But somewhat unsurprisingly yet still shockingly, White immediately became a target of a coordinated vicious attack by the far left, by insane brainwashed and brain-dead whackos who deny basic scientific facts such as the key role of CO2 in the life processes.
If you search Twitter for her name, you will find a huge number of hostile tweets similar to this one:
Since #KathleenHartnettWhite calls CO2 “the gas of life” maybe she should go stand in a chamber of CO2 & see for herself if she survives— Lassitude (@jen98a) November 9, 2017
Oh, you haven't killed climate skeptics in gas chambers, dear "environmentalists", for months. This "Lassitude" claims to have earned "several degrees" – if true, it proves that the general education system is completely broken in California and total morons like "Lassitude" are getting degrees for parroting hostile, Nazi-style political slogans and/or for her non-convex reproductive organs.
Some of the tweets were kickstarted by this painful exchange between her and Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democratic Party Senator and a prominent climate fearmonger, during a hearing:
White clearly didn't know the answer to the "quiz" because she's no ocean scientist. What is the percentage of heat from the imbalance that has been trapped in oceans, instead of increasing the temperature of the land? She said she didn't know, it was plausible that the number is below or above 50%, opinions differ, she expressed her understanding.
You know, I would be almost certain that it's above 50% – just because oceans are more than 50% of the Earth's surface – but even though I have studied lots of things in the climate system, I have never focused on discussing or researching this number. It's being said that over 90% of the heat imbalance has been stored in the ocean and I think it's totally plausible and she's ignorant about it.
But just try to appreciate how insanely irrelevant this number is for the understanding of all the questions that are important for energy policymaking. This number was just used by Whitehouse to mock her and lots of the alarmists may parrot this number – and even some U.S. lawmakers have literally "voted" that the number is higher than 90% – but virtually none of them can calculate it, not even approximately, and they don't understand the consequences of these numbers, either.
Why do the alarmists find this number "cool"? Here is a quote from the 2016 New York Times article:
...Eric Leuliette at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration feeling that 90 percent of the climate change story is being ignored.Because (more than) 90% goes to the ocean, it means that we only see (less than) 10%, and the "real problem" is therefore (more than) 10 times worse than it seems!
Well, this reasoning is complete rubbish, of course. When some heat gets trapped in the ocean for a few centuries, it becomes literally harmless because the ocean is fudging large and deep – and because it contains water, a substance with an extremely high heat capacity, the ocean has a huge total heat capacity. So even if we could heat the surface of the ocean by some degree Celsius – the ocean seems to be warming up more slowly – and if we continued to add this heat for 1,500 years, the periodicity of the longest cycles in the ocean, it would just mean that the whole ocean water gets warmed up by some 1 °C after those 1,500 years. It's an obviously harmless change.
So if one worries about the "climate alarm" at least a little bit rationally, the ability of the ocean to take the heat is good news, not bad news. But more generally, it makes no sense to focus on overall amounts and percentages of heat because conditions for life aren't dictated by some huge extensive amounts of heat somewhere in the Earth beneath you. They are dictated by intensive quantities such as temperature and pressure at the place where the life is supposed to exist.
The questions by Whitehouse are a typical political trial designed to hurt the image of Ms White. Most climate alarmists wouldn't know the answer to that question, either, and even most of those who would know because they just memorized a number from an article wouldn't really know what it means, whether it means anything, and how such numbers may be estimated.
Needless to say, it's not just dirty green organizations and brain-dead trolls on Twitter who participated in the witch hunt against Ms White. NPR – led by Mr Michael Oreskes, a brother of the notorious alarmist Ms Naomi Oreskes, who is now accused of sexual harassment – has behaved very differently than how an impartial public ratio station should behave. They ran a hit piece
KATHLEEN HARTNETT-WHITE: The book has all kinds of examples of the really beneficial impacts of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere.Ms White is absolutely right: the book has all kinds of examples of the really beneficial impacts of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. And these examples are genuine and the broader message is true and important, too. CO2 really is greatly beneficial for life. But this monstrous aßhole Mr Buchele makes it sound as if it were politically incorrect to mention e.g. just the obvious fact that CO2 is vital for photosynthesis. She's also right that the "renewable" energy sources are unreliable – you know, the Sun doesn't shine at you at night and the wind sometimes stops blowing. And she's right that they're parasitic – they're subsidized and they make the energy more expensive and people are forced to pay higher energy prices. But the truth doesn't mean anything whatsoever to NPR talking heads.
BUCHELE: CO2, of course, is a major contributor to global warming, but Hartnett-White suggested that climate regulation is a conspiracy pushed by communists. She's called renewable energy unreliable and parasitic. And she really, really likes fossil fuels.
Instead, a "good" citizen who can get good press at NPR is obliged to say what Mr Buchele said: CO2 is a "major contributor to global warming". There's no contradiction between CO2's being needed in photosynthesis and CO2's ability to lead to the greenhouse effect. These two statements are perfectly consistent with each other. On top of that, the fact that CO2 is needed in photosynthesis is by far – by many, many orders of magnitude – more important an observation than the observation about its role in the greenhouse effect.
Every sane person who has understood the basic school science knows it. Mr Buchele may fail to know it but it's because he is a spectacular moron or demagogue. It's a shame that NPR is flooded by aggressive pseudointellectual garbage such as Mr Buchele. The radio station should be cleared of this dishonest garbage or defunded.
The NPR piece got worse:
HARTNETT-WHITE: Fossil fuels are the remains of life - plant and animal life.Wow. So one can't even safely say that fossil fuels have originated from fossils. Or one can't appear on a Christian television in Oregon. Or whichever of these two things was considered more blasphemous by this Mr Buchele.
BUCHELE: Here she is in an interview with a Christian television station in Oregon last year.
Ms White may be confirmed or not, or someone else who is sensible may be confirmed. But the hostility by these brainwashed and brain-dead communist attack dogs, the likes of Lassitude, Mr Whitehouse, Mr Buchele, and millions of others, will not go away for years. Sane people should have fought against the expansion of this toxic garbage – the climate alarmist propaganda – already decades ago. Now this filth is here and it will do its best to make the life harder for everyone who knows the basic things and who is honest. It will be around and it will poison the lives of all the honest people up to the moment when we realize that we really don't deserve it, don't like, and need to use much more effective weapons against the likes of Mr Buchele.