If the science was settled it would be Engineering and the Models would work

In my post yesterday I discussed how more people are now willing to challenge the fraudulent science underpinning climate change policies.  This morning I discovered another article pointing out problems with climate models.  I have touched on this subject before; the models are wrong because their science is wrong.

Governments know damn well that the science is wrong.  That is why they spend so much time stifling debate.  Anyone who questions the “science” is quickly ostracized.  Long time liberal MLA John Rustad was thrown out of the party and smeared by the CBC for making controversial statements about climate change.  Below is one of his “controversial” statements quoted in the CBC hit piece.

“Carbon dioxide is an essential component of life on this planet. It is not a pollution, and that sort of misinformation out there is just ridiculous. It’s ridiculous to do that. It doesn’t serve anybody well,” said Rustad.

That controversial statement is 100% scientifically correct.  CO2 is not a pollutant.  CO2 is not toxic at any level which is a good thing since every time you exhale you have 40,000 ppm in your breath.  The truth is dangerous to government; there is no downside to higher CO2 concentrations.  There is a huge downside to restricting access to energy.  So here is a thought, instead of restricting energy and scientific debate, why don’t we just restrict government?