February 5, 2024

The Real Health Hazards : Petro & synthetic chemicals : the sensitizers : bioaccumulative ones : the PAH's : PB residue ... and all the Hysteria.

Geometric marvels can be found in the smallest places.

Let's review:  CO2 is the big bad wolf of a con artist's design.  In reality, it is the unlocking key to photosynthesis which enables life to flourish throughout Planet Earth.  It's radiative forcing is a mild 3.7 watts per meter squared.  It's presence in the atmosphere no greater than 0.042%.  In contrast, Nitrogen is 78%, Oxygen is 21%, and Argon is .93%.  Those three elements, alone, take-up 99.93% of the Troposphere's space.

In addition, CO2 exists in three individual types of vibration modes.  In one of those modes of vibration, CO2 is incapable of retaining infrared heat.  And in the vastest regions of the oceans (9,000 ft downward for the Atlantic, Pacific, & Indian Ocean --- and 7,000 ft downward for Southern Ocean) CO2 is incapable of heating the ocean's water, which, at those depths, is a constant 39F.   

Plus, tremendous storms and long droughts have occurred throughout the past, when CO2 levels were much lower than today's 421 ppm.  These weather catastrophes occurred when CO2 was 280, 300, and 320 ppm.  

In fact, Al Gore predicted that hurricanes would get much worse in the years to come.  Well, here's a newsflash:  Ever since record-keeping on cyclone wind speed began, the number of Category 5 hurricanes to make landfall in the United States was a grand total of . . .  4.  Four.  No more than four.  Al Gore was significantly wrong.  They were the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935, Hurricane Camille (1969), Andrew in 1992, and Michael, in 2018.  Therefore, only ONE Category 5 hurricane made landfall in the United States, since Al Gore's 2006 movie which predicted many more higher-windspeed hurricanes.  Gore was once again wrong.

==>    "If you are an environmentally conscientious person, and if you are radically set on diagnosing the Earth's health, based on CO2 levels, then you are a dog chasing its tail.  So, if you want to end the production of all gasoline and diesel fuel, on account of CO2, then you have been hideously deceived, by very unconscionable people who want to use the youth's absence of experience, to make a lot of money." 

===> "However, if you want to end the common use of the gasoline and diesel engines, on account of their proliferation of petrochemicals and similar antagonists to health, then you are in the correct lane.  In fact, you're at least half right to two-thirds right.   You need to understand the concept of filtration.  Secondly, you need to understand that any transition must be done in phases, and NOT all at once.  Plus, the corporations being phased-out must be given accommodations to also change into the replacement technology."

You exhale about 2.3 lbs of carbon dioxide per day.  Now, I don't see your classrooms catching on fire.  I don't see your home burning down.  In fact, you exhale CO2 at least 6 million times a year.  So, what are you going to do about leaving behind a carbon footprint every time you exhale?  Are you going to stop breathing?  Or are you going to realize that you're being punked by scientists looking for lucrative taxpayer dollar funding?

Now remember, if you are overjoyed over the $370 BILLION "climate assistance" that the Congress appropriated to the Michael Mann People, Al Gore People, etc, know that your generation is the one who is going to have to pay for the $370 billion.  When, you get older, you're realize how much of a con game this was ... just like the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction alarm.  Everyone but a handful believed every false thing the media was telling us about post-millennia Iraq.

The New Form of Energy & Transportation.  This will be followed by the rainbow colored unicorn.

Oh, and even at that, there is one big question which first needs to be answered:  Q:  What is going to be the replacement energy?  

~Wind, so that birds can get axed by windmill blades, by the million?  Wind dies down very often.  

~Would the replacement energy be Sunlight?  Well, clouds and night time are an impediment to solar energy.  

~How about nuclear?  Uhhhm, are you aware of the half-life issue?  And even if you go nuclear, there is preparation time which needs to be done by complete professionals, and NOT by well-meaning laymen volunteers.

So, you want electric cars everywhere?  Well, do you know how much electricity today comes from the burning of coal, and how much more coal must be burnt to have a highway full of electric cars?  And, are you aware of the amount of mercury released when coal is burnt?  This would mean necessary filtration technology.   That takes time.  In fact, if you want nothing but electric, then the new infrastructure to support it will be beyond expensive.


BTW, natural gas is the way to go. ✅✅✅ Methane only exists at 1.9 parts per million.

Only a congress full of imbeciles would resist the fuller implementation of this technology.


The other form of excellent energy is Tidal Energy.  This is literally high-tide water power.  It would require a new infrastructure which would be moderately expensive, and and and it can only serve coastline populations where hurricane season isn't too busy.   So, this matter of replacement energy is something that takes time and mature individuals; NOT fanatical activists or anti-activists.

If you're not informed about basic tide science, click here:  A Tutorial on Ocean Tides

Now, CO2 is NOT going to cause the world to end in 12 years .... or in twelve hundred years.  You are being duped by some of the lowest intelligence con artists yet to come on to the American scene.  BTW, the American scene included the United Nations, being that it's headquartered in NYC.  The trick is for these con artists to create a sense of urgency amongst their potential customers.  It's all a matter of hysterics.  Today's climate con artists think that you are stupid and easy to dupe.

At this point, you need to understand that CO2 is NOT the grand enemy.  It's your friend.  Your danger is the glut of synthetic chemicals in today's society.  That's the sick joke of society.  Let us go to the original starting point of this post:

Years ago, there were  assumptions, and then insinuations, that people presenting the counterpoint on the climate issue were payed-off by Big Oil.  The accusers were first-generation-thoroughly-obsessed.  

These accusers were the ones who used to call their monster-in-the-closet Global Warming.  Then, in the middle of the SIXTEEN YEAR warming pause (1999-2016), they were told to call their closet monster the vague title, "Climate Change."

None the less, the Thoroughly Obsessed became emboldened without evidence to be so.  As an example, a less-than-stellar guy walked up to a debate table where sat the Princeton-associated inventor of the Sodium Star.  The phantom activist acted absolutely assured that the Princeton scholar was in the deep pockets of Big Oil.  He had ZERO evidence, being that none existed.  But, he was utterly assured of himself.  Arrogant buffoon.

Well, here's another clue for you all, aside of the fact that the Walrus was Paul (Beatle's Magical Mystery Tour reference, as a satirical joke):

Big Oil was more than willing to concede to the extremely asinine assertion that CO2 was destroying the planet.  This is because Big Oil wanted to protect its lucrative petrochemicals which don't grow on trees.  So, Big Oil was willing to use CO2 as a diversionary tactic ... as a smokescreen ... so done with the hope that the Public would forget about the petrochemicals that really can hurt you.  As a result, the thoroughly obsessed "climate activists" who believed themselves to be the most enlightened beings on Earth got easily duped.

The Necessary Thesis Statement

The true problem with the present environment is the plurality of petrochemicals & synthetic chemicals which flood society and which are associated with ~asthma, ~endocrine disruption, ~urticaria, ~digestive problems, ~chemical allergy sensitization and chemical allergy reactions, ~irritant-induced reactions, ~nervous system inflammation, ~kidney problems, and . . . . . .  ~~~cancer.  CO2 does NOT cause cancer.  In fact . . .

. . . There are several types of asthmatic conditions.  One is known as Small Airways Disease, where the asthmatic actually "traps air" within himself.  One sign is that a stethoscope will detect wheezing at his sides (bi-lateral wheezing), but not on the front of his chest.  Plus, such patients have "prolonged expiratory phases." They exhale exceedingly.  Well, these Small Airways Disease patients do wonderfully in air-spaces that have elevated levels of CO2 ... as long as there are no airborne allergens present, to trigger their asthma.

All in all, CO2 is your friend.  It is the key to Photosynthesis, and therefore greenery.  So, if you really do want to go green, then increase the CO2 levels ... without simultaneously increasing harmful gases such as sulfur dioxide ...  polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons ...  black mold mycotoxins  ... volatile organic compounds which very effectively trigger asthma ... and anything that appears in the Toxic Release Inventory.  

Workplace chemicals are of importance, because of the repeated exposure to them, followed by the process of sensitization which has occurred in a percentage of workers.  Example:

Perchloroethylene:  It's used in the dry cleaning business.  It can be an eventual nightmare for the employees of that industry.  But, what about the customers?  ANS: Nowhere nearly as much, if at all.  In workplace cases, it's a matter of sensitization, as opposed to toxicity.  For the record, there is a difference between being poisoned and being allergic.

None the less, the really dangerous chemical compounds are known as biopersistent. 

                                    See:  Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxic Chemicals 

Another Example:

One of the major ingredients of combustible fuel production is none other than ===>  Benzene.  Ambient benzene levels have been linked to the rise of certain cancers, as far as goes correlation.  This was affirmed statistically in Western India, for starters. 

Plus, certain types of cancer have high rates amongst those Canadians who live in the wind direction of the Alberta Tar Sand Fields.  Yet, who amongst the "Woke, Going-Green People" mentions this? ... or cares about this? ... or even knows about this?  And then comes the other chemicals to which the "woke" people seem absolutely clueless.

Qualifying Statement of one type of pollution:

Diesel Particulates (micrometer-sized grains):  Aside of coming from the soot and ash of incompletely burnt fuel, diesel particulates are also the result of engine part ABRASION.  If they are larger than 10 micrometers, then they easily find their ways to the ground, due to their weight.  If they are as small as 2.5 micrometers, they find their way to your lungs, sometimes for six consecutive months.  

This is one example which shows that the Al-Gore-induced obsession with CO2 is an utter waste of time that takes away the time needed for addressing true pollution.  Without CO2 ... and without chlorophyll ... and without bees ... life of Earth eventually ceases.   CO2 is NOT pollution. 

You have to "get with it," in life.  The CO2 obsession is a money-grabbing con game.  The synthetic chemical issue is what needs to be addressed ... and what needs your help.  Quit being Michael Mann's dupe.  He NEVER won any Nobel Prize, and Al Gore did NOT win the Nobel Science Prize.

In fact, you need to talk to guys/gals who worked outdoors for the past 30 years ... even if it were on-and-off employment.  You have to quit relying on "doctored" graphs that "hide the decline."  (That is done by "smoothing out" a data set, in order to remove the jagged edges of a graph.)

Concerning the infamous (and intelligence-insulting) hockey stick graph that portrayed the Years 1000 to 1999, the decline was hidden in the background - - - in the "bar of uncertainty" --- in the "error margin" or "error bar."  The background of the original 1999 climate hockey stick graph is super jagged.  Anyone with an open mind instantly perceives it.  The Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age are in that "Error Bar."  Let us resume with the topic at hand:

Are you aware of the thousands of chemicals used in modern society?  I would set forth the approximate number, but I don't even believe it . . . without first doing hours of fact checking.  Well, whatever be the true number, it's irresponsibly high, and it's the reason for the:

Frank  R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, as well as the 2016 laws thereof.

   See:  Key provisions of the Lautenberg Safe Chemicals Act of 2021.

   There is : OSHA guidance for hazard determination of chemicals

   Also take a look at:   Chemical respiratory allergens