https://twitter.com/tntradiolive/status/1737273943671910502
https://climatechangedispatch.com/study-says-human-breathing-is-worsening-global-warming/
BY ERIC UTTER
A new government-funded study out of Britain, conducted by scientists at the U.K. Center for Ecology and Hydrology, purports to show that “human breathing is contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.”
Therefore, the study authors are urging “caution in the assumption that emissions from humans are negligible.” [emphasis, links added]
The peer-reviewed study published Wednesday in the Public Library of Science’s journal PLOS One investigated greenhouse gas emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath, which allegedly “contribute to global warming.”
Well, there it is! I knew it was coming! Are you serious about stopping global warming? Well, then, just stop breathing!
What a boon to depopulationists! Turns out “we are not the ones we have been waiting for”; we are the problem!
Of course, some of us suck up more air — and are bigger blowhards — than others. You know who you are. Al, Greta, John…?
Gee, I wish we had a smarter God, one who didn’t design humans (and most animals) to respirate! And then have the nerve to say, “Be fruitful and multiply!”
The implementation of “statist interventions” and “unreliable energy alternatives” isn’t enough.
So if you truly care about the planet, please go ahead and make the ultimate sacrifice.
Do it for the scientists who conducted the study. Do it for Al, Greta, and John. Do it for Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum (WEF). I’m sure they will thank you for it.
Read more at American Thinker
They might even breathe a sigh of relief.
#
Study dissects breathing’s climate impact by race & gender! Finds ‘Human respiration has a net warming effect on the atmosphere’ – Claims ‘African populations more likely’ to warm the Earth than ‘Asian populations’ with their breath & burps & claims women warm the planet more than men! – Via
Humans “contribute to global warming” by exhaling greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide 16 times per minute –
Africans are reported to more likely to warm the Earth with their breath and burps than other ethnic groups, and that women (38%) are more likely than men (25%) to be MPs (‘methane producers’) too.
“It has been reported in previous studies that region of birth or ethnicity is a strong indicator of the likelihood to be an MP, with African populations much more likely to be MPs than Asian populations.”
“The results reported in this study are consistent with most previous studies that found a higher percentage of MPs in females (38%) when compared to males (25%).”
#
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/12/16/the-absurdity-of-measuring-breath-for-climate-change/
In a recent study published in PLOS ONE, titled “Measurements of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath and the development of UK scale emissions,” researchers have embarked on a quest that epitomizes the absurdity of current climate change discourse. This study, focusing on the emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from human breath, is not only a glaring example of scientific overreach but also a worrying indicator of the lengths to which climate alarmism is willing to go.
The study’s objective to investigate emissions from human breath in the UK population is fundamentally flawed. It operates under the assumption that these emissions are significant enough to warrant detailed analysis and inclusion in national greenhouse gas inventories. This premise is laughable at best, considering the minuscule percentage these emissions contribute to the overall greenhouse gas emissions.
The methodology employed in the study is questionable. Collecting 328 breath samples from 104 volunteers hardly constitutes a representative sample of the UK population. Furthermore, the study’s reliance on such a small sample size to draw conclusions about national-scale emissions is a classic case of over-extrapolation.
The study’s findings that 31% of participants were methane producers and that all participants emitted nitrous oxide are presented without adequate context. These results are portrayed as significant, yet they fail to consider the broader environmental impact. The fact that these emissions are stated contribute a mere 0.05% and 0.1% to the UK’s total emissions of CH4 and N2O, respectively, well below any margin of error in “national inventories” renders these findings insignificant.
The idiocy of this study and the entire genre of human behavior studies, whether it be meat eating, or owning pets, diverts attention from more pressing environmental issues and misallocates resources that could be better used elsewhere. This approach is indicative of a climate change narrative that is increasingly detached from reality. This study dangerously overstates the impact of human biological processes on climate change. By attributing environmental consequences to the act of breathing, it sets a precedent for viewing every aspect of human existence through the lens of environmental impact. This perspective is not only scientifically unsound but also potentially leads to dehumanizing policies.
The study, and the subsequent media coverage, lack a rational discourse on climate change. There is a conspicuous absence of critical analysis or questioning of the study’s relevance and implications. This omission is a testament to the current state of climate change discussions, where sensationalism often trumps scientific rigor.
The obsession with carbon, its compounds, and greenhouse gases as seen in this study’s focus on CH4 and N2O, is a misplaced concern. It reflects a narrow view of the complex and dynamic nature of Earth’s climate system. This fixation on carbon emissions is a distraction from more holistic environmental strategies.
The implications of this study for policy making are extremely concerning. It represents a step towards justifying intrusive and overreaching policies based on negligible environmental impacts. Such an approach is not only impractical but also poses a threat to personal freedoms which continue to be under attack daily and the dignity of human life.
In conclusion, this study is emblematic of the absurd lengths to which climate alarmism has gone. It represents a worrying trend in the climate debate, where even the most basic human functions are scrutinized for their environmental impact.
There is a dire need for a return to scientific sanity and rational discourse in addressing environmental issues. The path to a prosperous future does not lie in fear-mongering or exaggeration but in reasoned and rational scientific inquiry. I know we can’t expect that from the current crop of ideologically captured academics, but we must not stop working toward weeding out the rot in these institutions, even though it will likely take decades.
#
Breathing Causes Global Warming –
“Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming. “
#
Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs on breathing/climate study: Excerpt: The peer-reviewed paper is “Measurements of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath and the development of UK scale emissions” by Ben Dawson and other Experts in PLoS ONE.
One of two of these Experts have, it seems, some training in chemistry. So pay close attention to these sure-to-be accurate words from the Abstract: “Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming.” Now called “climate change.”
I mean, who knew?
These Experts gathered “104 volunteers” and put the scientific method to work. They collected breath samples from these volunteers.
My favorite sentence in the whole paper is this: “The percentage of methane producers (MPs) identified in this study was 31%.”
Methane producers sounds like womb possessors to my ears. Oh, because somebody’s going to ask, yes: the word flatus does make an appearance. Not cows. Human flatus.
Amusingly, “Females (38%) were more likely to be MPs than males (25%),” which means that when the culling comes, women go first. And blacks. Yes: “African populations [are] much more likely to be MPs…”
Our Experts took at stab at estimating the amount of “climate change”-making breath from all the humans in the UK, and came to some number of tons of carbon dioxide per annum. They did not perform this same service for the more numerous other animals. So we must classify this research as preliminary.
I don’t know about you, my dear friends, but the first question that came to my mind when I read this breathtaking research was: how could people be this stupid?
It has been known for quite a while that man exhales CO2. The amounts were also on the books. Ask any doctor who graduated before the woke struck medical schools.
You can’t stop people from breathing. And you can’t stop more people from breathing more, it being the policy of the UK to replace the natives with “migrants”. All of whom breathe.
Could it be, could it really be, that these academic Experts want to reduce the surplus population to cut down breathing and save us from the ravages of global warming. Now called “climate change”?
Maybe, at some level. Imaging the tortuous death of our enemies is always a fun pastime, especially among academics. But a much more likely explanation is the deep desire to be thought profound and important.
All academics suffer this terrible disease. The need to produce “research” guarantees this affliction.
Global warming, now called “climate change”, is big. No bigger area of science. Regardless of your training, if you’re not active in this area who are you? Nobody, that’s who.
Before I let you go: our Experts forgot photosynthesis. How could they forget photosynthesis? Don’t know. But nearly every Expert does.
#
Now scientists say your breathing might affect the climate – By Jo Nova – The new study shows that humans are generating methane, just like the awful Planet Wrecking Cows. But the truth is that all mammals have probably always produced some methane, and that includes the massive herds of herbivores that used to roam the Earth, when the climate was “perfect”. The new paper in PLOS One assessed 104 people and found 31% were methane producers like the cows. They calculated the 67 million homo sapiens in the United Kingdom increase the national methane and N2O emissions by as much as… golly, 0.05 – 0.1%. (Despite this trivial and predictable outcome, somehow, they had no trouble getting grants or getting published for studying methane-angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin). The main thing we learn from this paper is how easy it is to get money to study climate inanities compared to how hard it is to get grants to audit the IPCC or investigate the sun’s role in climate change. If belches of methane can cause a climate crisis, how, we marvel, did the planet not boil away when 30 million bison roamed the plains of North America? Why was the climate ideal (apparently) when the vast herds of Wildebeest roamed Africa, and Aurochs stretched across Europe? Turns out nearly all mammals produce methane – In 2020 Clauss et al reviewed the research on and found that it’s not just cows and camels that produce methane, but carnivorous reptiles, ostriches, kangaroos, sea cows and rodents, pretty much everything they looked at. Indeed, they conclude it’s… prudent to assume that all mammals harbour some methanogens, and produce some CH4, until consistently proven otherwise.”
#
Humans may be fueling global warming by breathing: new study – Those who did not exhale methane in their breath still probably released the gas “ion flatus,” the study said, referring to burping and flatulence. “We report only emissions in breath in this study, and flatus emissions are likely to increase these values significantly. – The study, led by Dr. Nicholas Cowan from the UK Center for Ecology and Hydrology, involved 104 adult volunteers and found that nitrous oxide was breathed out by every one of them, while 31 percent exhaled methane. Those who did not exhale methane in their breath still probably released the gas “ion flatus,” the study said, referring to burping and flatulence. “We report only emissions in breath in this study, and flatus emissions are likely to increase these values significantly, though no literature characterizes these emissions for people in the UK,” the research team wrote. “Assuming that livestock and other wild animals also exhale emissions of N2O, there may still be a small but significant unaccounted-for source of N2O emissions in the UK, which could account for more than 1% of national-scale emissions,” they added.
#
Study dissects breathing’s climate impact by race & gender! Finds ‘Human respiration has a net warming effect on the atmosphere’ – Claims ‘African populations more likely’ to warm the Earth than ‘Asian populations’ with their breath & burps & claims women warm the planet more than men! – Via
Humans “contribute to global warming” by exhaling greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide 16 times per minute –
Africans are reported to more likely to warm the Earth with their breath and burps than other ethnic groups, and that women (38%) are more likely than men (25%) to be MPs (‘methane producers’) too.
“It has been reported in previous studies that region of birth or ethnicity is a strong indicator of the likelihood to be an MP, with African populations much more likely to be MPs than Asian populations.”
“The results reported in this study are consistent with most previous studies that found a higher percentage of MPs in females (38%) when compared to males (25%).”
#
New Study Now Claims We Humans Heat The Atmosphere Just By Exhaling – Finds ‘Human respiration has a net warming effect on the atmosphere’ – By – “Where hydrocarbon chains (food types) are consumed by humans and turned into CH4 [methane] … global warming potential is no longer neutral, and human respiration has a net warming effect on the atmosphere.” – Prada et al., 2023
According to a new study, humans “contribute to global warming” by exhaling greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide 16 times per minute. “Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming. These emissions from humans are not well understood and are rarely quantified in global greenhouse gas inventories.”
Like bovine populations, humans are referred to as “methane producers” (MPs), respiring and burping this potent greenhouse gas simply by existing. (Concerns about methane’s global warming potential are so significant that New Zealand is imposing a “methane tax” on the nation’s cows, as these MP animals are heating up the planet with their burps.)
The MP (methane producers) determination for humans unfortunately includes some culturally controversial claims (that could be interpreted as racist or sexist). The authors of this study claim that Africans are reported to more likely to warm the Earth with their breath and burps than other ethnic groups, and that women (38%) are more likely than men (25%) to be MPs too.
“It has been reported in previous studies that region of birth or ethnicity is a strong indicator of the likelihood to be an MP, with African populations much more likely to be MPs than Asian populations.”
“The results reported in this study are consistent with most previous studies that found a higher percentage of MPs in females (38%) when compared to males (25%).”
Humans also add CO2 – another greenhouse gas – to the air each time we exhale, and thus our breath’s CO2 emissions “contribute to global warming” too. An average of ~44,000 ppm CO2 exits our mouths as we breathe, eliciting a “net warming effect on the atmosphere.”
Perhaps, in due time, there will be a “breathing tax” policy initiative imposed on offending humans.
#
The peer-reviewed study published Wednesday in the Public Library of Science’s journal PLOS One investigated greenhouse gas emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath, which allegedly “contribute to global warming.”
Charles Rotter: The Absurdity of Measuring Breath for Climate Change – In a recent study published in PLOS ONE, titled “Measurements of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath and the development of UK scale emissions,” researchers have embarked on a quest that epitomizes the absurdity of current climate change discourse. This study, focusing on the emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from human breath, is not only a glaring example of scientific overreach but also a worrying indicator of the lengths to which climate alarmism is willing to go. … The methodology employed in the study is questionable. Collecting 328 breath samples from 104 volunteers hardly constitutes a representative sample of the UK population. … The fact that these emissions are stated contribute a mere 0.05% and 0.1% to the UK’s total emissions of CH4 and N2O, respectively, well below any margin of error in “national inventories” renders these findings insignificant.
#
Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs on breathing/climate study: “The first question that came to my mind when I read this breathtaking research was: how could people be this stupid? It has been known for quite a while that man exhales CO2. The amounts were also on the books. Ask any doctor who graduated before the woke struck medical schools. You can’t stop people from breathing. … Could it be, could it really be, that these academic Experts want to reduce the surplus population to cut down breathing and save us from the ravages of global warming. Now called ‘climate change’?”
Humans Are Fueling Global Warming By Just Breathing, Study Claims – For the study, the researchers investigated emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in human breath from 104 adult volunteers in the UK.
