In the foreword to a new report on CO2 published in the Science and Environmental Policy Project journal The Week That Was, Freeman Dyson, a theoretical physicist and professor emeritus of Mathematical Physics and Astrophysics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, explains how, without CO2, Planet Earth and everything on it would collapse.
"To any unprejudiced person reading [Goklany's] account, the facts should be obvious: that the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide as a sustainer of wildlife and crop plants are enormously beneficial, that the possibly harmful climatic effects of carbon dioxide have been greatly exaggerated, and that the benefits clearly outweigh the possible damage," Dyson writes, referring to the author of the report, Indur Goklany.
For more climate-related news, be sure to check out ClimateScienceNews.com.
Goklany's report is replete with scientific evidence to show that CO2 is hardly the "evil" and "dangerous" molecule that the Church of Global Warming claims it is. Quite the contrary, in fact: CO2 is a critical element that's central to all life. The Health Ranger wrote all about this back in 2017, revealing how entire ecosystems would cease to exist without CO2.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the importance of CO2 in our world. But for whatever reason, many of the world's leading "climate scientists" remain in absolute denial about the need for CO2 to sustain life on our planet – and Dyson believes that no amount of evidence will ever change their minds.
"The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence," he writes. "Those of my scientific colleagues who believe the prevailing dogma about carbon dioxide will not find Goklany's evidence convincing."
"I hope that a few of them will make the effort to examine the evidence in detail and see how it contradicts the prevailing dogma, but I know that the majority will remain blind. That is to me the central mystery of climate science."
Since human beings tend to have a "tribal" mentality when it comes to what they believe – which isn't necessarily a bad thing, by the way – there's a tendency to simply go with the flow: they believe whatever it is that prevailing dogma surmises about a particular subject.
In the case of global warming and climate change, scientists who adhere to the tenets of these conspiracy theories are more inclined towards wanting to be on the "winning team," as opposed to being on the team with the winning argument. This continues to be a major roadblock for many scientists who may never arrive at a truthful, honest conclusion about the climate.
"I am suggesting that the thinking of politicians and scientists about controversial issues today is still tribal," says Dyson. "Thinking about scientific questions is still presented to the public as a competitive sport with winners and losers. For players of the sport with public reputations to defend, it is more important to belong to a winning team than to examine the evidence."
For more news about real climate science, read Climate.news.
Sources for this article include: