Climate Scientists : Fertilizer For Brains

In 1990, scientists discovered that Tasmania was warmer in the 9th century than it is now.


They also concluded that trees were growing faster in the 20th century because of “the carbon dioxide fertilisation effect


31 Aug 1990, Page 11 – The Age at

They can’t get any money for calling it “the carbon dioxide fertilisation effect” – so they changed the name (in the same sentence) to “the enhanced greenhouse effect.”

And climate experts now say CO2 is bad for plants.


New study undercuts favorite climate myth ‘more CO2 is good for plants’ | Dana Nuccitelli | Environment | The Guardian

There appears to be no limit to how dishonest climate scientists will be to keep politicians happy, and keep their funding coming in.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Climate Scientists : Fertilizer For Brains

  1. Latitude says:

    First they blow up the graphs really big…so a 1/2 degree looks huge

  2. John Silver says:

    You can’t say “carbon dioxide fertilization” since carbon dioxide is the primary building block of life on Earth.
    The warmists are not carbon based life forms, they based on another element.
    Get it? You don’t get it, do you?

  3. John F Hultquist says:

    The world does not work in linear fashion.
    Any catalogue of seeds and plants will indicate what sort of environment each plant is best suited for. One can approach this from the “biome” issue, also.
    So no news here.
    Dana Nuccitelli has simply picked, as usual, a non-issue to try to bludgeon everyone else into his depressed and pessimistic state of mind.
    He needs to back away from the keyboard, and get out and talk to actual farmers.
    They are optimists, and are producing record or near-record crops – again.

  4. RAH says:

    John F Hultquist says:
    September 24, 2016 at 4:08 pm
    “……..The world does not work in linear fashion.”

    But the alarmists and their models most certainly do work in a linear fashion!
    The trend lines on their graphs demonstrate this fact.
    If it’s temperatures, storm severity or incidence, drought, sea levels, or wild fires. the trend line must go up. If it’s ice the trend line must go down.

  5. OrganicFool says:

    They’re worried plants are going to become obese from too much CO2? Hilarious.

    Here’s some obese plants up to 800ppm CO2 (credit C3 type plants seem to benefit a lot from more CO2. How long will it take to double the CO2 concentration from 400ppm?

    They seem to want it both ways. We’re all going to die if we don’t stop CO2 from increasing but on the other hand they want to reduce human population. It seems if we just keep going, we’ll kill ourselves off and then save the planet.

  6. gator69 says:

    The “study” determined that “higher temperatures” were not beneficial to certain plants in California, and really had nothing to do with CO2. The headline for this story is 100% false and misleading, just like the “science” upon which it is reporting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.