Posted by greg2213 on May 17, 2011
New peer-reviewed paper ignores CO2 as a climate mechanism, concentrating on other cycles, instead. The Abstract (emphasis is mine:)
Time series of solar radiation and north Pacific sea surface temperature (SST) index were used to analyze their causality relationship with various periodic oscillations in reconstructed millennial global-mean temperature series. The three long-term periods of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), Little Ice Age (LIA) and recent Global Warming Period (GWP) were distinct in the temperature series. 21-year, 65-year, 115-year and 200-year oscillations were derived from the temperature series after removing three long-term climatic temperatures. The phases of temperature oscillations significantly lagged behind oceanic SST and solar radiation variability. The recent decadal warm period was caused by the quasi-21-year temperature oscillation. At this century-cross period, the four oscillations reached their peaks simultaneously, which did not occur during the last millennium. Based on the long-term trend during the GWP and the four periodic oscillations, global-mean temperature is expected to drop to a new cool period in the 2030s and then a rising trend would be towards to a new warm period in the 2060s.
I think I’ve seen that conclusion in a few places before, from anyone who’s looked closely at ocean/solar cycles. Seems to me that if the 1990s warming was caused by these cycles coinciding, then the 2060 warming won’t be nearly as large. Brrrr…
The full PDF is available as a download from the site, look for the PDF link on the right side of the page. Go here for the paper.
Posted in Falsified | Tagged: Cycles | Leave a Comment »
Posted by greg2213 on April 10, 2011
An article by David Evans in the FinancialPost.com. He sums up the whole thing very nicely.
The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro-thin half-truths and misunderstandings. I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a skeptic. Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools out of our politicians.
Let’s set a few things straight.
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.
Let’s be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet, but how much.
Most scientists, on both sides, also agree on how much a given increase in the level of carbon dioxide raises the planet’s temperature, if just the extra carbon dioxide is considered. These calculations come from laboratory experiments; the basic physics have been well known for a century.
The disagreement comes about what happens next.
Read the rest: Climate models go cold
Posted in Falsified | Leave a Comment »
Posted by greg2213 on January 1, 2011
Author: Paulo Cesar Soares
The dramatic and threatening environmental changes announced for the next decades are the result of models whose main drive factor of climatic changes is the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Although taken as a premise, the hypothesis does not have verifiable consistence. The comparison of temperature changes and CO2 changes in the atmosphere is made for a large diversity of conditions, with the same data used to model climate changes. Correlation of historical series of data is the main approach. CO2 changes are closely related to temperature.
Warmer seasons or triennial phases are followed by an atmosphere that is rich in CO2, reflecting the gas solving or exsolving from water, and not photosynthesis activity. Interannual correlations between the variables are good. A weak dominance of temperature changes precedence, relative to CO2 changes, indicate that the main effect is the CO2 increase in the atmosphere due to temperature rising. Decreasing temperature is not followed by CO2 decrease, which indicates a different route for the CO2 capture by the oceans, not by gas re-absorption. Monthly changes have no correspondence as would be expected if the warming was an important absorption-radiation effect of the CO2 increase.
The anthropogenic wasting of fossil fuel CO2 to the atmosphere shows no relation with the temperature changes even in an annual basis. The absence of immediate relation between CO2 and temperature is evidence that rising its mix ratio in the atmosphere will not imply more absorption and time residence of energy over the Earth surface. This is explained because band absorption is nearly all done with historic CO2 values. Unlike CO2, water vapor in the atmosphere is rising in tune with temperature changes, even in a monthly scale. The rising energy absorption of vapor is reducing the outcoming long wave radiation window and amplifying warming regionally and in a different way around the globe.
Here’s the rest, including a link to the full paper: New paper – “absence of correlation between temperature changes … and CO2″
And a comment that I thought was really interesting, given all the reliance on correlation (which is still a necessary starting point:)
Anything is possible says:
If you extend back to 1958, the co-efficient of correlation between CO2 and HadCRUt global temperatures is 0.907.
How significant is that?
Well put it this way : The co-efficient of correlation between the number of Home Runs hit in MLB and HadCRUt global temperatures over the same time period is 0.885.
Make of that what you will!
Posted in CO2, Falsified | Tagged: Abstracts, Papers | 1 Comment »
Posted by greg2213 on November 14, 2010
Another one down, another one down, another one bites the dust…
From the No Trick Zone:
Scratch off the Potsdam Institute For Climate Impact Research from the alarmist list. No kidding!
The European Institute For Climate and Energy has a new piece written by Raimund Leistenschneider that takes a look at two interesting papers dug up from 2003. I wonder if Rahmstorf and Schellnhuber are going to feign amnesia on this. Big hat tip to NTZ reader Ike!
Rahmstorf 2003 paper shows pronounced cooling
The paper by Prof Stefan Rahmstorf confirms that today’s temperatures are actually quite cool compared to temperatures earlier in the Holocene.
The rest: Rahmstorf/Schellnhuber Confirm No Anthropogenic Climate Change!
As a commenter on that site notes, if you look at the very bottom right of the second graph you’ll see the hockey stick.
Posted in Falsified | Leave a Comment »
Posted by greg2213 on July 11, 2010
Found on The Air Vent
Falsification of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame of Physics,”
International Journal of Modern Physics B, v23, n03, January 6, 2009, pp. 275-364.
full paper is here
Posted in CO2, Falsified | Tagged: Greenhouse, Physics | Leave a Comment »