It Has To Be Coincidence, Doesn’t It?

It happens too often to be coincidence, one could say. I’m not saying it, but it does occur quite frequently I have noticed. I use an unusual phrase in one of my posts and then a few days to a week or so later I see that phrase showing up in other related writers pieces. I guess it is just a bit uncanny. Do I (actually, dare I ask this question?) somehow hook into some form of universal thought streams, as premonitions? Nah… couldn’t be, could it?

Now something else has turned up that is quite intriguing. In my post dated Dec 12, 2023, just three days ago, I wrote about human breath being what climate alarmists might call “contributing to climate change”. That is nonsense really, and I did not say that – let me be quite clear. Humans contribute very little to climate change and we are kidding ourselves to think that we do (I mentioned that as well, derisively, in relation to our penchant to casting the blame for our own personal emissions onto the cattle we raise). What I did say was that we breathe out around 40 times the amount of CO₂ that we breathe in. Which we do, except it is not all in the form of CO₂. We breath out x10 the volume of CO₂ breathed in. The other x30 is in the form of methane (CH₄) – which degrades over time to about x20 its volume of CO₂ – contributing to the x40 I mentioned. But that is not all. I also mentioned that we fart methane. We also belch methane, and neither of those processes are part of the breathing cycle. They produce just extra CO₂ – which I did not directly mention.

So, I believe I was more or less correct, just incomplete. But it is still a negligible amount, and does not form a climate risk – whether we would like it to or not. And CO₂ can still not be referred to as a ‘greenhouse gas’. Methane may be a ‘greenhouse gas’ (not because it of its association with CO₂) because it is often emitted in large amounts by geophysical events at the same time as temperatures are rising – though not ubiquitously so. Degrading as it does, over time, into massive amounts of CO₂ the appearance is that CO₂ is acting as a coolant – since, as there becomes less methane in the atmosphere (through degradation), the atmosphere tends to cool. Though I assume that is more to do with the lower amount of the source of heating than the presence of a coolant. But who knows – man hasn’t been around long enough to witness a complete one of these events yet, and in any case they occur over many generations of humanity or millions of years. We have only been around for most of the warming period of the current cycle (it began around 13,000 BCE). But we will soon see the beginning of the cooling phase in our time or the geologically near future, and this usually takes over 100,000 years to complete. So, no-one alive just now is likely to notice much difference in their own lifetime. But it is interesting to notice that happening. This, the rising and falling of methane levels, is part of the reason that the planet experiences such periodic warming-cooling cycles.

But all that is by the by and not what today’s ‘coincidence’ is about. As I said, I wrote that piece on December 12. Today, December 15, I was quite surprised to see not one but two articles from entirely different sources talking about the role of human breath and how it should not be minimised in relation to climate change. How curious? I don’t recollect seeing one such article previously.

I am not going to comment on them other than to say it is all complete nonsense, and should be be disregarded. Here are the articles…

First from RT: ‘Breathing contributes to global warming – study’ – December 14, 2023

Then the Daily Mail: ‘Now scientists say BREATHING is bad for the environment: Gases we exhale contribute to 0.1% of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions’ – December 14, 2023

Has someone been reading my blog? Is my writing becoming worthy of contradiction? Or am I being paranoid?

---