And why not blame mankind? During the first month of COVID shutdowns they announced a dramatic decline in CO2.

When I suggested that using the Mauna Loa Observatory to determine the baseline for world CO2 levels was flawed due to it's proximity to the summit of the volcano I was mocked and ridiculed. When they claimed they could adjust the readings for the volcanic output of CO2, I asked how they could make such adjustments when it was established by their own data that CO2 levels in the volcanic gases were known to fluctuate on a minute by minute basis. I was shouted down.
In spite of this fatal flaw in their data, they continue to use Mauna Loa Observatory redings as the benchmark for rising CO2 levels. When you read atmospheric CO2 is at 412 parts per million, this is where they make that determination.
The atmosphere is not monolithic, it is dynamic and not static. CO2 is not uniformly distributed in the atmosphere, it tends to concentrate in the lower atmosphere where plants use it to create sugars and oxygen. This however is not SCIENCE! SCIENCE says mankind is everything that is wrong with earth.

Sounds like it is all about you, sevenheart.

And seriously, less than 30 days after the COVID lockdowns there were articles proclaiing that the irreversable destruction of manmade CO2 had slowed to planet saving levels, simply by closing down mankind. Such a calamity it must be if it takes all of 30 days for CO2 levels to decline. LOL.

No it's really all about you. You are getting screwed over royal by this climate science lie. Me? I live off the grid, pretty simple, very modest, self sustaining life. When they shut down the grid and peoples food rots in their refrigerators, I won't know. I will still eat, I will have lights to read at night, my very modest home will be comfortable. You on the other hand may be herded to a disaster relief camp for your "own good", corralled, poked and prodded into submission, or even worse extinction.
I spent several years at various conferences and debates proving that climate changey science is a lie. Becasue I have a broad background in applied, not theoretical, science I used every proven science to dispell their lies. Biology, Geology, Chemistry, Physics, you name the science it disproves the lie.
I wasn't tied to academia like Dr. John Cristy or Dr. Roy Spencer and others, so they couldn't destroy me as easily when I spoke the truth. I was cancelled from fakebook before I even set up an account. I wrote for an international online journal and averaged around a million views, not because of me, but because I could articulate in understandable terms real science. Like how does a colorless, odorless, transparent gass reflect anything? I know it sounds cringy, but there were some diablical forces that destroyed the website owners for their willingness to address the debate honestly.
If it's all about me, why did they establish the climate observatory to monitor atmospheric CO2 levels near the summit of a volcano that they knew belches CO2 on a regular basis?
No, I'm no hero, I'm no superstar, but I'm no idiot either. Perhaps if I didn't use a personal narative you would still believe this pile of steaming bullshit that is climate science. Nothing is all about me, never has been.

I poked holes in the peer reviewed papers crying climate disaster when glaciers melted revealing ancient primordial forests- proving that disasterous manmade climate change was going to destroy the world as we knew it. How, you might ask, but Im sure you don't really care? I simply asked if it was warmer when the ancient primordial forest grew 10,000 years ago. This lie is so transparent Goebells has to be smiling up from hell.

My comment was about your use of the "I" word.

Oh. Well I is my preferred pronoun when I refer to myself. As a confession, I have self identified as I for decades.