I wrote this piece as part of correspondence with a London thinker and speaker on the politics of climate issues. 

Dear John,

If I may be excused for doing so, I read into the words you wrote some degree of despair with regard to the politics and pork of carbon. Surely the political carbon ecosystem is messed up but it’s a very young ecosystem and such young systems rarely have any resilience. On the other hand the real carbon ecosystem is very old and very resilient and as my research has shown this past year it has demonstrated the miraculous and nearly instantaneous capacity to heal.

The oceans which are 71% of this planet are of course of which I speak. The means to replenish and restore them and save the oceans and ourselves from the ravages of high and rising CO2 lies within the oceans.  And it is easily done. The really important  politics are about the ecosystem of phytoplankton which are the real living body and soul of this blue planet. The problem is also that to help in this crisis, as my personal mantra holds, this must be done to “save the world, make a little money on the side” in that order. Calling the problem of CO2 climate change is a gambit to make it all about money first and saving the world last.

But back to what the real politics are. The crisis we face is not one of politics in just one sphere, that of government. Even more sinister politics have long been afoot in the scientific sphere from whence this whole knowing of the matter of anthropogenic carbon sprang. The world of science is a most unpleasant guild-like, politically active, and aggressive world. It has its warring sides and those sides have territories they claim and fiercely defend.

Carbon is one of the major battlefields in science. The territory was claimed first by climate physicists and like most physicists, they are the amongst the most arrogant of all scientists. Physics has long been called the Queen of Science and she can most certainly be a bitch. As I look upon and live within the world of science and carbon, I cannot but see and be aghast at the dirty tricks and vehemence, with which the climate physicists defend their turf. This is how the world has come to be misled to believe the crisis of carbon is merely global warming, you know climate physics. Climate physicists are all about their models and he who has the biggest is the alpha dog, right?

I will tell you two stories that illustrate this. Quite some time ago I was at a major scientific conference at which climate change was a big topic. I sat through one whole day in one of the conference rooms where the climate modellers were presenting. One after another they took the podium and told about how cool and potent their hardware and software models were. Since all such models are about the future we all agree that this is science fiction, very good science fiction. But it is soothsaying for sure as the future has not really taken place inside the computers running the models. The sad fact is that the longer one spends with one psyche inside the computer the more one tends to believe that simulated reality is real. But I digress.

The last speaker of the day was a guy from the biggest and best of the national labs in the USA, Lawrence Livermore. There’s a joke at Los Alamos, the other great lab, “What’s the most ultra top secret category at Los Alamos called….Don’t tell Livermore.”

That guy took the podium and promptly started out saying that while he gave credit to all of the other presenters of climate models there was one fact they all had to accept. He had the biggest and best super computer of them all and he’d been given an extraordinary number of hours of machine time in preparation for this conference. The simple fact was his climate model was the biggest of all and everyone else in the room simply had nothing to compare. Whether in the context of the game of competing climate models that he had the biggest was certain, whether that meant he had the best model because of that was almost uncontested. That he was the biggest dick in the room there was no contest what so ever.

The second story comes from when I was back stage in the green room in a speakers venue in New York City with several of the evenings speakers chatting before our TED Talks. With me were two guys who are on either side of me in a scientific sense. One was the man who is most often the professor named as inventing the term geo-engineering, the Al Gore of geo-engineering, and today one of the two guys who Bill Gates allows to write checks on this topic out of his personal check book. The other guy was an elderly professor emeritus who is one of the grand sages of climate modelling, I believe he had as a grad student the Livermore guy in the earlier story.

So backstage in the Green Room we are chatting. I claim that the whole issue of climate change is a diversion from the real issue. The already emitted dose of CO2 of our anthropocene age is in effect a lethal dose of poison for ocean ecosystems. The issue I profess is urgent NOW is that we have to administer the antidote to that first lethal dose before we worry about the administration of the second lethal dose of CO2. Mother Ocean can only die once. The rate at which that first lethal dose of CO2 is going to kill the patient is measured in decades not the centuries for the same CO2 to produce problematic climate change. Problematic climate change is that which will cause the seas to rise, but certainly not faster than we can walk upslope away from centennially paced rising tide. I also profess that the antidote is in hand and will cost mere millions not billions or trillions to administer and that in the bargain we get to eat more healthy fish. Now being a guy who loves science and loves out of the box science most of all I ought to have seen what was about to hit.

Both professors come out professing and punching. They take it personally that I was even on the agenda with them. They are displeased in common but from different points of view save they both work in atmospheric realms. The elder professor rips me up one side and down the other in a well practiced professorial dressing down of an upstart who dares to challenge his creation of global warming as THE ISSUE in the world as has been shown by he and his students of climate modelling. How dare I suggest that everything ought not to be discussed in the true and proper light of climate modelling of climate change.

Does he know of the plight of the ocean pastures and their plankton blooms, no, and as I recall he doesn’t seem to care, that’s off topic.  How dare I suggest that the “climate change” and not the forcing agent is not the end all be all and deserve our undivided attention. And worse how dare I suggest that the horribly disfigured poster of the soon to suffer Earth Child that he uses to raise money to study “climate change” without limit is the point of this all and most certainly not my suggestion that instead we replenish, restore, and cure the victim of its disfigurements and make her well.

The other guy is a bit more erudite and conservative, a character of youth. He is of course selling his chemical engineers ideas of constructing forests of giant concrete trees larger than any redwood, and trickling harsh chemical solutions over the large surface area of his “trees” to neutralize CO2 in the air. In doing so he is doing Mother Nature and evolution one better than her mere invention of photosynthesis. Chemical engineers, well at least He, will engineer and breathe life into a really efficient new form of life to deal with CO2. God forbid we may even need His concrete trees along with God’s trees but that is not the point. The point He talked about how all His trees need is the price of carbon offsets to rise to about $200 per tonne and we can let His evolution takes its rightful place to save the world. We agree that saving the world is the goal.

So in that Green Room backstage of before an evening of speakers regaling an upscale audience about cool science expounded upon by super geeks of those sciences turned into a personal Rubicon crossing for me. Sadly the other side of the Rubicon was held and defended by fierce territorial “scientists.” By the way I was introduced that night by the TED host by comparing me to Galileo for the wild condemnation around the world of my ideas and work.

The next day I went to Woodshole Oceanographic Institute where a confab of ocean scientists was being held to debate my field of work. I had not been invited but when I told them I intended to come, the top scientist at the institute had the temerity to send me an email saying I could come, but only alone, and I would not be given an opportunity to speak to describe my own work. They had plenty of their scientist chums doing the telling of what I was up to, not one having ever asking me about the true story.

I was advised by some of my close ocean science friends that I should not go to that Woodshole meeting as it was a Kangaroo Court being convened to trash me. I went anyway, and indeed it was a trying ordeal. The Kangas were hopping mad.

So my point in this is to tell you that the real issue of anthropogenic CO2 is not just in the world of government and the politics therein. That is the just the ruse. The real politics are in the world of science who have turned this tale of CO2 science into an enormous pork barrel. And by their gods they will not tolerate any upstarts working to deliver an immediate, inexpensive, effective cure that turns deadly CO2 and its terrible effects into life itself. Just in time.

If you don’t believe there is some grand conspiracy for keeping that woeful and painfully suffering poster Earth Child of climate change on the poster. Just read about the largest RAID in Canadian environmental history that just took place on me and my office in Vancouver where all of our nearly 200 million scientific measurements and work on our science collection.

Look at how near that collection is to being able to prove that at the expense of a courageous tiny Indian village of less than 800 souls with 70% unemployment their ocean pasture can be returned to health and abundance by converting scores of millions of tonnes of CO2 into ocean life for the cost of a million dollars and one single small fishing boat.

What if this “It takes a village” true story were picked up by other villages.  Why else would a combat team of 11 armed officers sweep in an pin the seven of us, counting the two of us there who are grandfathers, to the wall (well actually put us in a tiny single office cubicle) and detain us while they took 24 hours to sweep up the scientific findings of the village work and take them away. Other EC RAID teams were simultaneously spread out across the Province of British Columbia sweeping the offices of the company that owned the fishing boat, the home of the crew of the boat, the native trust fund that provided the money, and maybe more?

The reason why?

IT WORKED!

Of course now in the face of this infamous and unprecedented political and police action we need help. Can you help. Will you help. Our village needs help to save this work.

Best fishes,

Russ George