Carbon dioxide is persona non grata in leftist circles. Listening to Democrat blathering over CO2, which they exhale copiously with each breath, one would think this gas is poisonous, on par with Sarin or other nerve gases. In reality, CO2 is plant food, and essential for life on planet Earth.

One of President Biden’s first executive orders, signed on January 20, aims to “restore science to tackle the climate crisis.” Joe claims, “the policy of my Administration to listen to the science.” Really?

His administration can’t decide how many masks we should wear, how far apart we should stand next to each other, or why despite millions of Americans getting vaccinated every day, we need to consider more lockdowns. Most of these recommendations did not “listen to the science” and now the arbitrary changes are still not following any science, particularly evidence-based clinical trials, the holy grail for Drs Fauci, Birx, and the rest of the medical smart set.

In the executive order, Biden emphasizes the “social cost of carbon,’ whatever that means. Is there a social cost of air and water too? Is the word “social” a convenient excuse to invoke “social justice,” “systemic racism,” “oppression,” “intersectionality,” “privilege,” and other  leftist dog-whistle buzzwords in the grand plan of fundamentally transforming America?

Carbon happens to be the building block of life on Earth. It is also organic, produced by natural processes that cannot be reproduced by man in any meaningful way, specifically the creation of coal, oil, and natural gas. Carbon is non-GMO, free-range, pesticide free, and everything else needed for it to be sold at Whole Foods if it was edible.

Carbon dioxide is one of several greenhouse gases, and certainly not the most prevalent as that distinction belongs to water vapor. Should there be a ban on water?

Carbon and CO2 are not the same thing, but interrelated. CO2 feeds plants which ultimately become fossil fuels over long periods of time, and when those fuels are used, C02 returns to the atmosphere to feed more plants. The circle of life.

CO2 is a relatively small percentage of the atmosphere, 0.04% to be exact, a fraction of a percent of the air around us. CO2 levels can vary significantly, from less than 400 parts per million outdoors to over 1000 inside a crowded room. Crews of submarines can handle CO2 levels of up to 8000 parts per million without adverse health effects.

More importantly, CO2 is plant food, necessary for life on Planet Earth. Think back to high school biology and photosynthesis, where water, sunlight, and CO2 combine to produce oxygen and plant grown, as in fruits, vegetables, grasses, and all form of plant life that members of the animal kingdom, including humans, eat daily.

CO2 and warm temperatures are necessary for plant growth and life on Earth. Consider CO2 as plant food or fertilizer. A 100 percent increase in CO2 levels increases plant growth from 22-41 percent, depending on plant type. Apart from CO2, temperature also affects plant growth, warmer temperatures translate to higher growth rates, assuming the other photosynthesis ingredients are in place.

Plants have tiny holes on the underside of their leaves called stomata, through which plants ingest CO2. When the CO2 levels are higher, the stomata don’t need to open as wide to get the CO2 they need. Plants also lose water through these stomata (think of a plant ‘breathing’). Smaller stomata openings mean less water loss, so that with higher CO2 levels in the air, plants lose less, and therefore need less water to thrive, and can grow in drier, previously unhospitable environments.

Putting science class aside, higher CO2 levels with slightly warmer temperatures, increases the productivity of most plants. This creates a “greening of the planet,” combating the effects of fires, deforestation, pest outbreaks and other attacks on Earth’s vegetation. As the planet greens, dry climates become fertile, supporting plant life which in turn feeds both humans and animals.

This “CO2 fertilization” correlated with an 11 percent increase in foliage cover from 1982-2010 across many arid regions of the world. Think of the resulting benefits, including the reduction of hunger, disease, and poverty in Africa and the Middle East. Why is this not a good thing? Excessively limiting C02 starves the plant kingdom and ultimately the animal kingdom which is dependent on plants for food.

Carbon, the basis of life, originates with carbon dioxide, consumed by plants, eventually converted into carbon-based fossil fuels via the sun, making it a form of solar energy, and completely natural. This fact alone should be applauded by the environmental left.

There is a social cost to reducing or eliminating carbon and CO2, contrary to the supposed intention of Biden’s executive order. Advocating for less atmospheric CO2 and cooler temperatures will cause a “browning” of the planet, less food, more starvation, disease, and misery around the world. Is that part of the “fundamental transformation” or “great reset”? Is CO2 reduction a backhanded means of population control?

One of President Trump’s actions was to end funding for a United Nations population control agency. Is the Biden administration, through carbon restrictions, a sneaky way of pushing UN and globalist population control?

Unless this talk of reducing carbon is not actually about the environment but instead about social engineering and control. Much like how the myriad arbitrary COVID rules and restrictions are more about money and control than the virus.

The Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development, a consultant organization to the UN, gave a press conference in Paris claiming that, “If we are to address the climate crisis we need to challenge the structural causes of the crisis which lies on unequal distribution of wealth, of carbon, and of power.”

Note two of the causes -- wealth and power. Those should be in the hands of the ruling class, not the hoi polloi. Is that what Biden and the left’s climate crusade is really all about?

The Green New Deal for example is not about the environment, but instead top-down government control. AOC’s chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti admitted as much, "The interesting thing about the Green New Deal is it wasn't originally a climate thing at all. We really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing."

This is out of the Karl Marx handbook, the struggle against the “unequal distribution of wealth.”

If the global do-gooders were truly concerned about the poor, they would embrace concepts, such as CO2 fertilization, that raise the standard of living of poorer countries. Instead, their goal is to redistribute wealth and resources to the point that everyone is poor, except of course for those in charge. This explains the war on carbon, which is actually a war on prosperity. Welcome to Joe Biden’s America.

Brian C Joondeph, MD, is a physician and writer. He is on sabbatical from social media.

Image: AIRS (Atmospheric Infraed Sounding)

You can find this post on MeWe here.