What They Don’t Want You To Know About CO2. By Tim Ball

Published May 1, 2016

Animals cannot live without oxygen. Plants cannot live without CO2. Plants produce the oxygen but are also the major source of food for most animals. Most political leaders are pushing to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere because people like Al Gore tell them CO2 is at the highest level ever when it is actually at the lowest. Figure 1 shows the level of CO2 against temperature for the last 600 million years.


The official claim figure given for atmospheric level of CO2 is 400 ppm on the right side. CO2 became the focus of a premeditated orchestrated political agenda to demonize it as the toxic byproduct of fossil-fuel driven industries causing runaway global warming.

The deception began with the illusion that the UN agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), studies all climate change, as their title implies. The definition produced by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) narrowed research to only human causes of climate change

“a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.”

It is impossible to determine human effects if you don’t know or understand natural patterns or causes, and we don’t.
It is no surprise that every prediction the IPCC made since 1990 was wrong. Science is easily defined as the ability to predict. If the prediction is wrong, the science is wrong. The level of deceit about their level to predict is shown in the Third IPCC Report (TAR) where they wrote;

In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.

Of course, they know few will read the report and even fewer will understand, and they can easily marginalize people who point out the truth.
The definition of climate change used by the IPPC narrows everything down to CO2. The distortion was so effective that claims about greenhouse gases (GHG) led a major US news network to post false information on their website. Figure 1 shows an ABC News pie chart.


The graph shows only 4 percent of the greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide is only the “majority” because they ignore the 95 percent that is water vapor.

Gross misinformation about CO2 is everywhere. President Obama calls it ‘carbon,’ a solid, when he means CO2, a gas. He talks of “carbon pollution” and falsely labels CO2 a pollutant. Few know the facts, and many ignore them for political, or financial reward.

As Aldous Huxley (1894-1963) said,

“Facts don’t cease to exist because they are ignored.”

Some facts about CO2;

1. CO2 is called a greenhouse gas (GHG) because it reportedly allows shortwave (SW) solar radiation to pass through the atmosphere and reach the Earth’s surface. This heats the surface, and that heat is radiated back out to space as longwave (LW) radiation. The greenhouse analogy claims that the earth’s atmosphere is like the glass that allows SW in but stops heat LW escaping. It is a false analogy. It suited the narrative because everybody associates greenhouses with warmer temperatures.

2. There are three major GHGs. They are by volume; water vapor (H2O) 95%, carbon dioxide (CO2) 4%, and methane (CH4) less than 0.3%.

3. CO2 is approximately 0.0397 % of the total atmospheric gases. Figure 2 shows the proportional relationship between atmospheric gases and GHGs.


4. The IPCC assume an increase in CO2 causes a temperature increase. It doesn’t. Every record for any period shows that a temperature increases before CO2. The only place a CO2 increase precedes a temperature increase is in IPCC computer models.

5. The amount of CO2 was inconveniently small, so they concocted an effectiveness value. This claimed that each CO2 molecule reduced LW escape at a higher level than a molecule of water vapor. The trouble is the range of estimates shown in Figure 3 varies considerably. If this effect follows the laws of physics then all calculations should give the same results.


6. Let’s assume CO2 is causing warming. Then, when its density reaches a certain level, the warming ability is maximized. It is currently maximized, so the addition of more CO2 has little effect. Consider light passing through a window. One coat of black paint blocks most of the light and subsequent coats block only fractionally more. Doubling or tripling atmospheric CO2 has little further temperature effect. To bypass the problem, IPCC theorized a positive feedback. Higher temperature due to CO2 increases evaporation and more water vapor causes increased temperature. It doesn’t exist. In fact, the feedback is negative partly because of increased cloud cover.

7. The IPCC said the CO2 we put into the atmosphere stays there for 100+ years, called the residency time. It supported their claims that even if we stopped production now, the problem would persist, and if we didn’t stop, amplification through accumulation would increase the impact. Figure 4 shows the residency times from dozens of researchers against the IPCC claim.


Figure 4 The faint background chart shows temperature decline from 2002-2010 against CO2 increase.

8. Annual human production levels of CO2 are produced by the IPCC and are lost within the error factor of two natural sources; oceans, and soil bacteria/decomposition.

9. The IPCC claim the pre-industrial level was 270 ppm. Approximately 90,000 measures of atmospheric CO2 begun in 1812 showed pre-industrial levels of 335 ppm. Ice core expert Zbigniew Jaworowski explains, “The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false.”

10. All official atmospheric levels of CO2 are measured by a system created on Mauna Loa, patented and owned by the Keeling family. Ernst-Georg Beck explains how Charles Keeling established the readings by using lowest afternoon readings while ignoring natural sources. Beck notes, “Mauna Loa does not represent the typical atmospheric CO2 on different global locations but is typical only for this volcano at a maritime location in about 4000 m altitude at that latitude.” Keeling’s son operates Mauna Loa and as Beck notes, “owns the global monopoly of calibration of all CO2 measurements.” He’s also a co-author of the IPCC reports.

11. 20th- century temperatures increased most from 1900 to 1940 with little increase in limited human production of CO2. Human production of CO2 increased most from 1940 to 1980, but temperatures went down through that time.

12. The IPCC assumes CO2 is uniformly distributed in the atmosphere. It is not; it varies considerably as recent satellite imagery showed (Figure 5). In the image, you can see that the largest source of CO2 is the forests and grasslands, not the urbanized areas. China has high concentration, but they are upwind of the industrialized areas.


Figure 5: Source NASA

The focus on human CO2 as the cause of global warming and then climate change is wrong on every level, but the deliberate selection, omission, and misrepresentation of the facts allowed them to claim CO2, a gas essential to life on Earth was to blame and must be reduced. All IPCC predictions are wrong because their CO2 facts and science are wrong. Because of their lies, damn lies, and statistics they achieved their goal of demonizing CO2, so the world suffers unnecessarily, as it always has from corrupted, manipulative politicians and leaders.

8 Responses to “What They Don’t Want You To Know About CO2. By Tim Ball”

  1. Dan Robinson May 12, 2016

    Tim Ball is a geographer not a climate scientist! Get the facts people. Here is a list of the nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations that hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action. I’ll trust NASA and the National Academy of Sciences over this loon!





  2. Irma DeVries May 9, 2016

    Hi OLA Friends,

    Please pass on – BUT, remove my identification, please. Thank you.

    The following group – Citizens for Public Justice – has a letter on their website inviting people to write to the government and minister of environment to support climate change initiatives by the government. Since climate change is a croc, please use this letter to write your comments – respectfully – and let them know NOT to support more tax dollars going to climate nonsense. You can change each part of the document and write your own comments. I can support reduction in N0X and S0X and particulates BUT CO2 is NOT A POLLUTANT. Please make this loud and clear!
    You can comment on their nonsense. Go to:


    Thank you,

    Irma DeVries
    Saugeen Regional LA

  3. HERB SCHMIDT May 1, 2016

    So much angst about stupid politicians & global warming.
    Just get a copy of “The Creature From Jekyll Island” by Mr.
    Edward Griffin & it will be crystal clear. It’s the New World Order.

  4. Boing_Snap May 1, 2016

    The BBC made a documentary that is presented by high level professional doctors and researchers confirming the above material. This of course was made in 2007 prior to the vehement rebuke of reality in today’s world.


  5. Chris F May 1, 2016

    Governments, Brian. The global warming industry is a trillion dollar a year scam that will rob you of freedom of choice of where and how to live, how to heat your home and what or if you’re allowed to drive a car.

    Oh, and your wallet will be robbed constantly by taxes implemented just to make you ashamed that you even exist. You’re a cancer on the planet therefore you have to pay extra taxes to atone for your mere existence.

  6. Corinne Sauve May 1, 2016

    Why, with all the information, do Kathleen Wynne and Justin Trudeau and other world leaders STILL believe in global warming? The facts are there. I just read an article from NASA that debunked global warming from their satellite images. What is wrong with these people? This global warming insanity has to stop!

  7. Brian Parisien May 1, 2016

    So, who gains by propagating the myth of anthropomorphic global warming? I have no problem with cleaning up our pollution act, but I do have a problem with focusing too much (potentially pointless) effort on reversing warming and not enough attention on preparing for it.

  8. Catherine Mitchell May 1, 2016

    Thank you for this wealth of information. Evidence based research must be the foundation on which we make decisions rather than politics and economic greed. The transfer of wealth from the middle class to the multinational corporate elite for solutions that do not work will create economic chaos for many nations.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Get all the latest OLA news
delivered monthly right to your inbox!