It needs to come to an end.

 

Fringe climate scientists make wild, scientifically baseless claims about climate change aimed at creating fear in order to keep the steady flow of millions of grant dollars. What the world needs is to put in place a global policing organization with authority to punish the polluter nations that dump plastics and other pollutants into our oceans. We also need to be technologically proactive and develop ocean biodegradable plastics and containers. Also a greater focus on the advancement of nanotechnology science is needed that can deal more efficiently with polluting products and improve the efficiency of solar energy absorption.

 

The idea of carbon credits is basically a big rip-off that is costing us billions of dollars unnecessarily. It is a scam created for the purposes of fear mongering which will ultimately have zero impact on future climate change.


As for the current gathering at the COP26 UN Climate Change meetings, it’s nothing more than tea sipping and gin and tonic drinking socialites that think far too much of themselves debating a worthless subject. It is nothing more than window dressing and will ultimately achieve nothing.

 

Once again, even if you spend trillions of dollars and are somehow able to reduce the current 1% atmospheric greenhouse gases down to zero, it will ultimately have no effect on current or future climate change. You might as well flush all those trillions down the toilet.

 

https://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=E211CA714G91512&p=GLASCOW+CLIMATE+CHANGE
https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/prince-charles-warns-narrow-window-face-climate-change-80743881


Three Nobel Prize winners for climate change

 

Three Nobel Prize winners for their work in climate science failed to prove greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide are to blame for climate change. We should congratulate them on their great work in the field of physics which shows human greenhouse gas emissions have no effect on today's climate disasters. Scientific predictions should be based on actual factual and historical data. The same natural forces that caused the ice age, could be causing a reversal putting the earth into a warming cycle. This may very well just be the earth’s own natural evolution.


Its climate “derange” not climate change

Do not compare apples and oranges

 

Many scientists’ predictions of global warming seem to be extremely vague at pointing out that the less than 1% combined greenhouse gases are the cause. What about the 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen in the atmosphere?

Maybe you should send your carbon credit invoices to our loving God Almighty!


Syukuro Manabe and Klaus Hasselmann were cited for their work in “the physical modeling of Earth's climate, quantifying variability and “reliably” predicting global warming. Giorgio Parisi discovered hidden patterns in disordered complex materials....

I very humbly question Hasselman and Manabe’s climate table theory that is not based on true factually based historical data to compare.

My small numbers brain questions the mathematics they used in their table that calculates the effects of human greenhouse gases on today’s climate.

 

Perhaps the calculators these notable scientists used to run those calculations ran out of juice? How is it possible that the total of the greenhouse gases representing only a minute fraction of less than1% of all the gases in the atmosphere, far less than natural emissions caused by volcanoes, forest fires and natural decomposition could be to blame for allegedly affecting the climate as adversely as many say it does?

 

On top of all that there is the sequestrations/absorption/conversion by our sea growing algae, planktons and our trees that actively reduce the effects of those emissions. I do understand however how the popular social media narratives by climate change activists and self-proclaimed “do gooder politicians" are desperate to blame greenhouse emission for their failures to advance nanoengineering to rid our planets of these minute human caused gases. I challenge these Scientists’ theories and maintain that they are mathematically flawed.

https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/science/manabe-hasselmann-parisi-win-2021-nobel-prize-physics-2021-10-05/

 

Hasselmann, the Academy said, had developed models about 10 years later that became instrumental in proving that mankind's carbon dioxide emissions cause rising temperatures in the atmosphere.

 

"Syukuro Manabe and Klaus Hasselmann laid the foundation of our knowledge of the Earth’s climate and how humanity influences it," the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said in a statement. "Giorgio Parisi is rewarded for his revolutionary contributions to the theory of disordered materials and random processes."

No political angle, only opinions based on science, facts, and historical events

 

Turning the page from the pandemic

After writing 17 op-eds over the past 18 months on the coronavirus I decided to depart from that subject and focus on another scam being propagated throughout society today, climate change.


Environmental scientists' got climate change 99% per cent wrong! 


Is a mere one percent really causing the latest climate disasters? Of course not!


All these green parties' principles are based on total lies, deceit, and fear not true science.


The only difference climate change trillions of dollars will make is bankruptcy of our western economies.

 

Even if you achieve zero emission, you will still get the same climate fluctuation. They may even increase; it is a natural phenomenon.


A mere 1% in total between all the greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide couldn't practically and scientifically make such climate fluctuation changes. There is no question that observation made on, and above earth's surface show the earth climate is changing. But there is zero scientific evidence that the greenhouse gases above earth are due to human activities and not earth warming as it gets closer to the Sun.


Total carbon dioxide/CO2 in the atmosphere is only 0.04%, the percentage of human caused CO2 is only .0016%. 95% of carbon oxide/CO2 emission is caused by natural forces of nature such as volcanos, forest fires and natural decomposition process.


Scientists are making politically incorrect statements blaming climate change on the mere one percent of greenhouse gases emission by humans Even if we agree with their flawed science that the jet streams travel so fast carrying the greenhouse gases above earth, a one percent in the atmosphere cannot be the cause of the hurricanes, forest fires, cyclones, heatwaves, it is just mathematically impossible. Even if the carbon dioxide lingers above earth, it is eventually sequestered by nature such as algae, planktons, trees. We should look after our oceans and revive our depleting Algae, planktons, and replant billions of trees.


We need to restart our nuclear power plants. I hope Germany is reading my op-ed. Nuclear is climate net zero.


All these false statements. Wind, solar and electric cars energies are doing as much harm as fossil fuel, and no one have considered how much carbon print you are using in their productions. It is all a fear farce created by all these green parties supported social media narrative that purposely failed to be independent.


As I wrote before, we need to focus on technologies that will take out the minute greenhouse gases emission instead of banning them. We have evidence that greenhouse gases do rise and accumulate above cities causing pollution, such as in India, China, and Iran’s cities causing breathing problems. For sure we need to lessen their local impact, and we need to find a solution. I fully support nuclear power stations. 


The politicians support these made-up, non-factual, not based on true data, no historical comparison, because it gives them more control over a trusting voter. Fear is now the new effective tool to gain votes, and climate change created fear, coronavirus vaccines more fear, resulting in more control, more votes for our new western world fake politicians.


While the Western politicians keep on spending trillions of dollars to get zero emission, the poor underdeveloped countries are not taking any notice, as the priority is to feed their people.


Mark my word, spending trillions of dollars for achieving a zero-carbon emission in years to come will not make slight dent in climate change, you are deliberately bankrupting your economies.

I support minimizing carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions and policing the polluting of our oceans

 

Every country needs to do their part to take care of their surroundings and manage the quality of the air they breathe. Air pollution is not only harmful to the environment, but also to our health. We must all do our part to be good stewards of the planet, and part of that means reducing greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide emissions to lessen any negative impact. The problem is politicians are using climate change disaster fear message as a control mechanism.


The conflicted environmental scientists are manipulating information's and twisting facts to con people into thinking those emissions are destroying the planet and we are on the cusp of some cataclysmic climate change disasters. Carbon dioxide emissions have absolutely nothing to do with climate change and they are not moving us towards any of the catastrophic scenarios these people are predicting. That is a baseless scam created by pseudoscientists and advanced by power hungry politicians. 

At the end, it is all about control and money, our health is irrelevant.

 

Additionally, it is sad to see how so many irresponsible countries have treated our oceans like a garbage dump. We need to punish those countries that dispose of garbage, plastics, and other pollutants into our oceans. I support the formation of a united international environmental policing agency to crack down on anyone that pollutes and harms the world’s oceans.

Its climate “derange” not climate change

Forest fires, floods, heat waves, have nothing to with our gas's emissions!


Stop telling people all these latest weather-related disasters are caused by human climate change. The scientific facts do not prove any relation between the carbon dioxide, greenhouse gas emission and the latest weather disasters fluctuations.


Green parties have been elected on a totally false narrative, using scary techniques supported by social media to indoctrinate todays pea-brain generation.


We have had five ice ages cycles, are we having the first heat wave cycle?

Blaming climate change on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases is a scam

The heat cycle age is a natural phenomenon like the ice age

 

The wave of climate change misinformation currently being pushed by many so-called environmentalists and political green party loyalists across the western world is nothing more than fear mongering tactics designed to control the gullible masses to acquire power and more money. We are constantly being told that climate change is the result of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions from human industrialization and burning fossil fuels. In this article, I present scientific data that proves that those claims have zero credibility and are not based on any scientific proof whatsoever. I will show that the recent climate swings have nothing to do with the miniscule increase in CO2 emissions caused by human activity but are simply part of the earth’s natural cycles. Like the COVID vaccine scam, this is just another way to instill fear in people and increase power and control.


Environmental fact checkers and social media companies that like to censor information that is contrary to their narratives do not need to dig very deep to find the truth. A simple internet search will show them the true facts about the makeup of the atmosphere and humankind’s very tiny and negligible contribution to the total amount of CO2. If they are looking to blame someone for the occurrence of natural disasters they should blame God, not man. They should send him a memo and direct all of their complaints regarding “natural” disasters to my loving and almighty God.


Activists have perpetuated a lie that CO2 is a scary and dangerous gas that is rapidly filling the atmosphere and slowly heating the planet on its way to ending life as we know it. There is not a single, reputable, scientific paper they can point to that proves carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases are causing the climate to change or causing the catastrophes they claim are taking place. Let me say this again, “there is not a single, reputable, scientific paper they can point to that proves carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases are triggering the climate to change or triggering the catastrophes they claim are taking place.”


The total share of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is only 0.04%; the percentage of human caused CO2 is only .0016%

 

We are constantly bombarded with claims that reckless amounts of CO2 emissions are being released into the atmosphere, but how much CO2 is really in the atmosphere? And how much of it is a result of human behavior?

 

Let’s look at the facts. Ninety-nine percent of the atmosphere is made up of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen 21%). The remaining 1% is composed of other gases, mostly argon (0.096%) and only 0.04% is carbon dioxide (CO2). Of the total CO2, 95% is caused by natural forces of nature such as volcanoes, forest fires and natural decomposition processes. The human contribution of CO2 in the air makes up only 0.0016%. That is the amount that is emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human behavior like the extraction of coal and burning fossil fuels. Those are the facts. Human industrialization is only a very tiny contributor to CO2 emissions, but you would never know it by listening to the climate change alarmists. They use every natural occurrence as an excuse to assign blame to human behavior and industry. Whether there has been a flood, an earthquake, forest fires, heat waves, blizzards, or a volcanic eruption, activists always blame climate change to scare us into making drastic changes and handing them more power.




















https://scied.ucar.edu/image/gases-earths-atmosphere

https://easierwithpractice.com/what-living-things-release-carbon-dioxide-into-the-atmosphere/

 

Greenhouse gases, and carbon dioxide have a near zero effect on the climate!

 

Before I began to personally study the matter closely and consult with my friends in science, I too believed what the alarmists were saying about excessive human CO2 emissions causing climate change and being responsible for so many natural occurrences like flooding, monsoons, and fires. But once I dug deep and thoroughly researched the subject, I saw that the facts did not support their claims.


Another false claim by environmental activists is that excess carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions created by humans is responsible for 94% of the temperature rise in the ocean. The earth is an estimated 4.5 billion years old, and we have only had the ability to accurately measure temperatures and sea and land levels for the past one hundred years at most. Breaking down the numbers, that means that we have only been able to accumulate reliable data for a period of time equal to just two ten millionths of history of the earth’s existence, or 0.00000002222222222222%. This is beyond laughable! And to make matters worse, it is desperately foolish that we are rushing to such drastic conclusions after only being able to measure these metrics for such a comparatively insignificant amount of time.


The Paris Accord is a useless and immoral agreement


The Paris Accord is a legally binding international treaty whose goal is to have the major countries of the world come together and commit to substantially reducing global greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change. These countries are not using actual data but are creating their own theories based on flawed science. If they were using true data, they would know that CO2 emissions from human industry are completely negligible as far climate change is concerned. They are using the climate change narrative to impose major limitations on the largest contributors to the global economy while giving China, the world’s biggest polluter by far, a pass. The Paris Accord seems more about global socialism than it is about climate change.


Iron ore and other nutrients mixture cultivation could reduce CO2, revive our Planktons, and bring back our disintegrating fish.  


Criticism and hindsight are easy, I always try to give a possible solution. 

Excess Carbon Dioxide in one area is dangerous, yes, I agree we need to eliminate CO2. Here is a proposal: An iron ore and nutrient mixture could become the next revolution in ocean agriculture cultivating phytoplankton to restore the dwindling fish stock back to our oceans. As well as restoring the fish, we can also drastically reduce our CO2. Fifty million tonnes of carbon dioxide are added yearly to our atmosphere.


The function of Planktons is through photosynthesis. Phytoplanktons use sunlight, nutrients, carbon dioxide and water to produce oxygen and nutrients for another organism to eat. 70% of earth is covered by oceans and phytoplankton are responsible for 50% of the oxygen we breath. Phytoplankton and Algae form the basis of Aquatic food web, they make up all the fish we as human consume.

In average joe language, phytoplankton could provide the solution in reducing carbon dioxide emission to zero by converting it to oxygen and in the meantime bring back our disappearing fish.


Let's reduce carbon dioxide by one hundred percent!


One ship can carry one hundred tonnes of iron ore mixture.


Choose the appropriate locations offshore. Apply a very specific technique in the gradual release of the iron ore mixture. It is believed that one hundred tonnes ship of iron ore could suck up between one hundred thousand to two hundred thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. If you have 50 ships, multiplied by the lowest number of one hundred thousand tonnes per ship, you get fifty thousand tonnes of carbon dioxide, now you are carbon neutral.


On top of all that, you replenish your fish stock back, and get financially rewarded, at 50 dollars per tonnes, you make two and half billion dollars, less your ships and equipment's of 20%, you are left with two billion dollars. That is a real environmental business, not the idiocy and stupidity of present proposal for climate change credits reductions.


I am not an expert but back in July 2015, myself and my only and most trusted doctor friend, commissioned a study from the renowned and experienced marine scientist professor Mak Sito at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for a review on phytoplankton's nutrients. We will make the report public if requested by interested governments.


Each country should seriously consider the economic benefit in setting up an Agency to deal with revival of their offshore planktons, fish stock and the Hughe financial benefits through this idiotic carbon credit scam.

You will notice that the oceans near the deserts have blooming planktons after sandstorms, the only scientific reason are the winds carrying the sands in rich in iron ore and other nutrients by dumping it in the ocean. 

 

Prince Charles on climate change, you got it totally wrong!


Yes, I support you getting net zero target. The idiot's scientists who are telling you that it is human contribution of carbon dioxide that is causing today's climate change are one hundred per cent wrong, Simply, the math does not add up.

Deploy 50 ships that continuously feed the oceans with iron ore mixtures, bring back the planktons, replenish your fish stock, and in the meantime, you can get rid of all the carbon dioxide produced by nature and human.

Climate change is a natural earth evolution phenomenon, unless you can ask our great and loving "GOD" to redial earth cycle, stop blaming the minuscules one percent of all combined gases in our atmosphere for today's climate disasters.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/01/prince-charles-terra-carta-climate-change-plan

How much permafrost is released in the atmosphere?

Is still less than one per cent!


A good close friend called me and pointed out that my op-ed math is scientifically incorrect. My one percent combination of all gases, including Carbon dioxide, methane and greenhouse gases is totally wrong.


The permafrost is responsible for all the climate warming we are having presently. Unless we have invented new mathematics, number do not lie. People misrepresentation fully endorsed by social media is the twenty first century disease. 


As earth warms, scientists worry that some of the carbon in permafrost could escape to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide and methane. Increasing the amount of these gases in the atmosphere could make earth's climate warm up even more. As permafrost thaws, microbes begin to decompose, such decomposition release greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere, still a part of the one percent.


The facts have not changed even with the claims of permafrost melting, one precents still the same number of all greenhouse gases, methane, and carbon dioxide in our atmosphere today, including the permafrost. 

https://www.quora.com/Does-melting-permafrost-end-up-releasing-a-lot-of-methane-gas-damaging-the-atmosphere


0.0016% CO2 is negligible

Why are we comparing apples and oranges?

 

In 2019 the global average atmospheric carbon dioxide was 409.8 parts per million. While that level is higher than at any point in the past 800,000 years, it is negligible and not significant nor responsible for the disasters it is blamed for. We also have multitudes more people and animals on the planet today than ever before. We have more plants and trees that require CO2 than at any point in history.

 

I have always advocated the need to be good stewards of the environment and do our part to eliminate pollution and reduce emissions where possible. It’s common knowledge that people who live in cities with higher pollution levels have higher rates of respiratory issues. We all want to improve the conditions around us so we can live in a place where we can breathe clean air, but that has nothing to do with climate change. Let’s not let them get away with creating phony doomsday scenarios of imminent planetary destruction designed to scare people so they can increase their control and impose greater restrictions.

 

Sadly, there is a new breed of scientists that are more eager to manipulate data in such a way as to align themselves with a political narrative, rather than to stay committed to going where the facts take them. My challenge to them is to stick to the facts and stop politicizing their findings with bogus pseudo-scientific models of climate change scenarios that they know are unfounded. For decades they have been making dire predictions of coming environmental tragedies of rising seas and global warming. For years they have been telling us how we must take radical measures IMMEDIATELY because the earth is almost to the point of no return and would soon be rendered uninhabitable.

 

Some politicians have also been notorious for their “end of the world as we know it” claims. In 2006, former Vice President Al Gore produced his Oscar winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, in which he made a series of doomsday predictions that could only be averted if we were to take “drastic measures”. He said if we didn’t reduce greenhouse gases, the world would reach a “point of no return” in a mere ten years. He called it a “true planetary emergency.” In his review of Gore’s work, now discredited NASA climatologist, James Hansen wrote, ‘We have at most 10 years – not 10 years to decide upon action, but 10 years to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.” Here we are more than 15 years later, safe from the phony cataclysmic pronouncements of those two frauds.

 

With a new generation of young millennials and gen Z’s that are too young to remember how foolish Gore and Hansen were, another rising political star is making her own doomsday climate change predictions. Over two and a half years ago, when she took office in January of 2019, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez told everyone that would listen that “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” Of course, this was simply a way to scare people into supporting her infamous Green New Deal. It’s interesting how Cortez does not act like someone who really believes the world is only less than 9 ½ years away from destruction.


Its climate “derange” not climate change

United Nations latest intergovernmental panel report on climate change is total scientific nonsense? 

What better than the latest heat waves, forest fires, flash floods, hurricanes to be used as a tool to scare the average person. Fear based on misinformation is the new political tool to blame climate change on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emission.

How can a mere less than one percent cause such extreme climate swings? The United Nations secretary general Antonio Guterres urged an immediate end to coal energy and other high polluting fossil fuels. I urge the secretary to go back to elementary school and strengthen his failed mathematics.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/united-nations-climate-change-1.6134493


Greta Thunberg should return to school and get a real degree.

The Swedish environmental activist urges world leaders to take immediate action for climate change mitigation in reducing the carbon dioxide, fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions. She needs to return to school and study real science, then get a real job serving society instead of making garbage statements on climate change.


Politicians should refrain from punishing their voters with more taxes based on a total pipe dream theory that has no relation to today's climate change. It is a natural evolution of our planet. Tax our great GOD but not us!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9877907/Families-face-huge-bill-green-Tackling-climate-change-cost-fortune.html?ito=push-notification&ci=2UIkj5ZU1T&si=28011570&ai=9877907


Blah Blah Blah to your false climate change assumptions


Climate activist that has brainwashed our young generation of activists who should be studying hard and spend more time checking the scientific facts instead of blindly believing her climate change garbage assumptions.

Most of our young generation are becoming a disgrace to democracy. They have hijacked all our old fashion principles of respect, hard work, good religious practices with what they call today liberal freedom.

Increase the age of voting from 18 to 25 years; by then they might realize what really matters is hard work, family, and religion.


Pope Francis and climate change


Pope Francis says an urgent change of direction is needed to tackle climate change.

As a catholic I say urgent changes within the Catholic church needs to take place to stop child abuse in residential catholic schools. Canada is a typical example of a powerful morally corrupted Catholic church.

Priests must be allowed to marry to stop all these abuses.


https://www.canada.ca/en/parks-canada/news/2020/09/the-residential-school-system.html


Just for your information Catholic Church hypocrisy


In the old days Catholic priests were allowed to get married and have Children. Only when the Church was in trouble financially because of the continuous support provided to the priest's families, they issued a decree claiming that priest must become celibate because Jesus was celibate; how ironic.


The Church was a thousand years old before it definitively took a stand in favor of celibacy in the twelfth century at the Second Lateran Council held in 1139, when a rule was approved forbidding priests to marry. In 1563, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the tradition of celibacy.

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/696


The U.S. Court of International Trade

 

The abundance of repeated fraudulent claims must be put to a stop. They are using this intentional misinformation to extort money from businesses in the name of carbon credits or carbon footprint taxes. Surely the courts should have something to say about this continued thievery based on knowingly false information. Someone needs to bring charges and initiate an inquiry with judicial agencies like the U.S. Court of international trade, the World Trade Organization, or the International Business Court in Europe. We cannot continue to allow anyone to use baseless scare tactics on the public for their political or financial gain.

 

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide#:~:text=The%20global%20average%20atmospheric%20carbon,least%20the%20past%20800%2C000%20years.

 

There have been at least five previous ice ages in earth’s history

Extreme weather changes are a natural part of earth’s evolution

It is believed the earth has experienced at least five significant ice ages in its history, each time followed by warmer interglacial periods. We are currently living in an interglacial period right now. Extreme weather is nothing new to the planet and is simply part of earth’s natural evolution. These wide variations in weather cycles are certainly nothing new and have had nothing to do with human CO2 emissions or industrialization. No credible scientist would ever predict that the 0.016% CO2 in the atmosphere caused by man will bring about the destruction of the earth as we know it.

 

Carbon credits are a control mechanism based on fraudulent claims

Extorting money from large corporations under the guise of carbon credit taxes or carbon footprint taxes is simply another way for government to exercise control over large corporations. Even if human caused CO2 emissions increased tenfold from 0.016% to 0.16%, it would still only account for less than 1/6th of 1% of all the CO2 in the atmosphere. Even with an increase of one-hundredfold it would only be slightly more than 1%.

This kind of fear mongering is nothing new. It is standard practice by some to scare people into giving up their freedoms and willingly yield some of their rights. I wrote about this same thing in many of my 17 previous op-eds on the coronavirus. When they can succeed at scaring people, they can achieve their way with them. Look how the social media companies and pharmaceuticals have so easily used COVID-19 to create mass fear, bring about lockdowns and institute mandatory experimental vaccines. Just like the push to keep the pandemic alive, climate change hysteria is about money, power, and control, not people’s health.

 

Its climate “derange” not climate change

Does Alexandria Ocasio Cortez realize the degree of fraud behind her infamous "Green New Deal"? Implementing it would be like flushing $93 trillion down the toilet 


Radical environmental activists preach that we must completely eliminate the use of fossil fuels. Not only is that foolish and irrational, but it is also impossible. They feel better about themselves when they drive their electric cars but fail to realize that the carbon footprint spent to manufacture that car, its parts and battery is about equal to the carbon footprint of driving 100,000 miles in a car with a combustion engine. And how do they think those batteries will be disposed of at the end of their usable lives? Politicians that make false claims about needing to move to 100% clean and renewable energy by some arbitrary date like 2030 are knowingly pushing phony doomsday narratives. Their goal is to instill fear in voters and portray themselves as the enlightened ones that will save the planet from certain destruction.

 

What is a carbon footprint? 

 

A carbon footprint is the total amount of greenhouse gases (including carbon dioxide and methane) that are generated by human action, usually expressed in equivalent tons of carbon dioxide. The carbon footprint of a person, family or company is calculated by measuring their emissions from their use of transport vehicles, heating and cooling homes and buildings, electricity usage, and anything else that is powered by burning fossil fuels. The total amount of carbon dioxide they emit into the atmosphere is used to calculate their carbon footprint.

 

As the facts which I have presented clearly show, human activity only accounts for 0.0016% of all the CO2 in the atmosphere. But that already incredibly low emission level does not stop the radicals from shaming us and trying to force the imposition of draconian reforms to unnecessarily lower it even more. This utter stupidity is met with little resistance because people are generally ignorant of the facts, and social media propaganda only helps promote the climate change misinformation campaign. There is not a single shred of evidence to support the notion that the current 0.0016% of human caused CO2 emissions has done anything to affect the climate, but that does not stop the push to recklessly implement exorbitant measures.

 

What is becoming of our 21st century world? I fear for the future of our children when so many forced major changes are taking place that are based on lies and misinformation. The latest nonsense is the crazy plan to capture carbon dioxide. Billions of dollars have been allocated to create the infrastructure that is supposed to reverse CO2 emissions. It is shocking to see government officials needlessly waste so much money and critical resources on these crazy measures that have no basis in facts or real science. God help us!

 

Netherlands court orders Royal Dutch Shell to cut carbon emissions 45% by 2030; Fossil fuel and mining companies need to take action to defend themselves

 

On May 26, 2021, the Hauge District Court ordered oil giant Royal Dutch Shell to “limit all [carbon dioxide] emissions into the atmosphere … by at least 45% at the end of 2030, relative to 2019 levels.” It marks the first time in history a court has held a corporation liable for causing climate change. This landmark decision by the court was the epitome of virtue signaling. Did the court even bother to educate themselves on the true scientific facts? A simple internet search would have shown them there is no basis whatsoever for this ridiculous decision. Perhaps the judges entered the case with preconceived bias and were determined to use Shell as a scapegoat to make a political statement. Conceivably they were trying to be seen as the world’s climate change heroes and champions of the environment. Instead, history will show they only succeeded at making fools of themselves and bringing this independent legal system into disrepute.

 

I lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of the pseudo-scientists like James Hansen and other opportunists that make up these baseless, wild theories and discredit themselves and their field. How easy it is for them to scare the public with their unfounded rubbish by pointing fingers at fossil fuels and coal fired stations. It is time for the fossil fuel companies to stand up and challenge the bogus science and misinformation put out by conflicted scientists and radical activists. This is just a business for them. The more they scare the public the more endowments, funds and government grants they can secure for their so-called research and green organizations, keeping their jobs alive.

 

How can companies be assessed taxes for CO2 emissions on the assumption their emissions are contributing to climate change when there is absolutely zero proof that CO2 emissions have any effect whatsoever on the climate. Every company that has had to pay this made-up tax should fight back and demand a refund with interest. Oil producing companies such as Royal Dutch Shell, BP plc, Exxon Mobil, Total SE, Chevron, Saudi Arabia Oil co. Aramco and Petro China, among others, need to launch legal action against all governments that are extorting money from them under the guise of a carbon tax, which is based on fraudulent science and bogus claims of manmade climate disasters.

 

What is the solution?

 

First, we need to recognize that the earth is a massive living organism that constantly undergoes regular cyclical changes. The earth’s climate has been changing since its beginning, such as the many alternating ice ages and heat cycles it has undergone before man made human emissions ever began. We may be due for a temperature heating cycle.

 

Second, we must strengthen our infrastructure through re-engineering. It does not make sense to invest in the mass rebuilding of some towns, villages and cities in the same locations that are prone for natural disasters.

 

Additionally, we need to strengthen offshore coastal defense structures to better protect against occurrences like tsunamis and tidal fluctuations. More caution should be taken when developing coastal real estate and properties located on beaches. Homes further inland or on higher ground are typically safer than those located directly on the shore.

 

And as I mentioned earlier, we must be good stewards of the cities, towns, states, and countries in which we live. All measures we can take to reduce and eliminate pollution and needless emissions will help make our world a better place. It has nothing to do with bowing to the false climate change narrative, and everything to do with us making sure we take care of our local communities and ensure we can all breathe cleaner air.


Our Oceans and marine life need to be better protected


It is also imperative we enforce regulations to protect our oceans. Serious penalties must be assessed to countries and companies that dump plastics and garbage into the oceans. Any country caught doing that should have their products banned from import. We must crack down on all ocean polluters and toxic waste dumping.  Advances in artificial intelligence and industrialization can also give us new ways for disposing of sewage and improving conversion rates and utilization rates of methane gases.

 

Feasibility studies for new pipeline infrastructures should be conducted to assess and research new ways to deal with forest fires. Having pipelines running from the ocean inland to areas prone to seasonal forest fires could provide a quicker and safer way to extinguish those fires and save millions of acres of forestry. If indeed the oceans are rising this could also provide a method to divert salt water out of the ocean. Let’s look for real solutions and stop with the bogus climate change lies aimed at creating fear and extorting money.

 

The climate change fake pioneers

 

Things like Tesla cars, wind energy, and solar energy are not saving our planet from climate change. As I mentioned, the carbon footprint involved in making and disposing of these products is not much different from their fossil fuel counterparts. Only after these technologies become economical should we consider their widespread use. Subsidizing them now does not make any sense. When the time comes for me to replace my current car, I will consider purchasing an electric car if I feel it will save me money in the long run and if I really like the car. It will NOT be a decision I make under any foolish illusions that doing so will somehow help save the planet.

 

Now that green parties have had their climate nonsense exposed, what is next?

 

I am eagerly waiting for green pundits to lash out and defend their fake claims. Of course, we should expect more lies and deceit to continue to mislead the public. All these green deal initiatives must stop. Billions of dollars are being flushed away on false green causes. We need to spend those billions on creating the next industrial revolution that will lessen the impact of C02 and greenhouse gases, etc.

 

Only an industrial innovative revolution will save us

 

America and the west have failed miserably at supporting innovation and new inventors. In today’s legal system that governs patents, the laws are heavily skewed towards protecting patent infringers which in turn punishes innovation. Many of the decisions made in courts across the U.S. are making it more difficult for a small inventor to ever be able to monetize their inventions. Large corporations know how to game the system and drag out the legal process to the point where a small company is drained of all resources and unable to maintain the fight for their intellectual property rights. We need to incorporate artificial intelligence technology more fully into the legal system to create an unbiased method using a points system to determine the validity of a patent within a predefined period, such as two years.

 

Stagflation, high inflation, lack of productivity, supply chain breakdowns, and civil unrests will lead to the next depression


As I have warned before, economic pressures created by the vaccine's failures along with financial stress from immoral carbon taxes forced upon companies that are wrongfully being blamed for climate change will lead us into a depression like we have never seen before.


Within the next two years or sooner, the printing machines that have become of the Federal Reserve Bank and the European Central Bank will be forced to shut down. They will have no option at that point but to adopt a gold, silver, or some other type of industrial precious metals as a measuring standard of their currencies’ values. As a result, I expect to see a more than 50% reduction in the world’s stock markets. In my opinion, this may be a good time to sell off some stock holdings and shift investments into cash and physical gold and silver. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are a scam and I believe a recipe for bankruptcy.

Link to other Literary Works by Emil Malak

https://emil-malak.com/portfolio.html


GO TO PAGE ONE OF EMIL MALAK’S COVID-19 OP-ED
Discover Emil’s latest insights and predictions.
Emil Malak Op-ed | International Politics






Emil Malak Op-ed | Climate Change Scam | August 2021 | Blaming climate change on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases is a scam | Total share of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is only 0.04% | human caused CO2 is only .0016% | is climate change real | Is the climate always changing | should I be afraid of climate change | Is CO2 dangerous | Emil Malak Climate Change Op-ed

HOME

CURRENT ISSUE

INTERVIEW INDEX

CEOCFO SERVICES

CEOCFO MOBILE


Op-Ed | Climate Change | March 10, 2021

Previous Topics



Man caused CO2 and methane emissions are not affecting the global climate


We are being scammed by pseudoscience

 

Climate change pushing politicians are either naïve or power hungry


World leaders are the true polluters

What happened to Zoom?


I fully support local efforts to reduce the 1% carbon and greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but understanding the present emission rate has ZERO effect on current and future climate change

 


.Three Nobel Prize winners for climate change.


Environmental scientists' got climate change 99% per cent wrong! 


Is a mere one percent really causing the latest climate disasters? Of course not!


All these green parties' principles are based on total lies, deceit, and fear not true science.


The only difference climate change trillions of dollars will make is bankruptcy of our western economies.

 

Even if you achieve zero emission, you will still get the same climate fluctuation. They may even increase; it is a natural phenomenon.


I support minimizing carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions and policing the polluting of our oceans


Blaming climate change on carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases is a scam

The heat cycle age is a natural phenomenon like the ice age


The total share of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is only 0.04%; the percentage of human caused CO2 is only .0016%


0.0016% CO2 is negligible

Why are we comparing apples and oranges?



United Nations latest intergovernmental panel report on climate change is total scientific nonsense? 


Greenhouse gases, and carbon dioxide have a near zero effect on the climate!

The Paris Accord is a useless and immoral agreement

Greta Thunberg should return to school and get a real degree

The U.S. Court of International Trade


There have been at least five previous ice ages in earth’s history

Extreme weather changes are a natural part of earth’s evolution

Carbon credits are a control mechanism based on fraudulent claims

Does Alexandria Ocasio Cortez realize the degree of fraud behind her infamous "Green New Deal"? Implementing it would be like flushing $93 trillion down the toilet

What is a carbon footprint?

Netherlands court orders Royal Dutch Shell to cut carbon emissions 45% by 2030; Fossil fuel and mining companies need to take action to defend themselves

What is the solution?

First, we need to recognize that the earth is a massive living organism that constantly undergoes regular cyclical changes.

Our Oceans and marine life need to be better protected

The climate change fake pioneers

Now that green parties have had their climate nonsense exposed, what is next?

Only an industrial innovative revolution will save us

Stagflation, high inflation, lack of productivity, supply chain breakdowns, and civil unrests will lead to the next depression

Its climate “derange” not climate change

It is the planet’s natural evolution, not greenhouse gases

 

This is a money grab and a control mechanism

 

Our survival depends on our ability to understand and adapt to the planet’s ongoing evolution. Such evolution has nothing to do with the less than 1% contribution of human emission of greenhouse gases. The latest incidents of supposed “climate change” disasters such as hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, forest fires, and rising sea levels are constantly being falsely attributed to global warming. These are natural occurrences that have been around if the Earth itself. Any increase in these occurrences needs to be properly attributed to our resilient earth’s natural evolution. They conveniently blame mythical “manmade climate change” for any natural occurrence that is going to happen anyway.

 

Pseudoscientists base their phony theories on factual misconceptions. Their claims cannot be reconciled scientifically or mathematically. How can man’s miniscule emissions totaling less than 1% of all greenhouse gas emissions possibly be responsible for any changes that may or may not be taking place? We must be able to adapt to Earth’s natural cyclical changes. A deep and detailed historic analysis is needed before jumping to premature conclusions. I have always been a big proponent of keeping our oceans and environment clean and free of pollution. We need to come down on those countries that use the ocean as a garbage bin and make every effort to curb overfishing. I am a fan of electric cars, and in favor of expanding alternative forms of energy like hydrogen, wind and solar. But only if they can be more economical. Currently, the manufacturing process for alternative energy equipment creates as large or more of a carbon footprint than using traditional fossil fuels.

Associating natural disasters with climate change is comparing apples and oranges

 

To be clear, the present push for reformations in the name of climate change will make no difference to the climate or to rising seas. We will still have to face all the same major weather changes, natural disasters, and the disappearance of small islands, even if we were to achieve zero emissions. I fully support making every effort to lessen the impact of toxic air pollution and to reduce all forms of manmade pollution. We all want to breathe clean air and swim in plastic free oceans. We need to stop overfishing, increase plankton and algae in our oceans through advanced technological farming.

 

The next industrial revolution will be based on the improvement of nanotechnology that could make high precision machinery much more productive and attainable. Even smaller than nano is the future for more advanced technology supported by artificial intelligence.

Its climate “derange” not climate change

Even if we were to somehow rid the planet of all man produced carbon dioxide, methane gas, oil, coal, and greenhouse gases and achieve zero net emissions, it would not make the slightest bit of difference to the climate. Warming temperatures, floods, fires, and rising sea levels would still be here and maybe even stronger because this is all part of the Earth’s natural evolution.

 

The numbers they put forth simply do not make sense. The totality of the pollutants they are trying to eliminate accounts for less than 1% of all the gases in the atmosphere. Around half or less of these gases of the one percent is the result of natural emissions escaping from volcanoes, forest fires and animal and human rear ends. More than 99% of the atmosphere is made up of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). We do need to adjust through innovative engineering, but not because those adjustments will make one iota of difference to the climate and the phony climate warriors know that is true.

 

If these self-proclaimed climate change heroes really believed in their hearts the garbage, they are telling us, their beliefs would reflect in their behavior. They want us to take public transportation or drive around in Priuses while they take limousine motorcades to get to their private jets so they can fly around the world telling us what awful people we are. Someone that truly believes the world is dying and will be unrecognizable ten years from now as they so often say, would conduct themselves very differently than what we are seeing from these power-hungry hypocrites. 


ALL OF EMIL MALAK’S OP-EDs


INTERNATIONAL POLITCAL OVERVIEW OP-ED
_______________________

Latest Emil Malak Op-ed -
Double Vaccinated are now the new Super Spreaders
________________________

No.1 02-2020 – Emil Malak Op-ed - A Global Pandemic Has Already Started
________________________

No.2 03-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Financial World Already started to Collapse
_______________________

No.3 04 2020 F1 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Vaccine Speeding Up Infection for Most
______________________

No.4 04-2020 Updated - Emil Malak Op-ed - Coronavirus Vaccine Gold Rush Scam
______________________

No.5 05-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - We Are at War with Coronavirus
______________________

No.6 07-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Unspecified Outbreak Confirmed in Kazakhstan
________________________

No.7 08-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - ADE a serious concern in vaccine and antibody therapy
________________________

No.8 08-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Top Scientists Have Become Coronavirus Quacks
________________________

No.9 09-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - No More Lockdowns or Social Distancing
________________________

No.10 10-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Vaccines fail to deliver lasting immunity
_______________________

No.11 09-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - They Knew it All Along
_______________________

No.12 10-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - COVID-19 mutate into a SARS, MERS?
_______________________

No.13 11-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed – Big Pharma Unsafe Vaccines
________________________

No.14 12-2020 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Therapeutic drug cocktail the only medical solution, Testing the only economic solution
________________________

No.15 01-2021 - Emil Malak Op-ed - Vaccinated people becoming infected with COVID
_______________________

No.16 02-2021 - Emil Malak Op-ed - The Coronavirus is Here to Stay
________________________

No.17 03-2021 final - Emil Malak Op-ed - Could mRNA vaccines permanently alter our genomic DNA, cause infertility, cancer?