Let’s Stop with the Carbon Con Already

SellwynThumbby Selwyn Duke1/5/17
The side that defines the vocabulary of a debate, wins the debate. So we could ask: as we fight the global-warming scam, why are we using the language of the scammers? It’s harder to combat “carbon” taxes, “carbon” credits and callow “carbon” appeals if we accept that at issue is “carbon.”

Calling CO2 “carbon” is like calling H2O “hydrogen.” Carbon is about as useful to a plant aspiring to photosynthesize as a tank of hydrogen is to a dehydrated man in a desert. Carbon dioxide and carbon are not the same thing any more than a fox and foxglove are the same thing.

If chemical formulas are meaningless and one element or atom between friends can be ignored, try inhaling copious amounts of CO. It’s also “carbon,” being in fact more “carboney” ratio-wise than CO2. But carbon monoxide is poisonous to fauna and flora while carbon dioxide is plant food, which is why botanists pump it into greenhouses.

Likewise, would you like some chlorine with your food, sir? Sodium is poisonous; chlorine is poisonous. Combine the two — NaCl — and you have table salt. Chemistry is our friend.

It would be nice to think that the carbon crew is just being friendly and familiar. But not only would calling CO2 Mr. Dioxide be just as inaccurate, there’s clearly an agenda here. Carbon, the primary element in coal, conjures up images of spewing sky-blackening soot into the air. It’s a dark brand of marketing.

In fact, I challenge those crafting “carbon tax” bills to call CO2 “carbon” in their legislation’s text. They won’t because I suspect it wouldn’t stand up in court, as factories don’t actually emit carbon. The alarmists will either specify carbon dioxide or define, tendentiously, what “carbon” means for the “purposes of the bill.”

Of course, carbon isn’t really a villain, either. It’s the fourth-most abundant element in the universe, and man is known as a “carbon-based life form.” Given the latter, if extra atoms and elements and how they react with each other can be ignored when formulating labels and definitions, we could say that Al Gore’s birth was a carbon emission.

Honest people should reclaim the language and reboot the debate by rejecting “carbon” talk. As for those knowingly using the term for propaganda purposes, they should have a huge carbon footprint placed firmly on their carbon-based posteriors.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com • (716 views)

This entry was posted in Essays. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Let’s Stop with the Carbon Con Already

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    One could consider “carbon” simply a shortened version of “carbon dioxide”, but one should always be careful about assuming decent motives from liberals, given their preoccupation with political advantage. This is especially true given how many PC circumlocutions are longer (often much longer) than normal speech.

  2. Anniel says:

    I suspect you are correct, algore’s birth was nothing more than a carbon emission. And those carbon based posteriors are sore tempting.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Carbon emission
    Elemental to all life
    Notably Snowflakes

  4. Steve Lancaster says:

    It doesn’t matter what the facts are its how it makes you feel. Thus, carbon in any form is bad–while loving the earth is good. Cutting down trees for homes is bad–hugging trees and not allowing the necessary logging to keep the dead wood cleared is bad.

    We are living in a Winston Smith world

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      One of the amazing things about the whole carbon-dioxide/global warming thing is how feelings can be so easily manipulated. Environmental hysteria is certainly a new kind of (always popular) apocalyptic view. And it might, in some regards, be seen as a human excess in the legitimate concern to be a good steward of the earth. But it is clearly first and foremost a function of propaganda, which starts in Kindergarten now, if not earlier. Emotions and feelings can be molded.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        But it is clearly first and foremost a function of propaganda, which starts in Kindergarten now, if not earlier. Emotions and feelings can be molded.

        Quote attributed to Saint Ignatius Loyola-

        Give me the child for the first seven years and I will give you the man.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        The late Michael Crichton pointed out the many similarities between Gorescam and a religion. The apocalyptic nature of the former was one of them, I think. The alarmists are really very medieval, with the equivalents of sumptuary laws and tindulgences (another of the religious aspects) and a bastardized version of the flagellants.

  5. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    man is known as a “carbon-based life form.

    As organic chemistry and life is carbon based, one wonders if some of these Leftists are not subconsciously expressing their desire for the end of human life on this planet. Of course, we should not forget the real drivers of the AGW movement, i.e. power and money.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      And as long as we’re getting technical, man is no more carbon-based than the letters in your morning newspaper are ink-based. Carbon (or ink) is merely the means to convey information. Carbon itself can be seen to contain absolutely nothing life-like on its own.

      What I continue to be amazed at is the fundamental religious impulses the Left and Environmental Wackos have infused into carbon dioxide. It’s astounding how kooky they are.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      There’s a reason why I like to suggest that climate alarmists eliminate their own personal emissions of carbon dioxide before telling us what to do.

  6. David Ray says:

    Has Al Jazeera paid off Al Goreza yet? I hear the compulsive little liar is having to sue his oil producing business buddies for the rest.

    Lets have a contest. Which lie is Al Gore’s most painful?
    (My vote is how he and Tipper inspired “Love Story”. Such a shame that fairy tale romance came to a tragic end.)

Leave a Reply

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