As I have previously outlined, climate change is a political theory. So it’s not a scientific theory, its theory put forward by political interests to progress a political agenda. So, let’s just say that politics were removed from the theory of climate change. Let’s analyze the model. I contend as a budding scientist that the model in and of itself is deeply flawed.
As an economist, we learn that all of life moves towards an equilibrium. In economics we have an equilibrium between the supply and demand. One way that we can define a model is whether they are static or dynamic. A dynamic model is one that has ever changing variables in the model. A static model will typically have one independent variable and a lot of constants. For example, when looking at supply and demand, a static model will call for a constant taste for let’s say Florida oranges. Every year, in a static model, everyone demands the same amount of Florida oranges and so the supply is the only variable. In a more dynamic model, every year everyone’s tastes change along with the supply and so there are a lot more moving parts.
The Idea of a Static Model
The foundation of the theory of climate change is that carbon is an element that when it gets put into the atmosphere it sticks around for a long time and that it heats up which in turn heats up the world or the atmosphere of the world. This is based on a static model in which roughly the same amount of carbon is left in atmosphere each year and that carbon remains in the atmosphere at a similar amount of time and that the rate in which it is being put into the atmosphere is also at a rough constant or at a predictable amount each year. This in a sense means that each year there is more and more carbon in the atmosphere than the year before. So they say there is more carbon being produced and more that is already out there.
The Dynamic Model
The reason this is a faulty model is that Carbon, as an element, is an essential element to life on earth. Carbon is literally considered the backbone of organic life. Organic chemistry revolves around carbon. Plants breathe carbon. Life on earth requires carbon. Therefore, Carbon is by its very nature a dynamic element. The amount of Carbon in the atmosphere will be ever changing. And remember the idea of an equilibrium, the earth will want to find an equilibrium with carbon. A perfect amount of carbon still in the atmosphere and of plants growing that are consuming carbon.
The Overshooting Principle
Let’s hypothesis a theory of overshooting. This means that in a given year that there is a lot of carbon, the earth will produce more plants which will then be consuming a greater amount of carbon until there is actually less carbon. So if Carbon really does heat up the atmosphere when there is too much of it then it could be said that too little Carbon will cool the atmosphere. Plants thrive in warmth generally and struggle in too cold of temperatures. So, in this dynamic overshoot example, when there is a lot of Carbon and the earth is a little warmer, more plants will exist and consume more Carbon leading to a cooling and less plants for the next year. Over time, plants figure out the rate in which they need to grow in order to live in a longer period of time. Nature makes its own equilibrium. The aggregate of atmospheric Carbon will be in balance with the aggregate of global plants.
Because the model is actually dynamic, Carbon is not a threat to the earth or life on earth. Let’s reject the idea of any static model. When you go to the Grand Canyon National Park and they say the Cougar is rare because of Carbon, reject this idea. The Cougar is rare in the Canyon because game is rare because it is such a barren place!