Based both on computer models and satellite data a team of scientists has concluded that the increase carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is making arid regions greener.

For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.


Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:

If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652


You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Based both on computer models and satellite data a team of scientists has concluded that the increase carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is making arid regions greener.

This study illustrates one possibility that is always ignored in the climate debates — that there is a really good chance that the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere will be beneficial.



  • During the Carboniferous period, when much of our coal deposits were laid down, average CO2 was 800 ppm. The average planetary temperature was 14C, about what it is today.

  • jwing

    Water (vapor) and Co2 are both considered green house gases…yet they are also essential inputs for plant life and therefore all life on this planet.

    Kinda makes you realize just how looney the environmental marxists are.

  • JGL

    But their logic is perfect and subjective, humans “create” or release carbon so by the application of logic the conclusion must be that it must be humans that drive temperature. I say the reasonable conversation is about pollution as a whole and technology that mitigates it. Period. If the conversation involves quantifying CO2 and temperature and the ability to use perfect, subjective logic to tie them together then you can control people because you have drawn a line of logic between the two, cause and effect. Its kind of like saying that all murderers exhale CO2, you can draw a logic line between murder and CO2 but is that really the cause of murder?

    1. Temperature and CO2 have both risen and fallen long before humans ever existed and by my understanding temperature seems to lead CO2, not the other way around. Not to mention the suns activity, a minor component to some.


    2. Like I said the discussion should be about pollution and its elimination through best practices and the application of new technology. That is the true conversation and as I understand it the U.S.A. is well on its way on that road, we have to get the rest of the world up to speed.

    But I think we can all agree that what is going on is something else.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *