At least coffee #75, or Carbon is not the enemy

Last time, I gave several examples of why the fight against carbon footprints is dangerous for humanity as a whole. I would like to return to this topic briefly. First, a small note about temperatures on Mars and Venus. As we know from physics class, pressure causes objects to heat up. And if the pressure on Venus is what it is, i.e., 11,428 times greater than on Mars, that in itself says a lot. Not being an expert, I don't know what causes that pressure, so I won't comment further.
I mentioned that, according to some critics of carbon madness, climate change may be caused by the so-called Milankovitch cycles, which are quasi-periodically recurring systematic changes in solar radiation caused by fluctuations in the Earth's orbit around the Sun (eccentricity, precession, and obliquity—the tilt of the rotational axis). I also learned that there is another cosmic phenomenon. It is the rotation of the solar system. And because this rotation is not similar to the orbit of the planets around the Sun, the entire solar system passes through different parts of the universe. And again, in cycles, it passes through a kind of warmer wave and a colder wave. Of course, this cannot be imagined as actual heat, as the temperature of the universe is about -270 °C, or 1 °K, but the fluctuation can be as much as 1 °K. And right now, the entire system is in the "warmer" part of its orbit. And even here, the effect is noticeable. I have no idea how many such warmer areas there are in the universe, but the fact is that the entire cycle of orbit is calculated to be millions of years. So, with the Sun being about 4.6 billion years old, the entire system has already orbited the center of its axis several times. And because there are phenomena similar to Milankovitch cycles here as well, it is impossible to estimate how many times we have already passed through the warmer part.
The problem with Europe, especially Errorunia, is that it cannot shake off its colonial past. This little dot on the globe thinks it will continue to dictate to the world. It won't. The world today is governed by different principles. Asia and Africa have become much more emancipated and no longer need Europe at all. Today, they focus more on themselves or on the US. And anyone who thinks about it even a little knows that the weather is influenced by various pressure fronts that form outside Errorunia, so once again, Ursula has no influence whatsoever. Northern currents bring winter, southern currents bring heat and often Saharan sand. What would the algoristic Gretenists want to do about this?
You have probably heard or read about actions against global warming and CO2. One idea is to cut down trees and bury them deep in the ground. Another idea has been devised and is reportedly already being implemented in Iceland. It involves a device that filters CO2 from the atmosphere and stores it deep underground. And British pseudo-scientists have come up with the idea of creating artificial clouds to protect the Earth from the sun's rays. Any normal-thinking person will immediately understand that these are stupid and even dangerous ideas. Algorithmicists won't understand this anyway, so I consider it pointless to comment on the individual steps.
• Most of them cannot state the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere. (It is less than most people think.)
• And how much of it is caused by humans. (Again, much less than people think.)
• And how much of IT has happened in the last 50 years.
• And then compare all that to changes in Earth's temperature over the last 100 years.
• And then compare THAT to the relationship between CO2 and temperature over the last 400,000 years to see the trends.
The conclusion of a rationally thinking person should be: "Hmm, there has been a slight increase in CO2. There isn't much CO2 there at all. CO2 concentrations used to be higher. And when they rose in the past, it was AS A RESULT of rising temperatures." Yes, temperatures rose before CO2 concentrations rose. So IF there was a connection, it would be the opposite of what all climate scientists claim: The increase in CO2 never caused the rise in temperatures; it was the other way around.
I get a lot of my information from Quora, among other sources. A certain Paul Noel writes a lot there. Not only him, but this author in particular writes in great detail. I don't know how accurate all his information is, but his conclusions are not without logic. And so there appeared certain people who took issue with his articles. When reading both the question and the answer, I had the impression that they were from the Czech Republic. Typical accusations that he is "paid for it." The only thing missing was that he is a pro-Kremlin degenerate. That probably didn't reach abroad. So, after all, our pro-government activists haven't gotten to this site yet.