CO2 Level Hysteria-Hyperbole: Repeating Meme

This one is well implanted so it’s easy enough to reactivate.

“Highest in Human History”

April 2022 saw levels of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere tip over 420 parts per million (ppm) — that’s the highest level ever recorded in human history. 

Oh, really? In human history? That’s HYPERBOLE. Exaggeration used to evoke and/or emphasis strong feeling and create lasting impressions. Or “exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally”

Read almost to the very last paragraph- something the vast majority of people don’t bother to do..

There is some seasonal fluctuation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere with the highest monthly mean value occurring in May, just before plants in the northern hemisphere start to suck up large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during the spring growing season. This means May’s monthly average is set to be even higher than April’s. 

(NOAA), with their data showing levels reached 421.33 ppm on May 4, 2022.

If you’ve paid attention to this repetitive meme you will notice it is rehashed yearly, every spring when carbon dioxide is at it’s highest leve in the atmosphere before plants (green plants- trees, grass, etc) begin intaking or sucking up vast quantities of carbon for healthy growth.

Let’s go back to my big tech censored blog

via the webarchive

Let’s talk about SEASONAL CO2 Fluctuations- A Natural Occurrence in the Real World

The Keeling Curve

This shift between the fall and winter months to the spring and summer results in the sawtooth pattern known as the Keeling Curve measurement of atmospheric CO2 such that every year there is a decline in CO2 during months of terrestrial plant photosynthesis and an increase in CO2 in months without large amounts of photosynthesis and with significant decomposition.

 In general, researchers found strong seasonal CO2 fluctuations throughout the Northern Hemisphere and weaker fluctuations near the equator and in the Southern Hemisphere

The station at Barrow, Alaska (71° N latitude), for example, experiences enormous swings in seasonal CO2. In fact, at this site, the daily 400 part-per-million (ppm) benchmark was passed for brief periods starting in 2006

At the opposite end of the spectrum, at the South Pole (90°S latitude) and other sites in the Southern Hemisphere, there is hardly any seasonal variability.

These latitudinal differences in fluctuation are the result of photosynthetic activity by plants. As plants begin to photosynthesize in the spring and summer, they consume CO2 from the atmosphere and eventually use it as a carbon source for growth and reproduction. This causes the decrease in CO2 levels that begins every year in May.

Because photosynthetic activity is the cause of seasonal CO2 swings, regions with more plants will experience larger fluctuations.

Why Does Atmospheric CO2 Peak in May?

Tim Lueker, research scientist in the Scripps CO2 Research Group, only needs one sentence to explain why atmospheric CO2 peaks in May. 

“Springtime comes in May in Siberia,” he says.

And what month is it? Oh yes, it’s May!


First, the significance of spring is related to the shift of terrestrial plants from barren winter branches to bountiful spring leaves. 

After the leaves on the trees drop in the fall, the leaf litter and other dead plant material break down throughout the winter thanks to the hard work of microbes.  During this decomposition, microbes respire and produce CO2, contributing to atmospheric CO2 levels in the process.  Thus over the course of the winter, there is a steady increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. 

In the spring, leaves return to the trees and photosynthesis increases dramatically, drawing down the CO2 in the atmosphere.  This shift between the fall and winter months to the spring and summer results in the sawtooth pattern of the Keeling Curve”

As my report from 5 years ago ended this one will today because it’s the same repetitive nonsense- over and overWhich means I can reuse/recycle the same REAL WORLD SCIENCE.

Isn’t nature amazing! She, like a good mother, is taking care of exactly that which needs to be taken care of ! She’s smarter then any of climate scientist drivel I’ve had the displeasure of reading! Our planet, on it’s own, takes care of itself.  Without our awareness. And sadly without most people even realizing! The fact that the trees, shrubs etc are still without their leaves (never mind drawing CO2 for fruit/seed production etc) implies that they have not yet drawn all the carbon out of the atmosphere that was produced, as food for them, by the previous seasons decomposition- If there was no or low carbon in the atmosphere for all the vegetation there would be little or no vegetation. There would be no new life

Thanks to the high carbon levels in the spring, the new living plant growth is robust and has lovely vibrant colour. The lawn is very nice, green and lush. The CO2 enables all that fresh new growth for the coming season.  Undoubtedly once all the leaves/plants begin their photosynthesis the carbon in the atmosphere will drop- Dramatically. The frenzied headlines are  lies of omission to create fear.  The carbon fluctuation cycle as demonstrated by the Keeling Curve is normal. I really do wish people would inform themselves in order to understand the natural cycles of our home planet!

12 replies on “CO2 Level Hysteria-Hyperbole: Repeating Meme”

“I really do wish people would inform themselves in order to understand the natural cycles of our home planet!“

Or at the very least if Canadians were old (or educated) enough to recall way back when “climate change” was something that happened, reversed itself, and happened again — with no lingering effects except maybe getting snowbound or sunburned — or worse — soaked with rain at Christmas time.

It seems the only difference was that it wasn’t so much exploited, back then, for government control and windfalls for the already filthy rich. Society has not progressed, it has regressed to a time when children were put into workhouses — only now they are commandeered to help spread the propaganda!

Hi Yaya:
I was thinking how it was warmer in the 80’s through to the 90’s and maybe the early 2000.
But for years now, better then a decade it’s been consistently cooler.

We used to be able to get an early start on the garden. For a long time now it’s been a late start particularly for peppers and eggplants.
We’re putting up a greenhouse in hopes of having that extended growing period back again

So much attention is paid to the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This study ( showed that there is a correlation between the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the percentage of protein and carbohydrate in the pollen of Canada Goldenrod.
Little or no attention is paid to the ability of soil to produce protein on which all life on this planet depends. Protein production in the soil depends on the minerals required to produce protein being in the soil in sufficient quantity. When any one or more of these minerals is deficient in the soil, there will be a deficiency in proteins that require that mineral.
Pollen is necessary as the protein source for the larva of bees. A wider ratio of carbohydrate to protein in the pollen therefore will be detrimental to the health of an emerging bumblebee. Several species of bumblebees are experiencing population declines leading to their becoming extirpated in some areas. The bee experts look at all the possible factors, including increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, for this decline except for the variability of soil to produce protein. They are actually resistant to even considering the declining ability of the soil to produce protein as a factor in observed pollinator declines, including bumblebee declines.
It would be easy to produce scientific evidence to determine whether the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere or the ability of the soil to produce protein is the dominant factor in the lowered protein with higher carbohydrate in the pollen. Just have side by side plots growing the same plant with one plot having the soil fertility improved to create a soil with an increased ability to produce protein and then compare the protein levels in the pollen produced on each of the plots.

“Protein production in the soil depends on the minerals required to produce protein being in the soil in sufficient quantity”

Just an opinion, the issue with bees, is likely multi factored.

From the link provided

“Drivers that have been associated with
these declines include, but are not limited to, socioeconomic
concerns (e.g. agricultural intensification), invasive pests
and/or pathogens (e.g. Varroa, Nosema), agrochemicals
(e.g. neonicotinoids) and a decline in genetic diversity of
bee populations and food sources (e.g. over-reliance on one
floral source) [11 –17]. These factors may act singly or in combination to influence bee health”

From the same link, the authors conclude that bees are unable to determine the different protein content of different floral sources.
I have four volumes of papers by the late soil scientist, William Albrecht, PhD, who disagrees with this conclusion. He states that biotic strata other than man are gifted in assaying their food intake according to different plant species and different degrees of rock development into soil on which the plants grow. The minerals in the soil for protein production result from the development of rock into soil.
To illustrate what Albrecht is saying, in 2016 I started a pollinator garden in the backyard of house in Willowdale. I chose Wild Lupine as the primary plant for this garden. The caterpillar of the Karner Blue Butterfly uses this plant as its sole source of food. The Karner Blue Butterfly is extirpated in Ontario. By increasing the ablilty of the soil to produce protein, I wanted to demonstrate that this would be the key to bringing back the Karner Blue Butterfly to Ontario.
I realized, if I was successful in improving the ability of the soil to produce protein, this would be shown in the growth of the lupine and in the response of other pollinators to the plants when they flowered.
The lupine is a legume. Albrecht points out that legumes are indicators of high soil fertility when they are large and are producing large quantities of seed. The same plant grows in High Park in Toronto. The plant looks much different in my garden.
When the lupine flowers in my garden, bumblebees come into the yard to collect the pollen from this single species of plant. Other flowering plants in the yard are ignored while the bumblebees load up on pollen from the lupine and then leave the yard. Legumes have the genetic capability to produce pollen with a superior protein content. Albrecht states, however, this only occurs when the legume is growing in a soil with a high ability to produce protein. In a soil with a low capability of producing protein, the pollen of a legume is no better than that of a non-legume.
If one wanted to save pollinators from population declines perhaps leading to extinction of species, would it make sense to investigate if increasing the ability of soil to create protein might reverse these population declines? So far, butterfly and bumblebee experts seem to see no value in doing such an experiment and none have expressed any interest is seeing what is happening in my project.

Hi Gary

‘From the same link, the authors conclude that bees are unable to determine the different protein content of different floral sources.”

I think bees are able to differentiate more then scientists wish to consider. So I agree with William Albrecht.

Interesting about the lupine ” Legumes have the genetic capability to produce pollen with a superior protein content”
I’m know what Lupines are.
And have gardened as well for 30 years.

The lack of interest is likely attributable to the lack of funding for such studies- All the money is in carbon and connecting everything to “excess carbon”

I hope you keep your project going 🙂

Your comment that funding is the reason for a researcher conducting a study is important. What is called “science” today is mainly funded “science”. This means that the researcher, in order to receive more funding in the future, must slant the study to benefit whoever has funded the study. This is certainly the case in both medicine and agriculture.
By the way, I am self funded so I have no obligation to anyone.


I have no qualms in stating that CO2 is 100% NOT a greenhouse gas, period..

And the facts are always the same here… Our present atmospheric gas makeup is replete of CO2 which is essential for plant life… Without CO2 in a number ABOVE about 150 parts per million, we would face extinction as the plants would basically DIE… But of course nobody talks about this all important factor and we have the retarded ‘climate change’ nutters out there screaming that we should REDUCE CO2 or have it stupidly ‘extracted’ out of our atmosphere by artificial means…

The fact is also that with higher CO2 levels the planet is actually becoming more ‘greener’ as plant life is flourishing.. .Thus with more plants, the more O2 which is their waste product is in our atmosphere for WE to survive..

As far as I am concerned, we should be figuring out even MORE ways to pump CO2 into our atmosphere to assure a thriving plant life across the globe….

“The fact is also that with higher CO2 levels the planet is actually becoming more ‘greener’ as plant life is flourishing”

And that additional greening would increase CO2 during the decay process before the uptake begins anew in the spring.

Which is why every May we get the hysteria about these high levels- the peak before the fall.

Hi Gary:

“What is called “science” today is mainly funded “science”
I agree with that completely and in fact am going to begin using that term- Funded science.

“By the way, I am self funded so I have no obligation to anyone.”

Like myself and this site- self funded.

btw: William Albrecht, PhD.. I’m going to have a read, if possible, into his work. If you have a link you’d like to provide please do?

Hi Penny:
Collections of Albrecht’s papers are published in book form by Acres, U.S.A. I have had the first four volumes since the mid 1990’s.
I have made a few files taking examples from these volumes. If you email me, I can send a couple of these files. One shows that declining soil fertility increases damage done by floods, droughts and erosion. The other gives examples of how other species select their nutrition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *