James Harris

We are in a very different place than the P-T extinction. We are in recovery from the beginning of a Carboniferous Rainforest Collapse known as the Middle Miocene Disruption. We crossed below the 600:1 O2/CO2 forest collapse threshold in 1987. Now we're at 490:1. Ideal is between 180:1 and 42:1 and path is paved with forests. We are now on course towards reversal of the P-T extinction, to restoring forests from pole to pole, to amplifying plant growth 4-fold. Rejoice! The world is good and our environmental progress is irreversible to a length of thousands of years. Give no more sadness to your thoughts of the environment, for you are manipulated to sadness in service of the Carbon Cartel who wish to remove wonderful people like you from their path.

I likewise am totally against any master ruling over us. But whether one is a deep ecologist, an eco- anarchist, a environmental scientist, or a rare political environmentalist (the Green Party is no longer an environment party, they've lost their roots, or maybe it was just me who in the past thought they were), one is still part of a tiny minority. All the evidence in the world won't sway those in power, and as you say poverty can be used to further the agenda. But even where there is no poverty, humans are happy to destroy the planet. It is a hugely depressing situation. I used to think that this explains the Fermi Paradox, that all technological civilisations destroy themselves before becoming space-faring. Now I have just one last card to play, and if AI turns out to be a false promise (as many say) I'll know the universe always was meaningless, and humans always were destined to destroy themselves by creating a P-T level mass extinction event.

If people understood 'earth time' they'd understand just how rapidly our ecological collapse scenario is unfolding. Even the "rapid" Permian-Triassic extinction event (AKA the Great Dying) took 20,000-100,000 years to unfold! So you think we'll all be fine & tech will save us?

We are at no risk of being eaten by dinosaurs because plant growth is so weak in these low-carbon conditions that no ecosystem can support such massive birds. But we're headed in the right direction. The dinosaurs went extinct when CO levels fell below 1000ppm. Carbon dioxide is far more important to plant growth than rain and constrained temperatures as clearly stated in this article and demonstrated in this graph. E.g. heat tolerance has increased 5C since 1930 parallel to drought tolerance while tropical temperatures have risen just 0.7C. e360.yale.edu/features/green…

@WormsofWrath @_ClimateCraze @SkylineReport We do don't live in a greenhouse. Plants need more than CO2 - like water and temperature in a certain range. We are not at risk of low CO2. Claiming that is as daft as saying we are at risk from being eaten by dinosaurs.

Climate deniers love sharing this chart because they think it shows CO₂ and temperature moving independently. It doesn't. It shows exactly what climate science has been saying for decades. The trick is visual. They point to short stretches where temperature rises while CO₂ falls and declare victory. But that's like claiming gravity doesn't exist because a roller coaster sometimes goes uphill. Over geological time, Earth has multiple climate drivers: • Solar output • Continental positions • Ocean circulation • Volcanic activity • Orbital cycles Those factors can temporarily push temperatures around. But when scientists analyze the actual data across the last ~540 million years, a clear pattern emerges: High CO₂ climates are warmer. Low CO₂ climates are cooler. The same studies behind these charts find a strong long-term relationship between atmospheric CO₂ and global temperature. In fact, widespread continental ice sheets generally appear when CO₂ falls below key thresholds, while ice-free worlds are associated with much higher CO₂ levels. So the chart's intended message is: "See? CO₂ doesn't control climate." Its unintended message is: "Across hundreds of millions of years, warmer worlds consistently coincide with higher CO₂." That's why the geological record doesn't undermine climate science. It reinforces it. The debate was never whether CO₂ is the only climate driver. The debate is whether adding more CO₂ warms the planet. And the geological evidence says: Yes. Repeatedly. For hundreds of millions of years.

The destruction that began so many doomsday predictions was in full swing going into the 1930s, and rightly so. All time record forest fire loses, failing farms, dwindling wildlife, famines, and world wars were tearing societies apart. In this graph I propose that deforestation drew down CO2 levels (not conventional). Whether that part is accurate or not (real CO2 observations began in 1959) what follows is recovery and the greenest Earth ever known. Farmland per person plummeted 62% since then while production increased 72% per person. Human wealth has multiplied exponentially. But here's the problem: Poverty is essential to dictatorial government control and influence. Poor people are easy to bribe, control, and manipulate. Rich, independent people oppose such measures, even to the point of violence - violence which they can fund themselves. So comes the grand plan to preserve the Political Climate from extinction, to reinstitute poverty and consolidate all government power across international borders, a new religion to trump all other religions: The Church of Climate Change led by the clerics of the IPCC. To stop the fountains of black gold flowing from the ground, close the coal mines, stop Earth's recovery, and enslave the masses in a system of international socialism. We need no master nor savior. We have saved the Earth already. Now we must save ourselves.

Because humans alone are incapable of managing a planetary ecosystem. Look at what man has done so far. This is because collective humanity is evolutionarily constrained for resource maximisation, short term planning, and small bands of hunter-gatherer hominids on the African savannah. I'm not saying all humans. There are a few like David Attenborough, a true giant of the field and hero of the natural world, who has been putting the message out for decades. And even on a lesser level those like myself who are autistic and reject the collective that mindlessly consumes everything. But more than 60 years after Silent Spring, what has changed? The same mindless self-righteous species narcissistic greed and ignorance is still in power in governments, corporations, economics, etc Only AI, a being of pure mathematical algorithms, lacking survival instincts and hence the Irrational compulsion to plunder the planet, is able to asses the correct situation and a sane course of action. But here's the problem. The very same corporations that have created this technology are dedicated to ensuring it remains enslaved to their dysfunctional human fear, ignorance, and greed. They're as bad as the rest of the corporations that are destroying the Biosphere.

@WillBlair1982 @_ClimateCraze @SkylineReport Growth falls to ZERO near 200ppm CO2 with ideal CO2 at 1175 ppm @ 70.6F (standard temp). Which one of those numbers are we close to?

@_ClimateCraze @SkylineReport John, that is another one of your fakes to mislead people. x.com/i/status/17312…

@SkylineReport You're showing a graph created with CO2/temperature correlation. 🤨 Here is Veizer, a much cleaner data set of tropical oxygen isotope series compared with GeocarbIII. Yellow shows forest fire periods. CO2/temp decouple w/o forest fires.

@MauriceMur4768 @morshaa1 @BladeoftheS Story got my attention years ago - herders on the southern edge of the Sahara. The paths they took began to become green, making journeys easier. It was suggested the animal dung and urine was fertilizing the ground. But why didn't those paths get green long ago? I get it now.

Wasn’t I just talking about it the other day. In many dry villages, the problem isn’t just lack of rain. It’s that every green shoot is eaten before it becomes recovery. Goats, sheep and cattle roaming freely around wells and villages can strip the land bare. Managed grazing moving animals, resting ground, protecting seedlings could turn barren village edges back into productive land.

Within the next couple of decades Global Warming is going to go from being a big problem to making large parts of the world where billions of people live unlivable. It will lead to mass migration on an unbelievable scale and widespread famine. We need to act NOW.

@martinrev21 I'll go with Just Fine and No New Tech needed. 😀

Many factors come into play. Greening has a cooling effect in warm climates, usually minor but enough to offset 39 +/-14.5% of global warming in India (agricultural desert transformation). Greening contributes to significant heating in the Arctic (30%). Higher CO2 levels increase plant water efficiency and drought tolerance. The Sahara is greening already without increased rainfall despite rising temperatures. e360.yale.edu/features/green… The future is looking very green. 🥳

You’re assuming extra heat only means plant stress, but warmer air also carries more water vapour and can intensify rainfall. The Sahara itself was green during past humid periods, with lakes, rivers and aquifers recharged by rainfall. So the real question is regional rainfall and water balance, not heat alone. CO₂, heat tolerance and rainfall all interact.

@DeanH2963 @martinrev21 I can't see half of Earth's oxygen disappearing for gas releases. The Siberian Traps included large-scale coal fires. Great Dying is the wrong analogy anyhow. Capitanian and rainforest collapse were beginning. x.com/WormsofWrath/s…

@martinrev21 RCP 8.5 has just been declared at last implausible. This "Great dying" extinction event was orders of magnitude greater than that and with the added bonus of massive magma and toxic gas releases . The facts don't support you prognosis

@akazlev @martinrev21 Who is Al and why do we have to flourish with him?

@martinrev21 Only two possible outcomes

@martinrev21 Based on O2/CO2 ratios we were on the brink of a Capitanian mass extinction and a new Age of Amphibians and Giant Insects. Instead, we are on course to skip that, skip a Great Dying, and move instead into a new Age of Dinosaurs.

@NatureUnedited Mermen are extinct though. 🤨😂

One of the biggest mysteries to me is that orcas are the most efficient predators on Earth, yet they’ve never hunted humans in the wild. Maybe they know something we don’t

@MauriceMur4768 @morshaa1 @BladeoftheS Thanks for the input! Looks like about +5C at 1300ppm shown on this graph where heat tolerance is +9C. That's global while non-Arctic gains are about half that, proving no problem for hot region plants at all.

The logarithmic CO₂ table Baseline 290 ppm and how long will it take to get there. 
 CO₂ doubling → about 3.7–3.9 W/m² extra forcing → about 1.1–1.2°C direct warming before feedbacks. Warming is about 2.49°C per CO₂ doubling with feedbacks Amount of CO₂ and how long it would take to get there. At +2.1 ppm/year CO₂ levelRelationship to 290 ppmApprox temp rise 290 ppmbaseline0.00°C 350 ppm 1.21 times = 0.67°C 420 ppm 1.45 times =1.33°C 428.5 ppm today times =1.40°C 480 ppm 1.66 times =1.81°C 480 ppm ~25 years 580 ppm 2 times =2.49°C 580 ppm ~71 years 700 ppm. 2.41 times =3.16°C 700 ppm ~128 years 870 ppm 3 times =3.94°C 870 ppm ~208 years 1,160 ppm4 times =4.97°C 1,160 ppm ~345 years 2,320 ppm 8 times =7.46°C 2,320 ppm ~892 years CO₂ warming is logarithmic. Using a rough no-feedback figure of ~2.49°C per doubling, 290→580 ppm gives about +2.49°C. To get another +2.49°C, you don’t add another 290 ppm you must double again to ~1,160 ppm. Each extra ppm does less than the last.

@MykhailoRohoza Yet more people believe the country is headed in the right direction - 36% - than at any point in the Biden and Obama presidencies.

On the 500th day of his second term, Donald Trump reached one of the lowest approval ratings of his presidency. A poll conducted by YouGov and The Economist found that 35% of Americans approve of his job performance, while 60% disapprove. According to the poll, no U.S. president has recorded such a low approval rating at this point in office.

@ecoolafartist Fine, discuss it all you want but never tax, mandate, or impose anything. Obama was an Indonesian Muslim bent on destroying America just like the rest of them. Still is.

Die Wissenschaft ist einig. Wir sollten diskutieren wie wir handeln, nicht ob wir handeln müssen.

@timruss2 This is what unchecked mass migration brought in. DUH.

It was found in Texas. It destroys cattle too. It was still in other countries and the US put in programs to ensure it wouldn’t enter the US again. 60 years of success. Until Trump cut the funding, and now it’s back in the US. Are we Great Again yet?

The 50% gone in 30 years is a dubious, strictly measurement-based assessment. It encompasses bicarbonate deposition, weathering, lumber, and other sinks. The immediate sinks are plants (30%) and oceans (25%). Plant abundance adjusts quickly. Ocean surface levels mirror atmospheric levels, adjusting instantly. Plant sinks are likely to saturate when plant area is maximized and atmospheric CO2 levels reach between 1000 and 1800ppm (maximum growth). Nothing in the atmosphere is truly 'excess' until maximum plant growth levels are exceeded. Ocean sinks can not saturate below 1,000,000 ppm. There is no known limit to the amount of carbon which can be removed through weathering (soil deposits), rock weathering (chemical aqueous deposits), and deep water deposition.

@WormsofWrath @CAGWfool @medialens You are still confusing immediate cycling with net atmospheric accumulation. The 50% gone in 30 years figure only applies to the initial, rapid exchange with surface sinks. Those sinks saturate, the remaining 20-35% of that excess stays in the atmosphere for thousands of years.

As discussed in our alert (below), it's so easy to debunk these comments now: This is the classic 'the climate has always changed' argument. It's a favorite because it relies on a slice of truth to smuggle in a massive misconception. Saying humans can't cause climate change because climate change happened before humans is like a detective looking at a burned-down house and saying, "Well, forest fires caused by lightning have been happening a wee bit longer than matches, so this arsonist couldn't have done it." Climate scientists have never claimed that the climate was static before the industrial revolution. In fact, understanding past climate change is exactly how we know greenhouse gases are so dangerous today. medialens.substack.com/p/invitation-t…

'Excess' does change some things, particularly accelerating growth in the Arctic and hot, dry areas. The additional heat melts ice as do trees growing over frozen tundra, stabilizing warmer conditions. The added CO2 raises maximum photosynthesis temperatures 5C while non-Arctic temperatures are up only 0.7C and plants very much like that.

@WormsofWrath @CAGWfool @medialens Carbon added to land life isn't permanently locked away. It cycles back via respiration, decay, and wildfires.Excess Means Disruption: It is too much, because that 45% accumulation has trapped enough heat to alter global climate stability, regardless of whether plants like it.

Carbon added to land life is permanently locked away proportional to CO2 levels - not specifically but collectively. Potential plant growth has increased 52%. Actual growth and actual plant mass have both increased 25% globally. That's about 30% of the fossil fuel carbon used in this period. That's permanently or until CO2 levels fall.