50,000 dot com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Dr. Charles Battig

Dr. Charles Battig

Let’s start a new car­bon diox­ide (CO2) web­site. Let’s for­get unimag­i­na­tive and puny sites anchored in the mid 300’s. How about “50,000 dot com”? 50,000ppm to be exact…

That is a real­ly big num­ber in view of claims that car­bon diox­ide is a pol­lu­tant, as defined by the U.S. Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion Agency (EPA), and but­tressed by Fed­er­al judges’ non-sci­en­tif­ic rul­ings. If a 400ppm con­cen­tra­tion of CO2 in the atmos­phere is adjudged by such polit­i­cal enti­ties to be an endan­ger­ment to human health, a dan­ger to the envi­ron­ment, and an all-round pol­lu­tant, then cer­tain­ly 50,000ppm must be a vicious killer, no?
Well, no. As a physi­cian prac­tic­ing the spe­cial­ty of anes­the­si­ol­o­gy, my train­ing includ­ed the details of human res­pi­ra­to­ry phys­i­ol­o­gy, and knowl­edge of the move­ment of the essen­tial gas­es in and out of my patients’ lungs. A most basic mech­a­nism of human life is the cycle of oxy­gen in; car­bon diox­ide out. What is the exhaled con­cen­tra­tion of CO2 in your lungs? Phys­i­ol­o­gy texts give a nor­mal range of 4 to 5 per cent. In the cli­mate change nomen­cla­ture are­na, that would be expressed as an equiv­a­lent 40,000 to 50,000 ppm! Imag­ine that, your own lungs man­u­fac­ture the EPA-defined pol­lu­tant car­bon diox­ide at lev­els one-hun­dred times that of the air we breathe in. Not only do the inner­most parts of your body tol­er­ate chron­ic expo­sure to this scary EPA pseu­do-pol­lu­tant, longevi­ty records con­firm our increas­ing lifes­pan, in spite of this offi­cial­ly labeled, EPA inter­nal CO2 pollution.

The EPA and Fed­er­al agen­cies have bul­lied auto­mo­bile pro­duc­ers into pro­duc­ing cars with ever low­er car­bon diox­ide emis­sions per mile, yet our own bod­ies con­sis­tent­ly pro­duce high CO2 con­cen­tra­tions with each exha­la­tion. Once our reg­u­la­to­ry agen­cies final­ly learn the details of basic human res­pi­ra­to­ry phys­i­ol­o­gy, there will be demands that mea­sures be tak­en to reg­u­late our bod­ies’ CO2 out­put. Per­haps manda­to­ry face masks to cap­ture and neu­tral­ize our “pol­lut­ing” CO2 emis­sions will be decreed. Such breath­ing appa­ra­tus would be rat­ed on its effi­cien­cy in cap­tur­ing bod­i­ly car­bon emis­sions; phys­i­cal exer­tion would be lim­it­ed to “safe” lev­els since greater exer­tion caus­es the body to pro­duce more CO2 than seden­tary lack of activ­i­ty. School chil­dren are bad­gered to mind their “car­bon foot­prints.” Who shall break the news to them and their par­ents that their own pre­cious bod­ies spew forth this false­ly maligned nat­ur­al prod­uct of human life processes?

Alice in Won­der­land would have faced a test of her increduli­ty were she to have read the non-sci­ence, non-sense spew­ing from gov­ern­men­tal agen­cies,  envi­ron­men­tal rad­i­cals, rent-seek­ing politi­cians, and the sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly illit­er­ate regard­ing car­bon diox­ide. And yes, Alice, there real­ly has been no glob­al tem­per­a­ture rise for the past eigh­teen years and count­ing. Poor old Hump­ty Dump­ty and his cli­mate com­put­er have had a real­ly great fall, and all the Fed­er­al agen­cies and pres­i­den­tial appointees can­not put all his bits and bytes togeth­er again. Alice did give us fair warn­ing, though, in her encounter with the Queen of Hearts and the Queen’s rant of  “off with their heads.” One promi­nent spokesman of the “Regres­sive Par­ty” has been quot­ed call­ing for sim­i­lar pun­ish­ment for non-believ­ers of their car­bon-diox­ide cli­mate hoax.