CO2 does not cause Global Warming
10/02/2019 15:43 - Posted by Tom van Leeuwen
A clarification to begin with. The title of this article and the text of the image must be understood as: "Adding more CO2
to the currently existing CO2
concentration in the Earth's atmosphere has no measurable impact on the average temperature".
There has never been conclusive scientific evidence for the CO2-hypothesis
which says that human emissions enhance the greenhouse effect, resulting in global warming. On the contrary, all evidence and rational considerations point in the opposite direction, namely that this hypothesis must be refuted.
Here's an overview:
- Consideration 1: There is no permanent correlation between the CO2 concentration and the average Earth temperature
Since the Holocene Climate Optimum, over the last 8 thousand years, the CO2 concentration has gradually increased, while the average Earth temperature has gradually decreased.
Between the 40s and 70s of the last century, the CO2 concentration increased enormously, while the average temperature dropped. This decline was so strong that there was a "Global Cooling" crisis and scientists warned us about a new glacial period.
Between 2000 and 2015, worldwide CO2 concentrations have risen considerably while no increase in temperature has been observed.
All this would be utterly impossible if the CO2 hypothesis were true. There is no explanation from climatologists for these phenomena.
Article: Temperature versus CO2 – the big picture
- Consideration 2: The end of the warm-up at the start of each interglacial
During the current Ice Age (4 million years), the Earth has known more than 40 glacial and interglacial periods. With each transition from glacial to interglacial, the heating stopped at approximately the same level. Why did that happen? According to the CO2 hypothesis, the earth temperature should have ended up in an unstoppable ("runaway") warming. This fact - which has repeated itself more than 40 times- is in complete contradiction with the hypothesis and the climatologists have no explanation for this.
Article: Why did the warming stop?
- Consideration 3: The ice ages of the distant pre-history
Much earlier in the past there have been different ice ages on Earth while the CO2 concentration was about ten times as high as today. This is completely in contradiction with the CO2 hypothesis and climate scientists cannot explain this.
Article: The Ordovician Ice Age
- Consideration 4: Climate models predict too much warming
The CO2 hypothesis has never been proven, but nevertheless it forms the basis for the hundreds of climate models used by the IPCC (UN) for their reports. As time goes by, it becomes increasingly clear that all these climate models predict too much warming. The results in no way correspond to the real-world measurements.
The only model that somewhat approximates reality is the model that assigns the smallest role to greenhouse gases.
This is a very clear indication that the hypothesis is incorrect and the climate scientists have no explanation for this.
Article: Climate models
- Proof: The fingerprint of the assumed enhanced greenhouse effect is missing
In order for the greenhouse gases to be able to heat the Earth, energy is needed. According to the hypothesis, this energy should be obtained from a change in the infrared radiation balance of the atmosphere.
In the NASA measurements this change is not found which proves that there is no enhanced greenhouse effect and therefore the hypothesis is refuted.
Article: The fingerprints of the greenhouse effect
There is no reason to worry about the climate. There is no climate crisis
and there is no reason to take measures to limit our CO2
emissions. Mankind has no influence on the climate and certainly not to the extent that they want us to believe.
Tom van Leeuwen, September 20, 2019.
Fighting the climate hysteria takes time! If you think I'm on the right track and you want to support my efforts
I would be more than happy to receive a small donation that will help me to maintain this site.
Or donate some Bitcoin
The hypothesis of "man-made climate change" tells us that the increase in the concentration of CO2 enhances the greenhouse effect
of the atmosphere and has global warming
as a final result.
Since the beginning of the industrialized era around 1850, man emits relatively large amounts of CO2
into the atmosphere through the use of fossil fuels. The consequence of these emissions is that during that period, the concentration of CO2
in the atmosphere increased sharply from about 300 parts per million to more than 400 ppm, an increase of almost 40%. The average temperature increased in the same period more or less 1.5 °C with a small variation depending on the data source used.
The political reports of the IPCC are based on the hypothesis that CO2
is the most important control knob of the Earth's temperature. The problem is that this hypothesis does not correspond at all with the empirical data available to science. Forecasts are made using models that are not capable of 'predicting' the past
When discussing “Climate Change” it’s good to have an understanding of how the Earth’s climate has changed in the past. That will give us a reference to decide whether the current changes are normal or not.
Global temperatures have varied a lot over the last 500 million years. Depending on the timescale used, the current temperature is either cold or hot, so when you want to know the “normal temperature” you’ll have to indicate what timescale you’re using.
Professor at the Geophysical Sciences department at the University of Chicago David Archer describes the band-saturation of the CO2
greenhouse effect. After that, everything goes wrong.
The first part of the lecture is very informative. Professor Archer explains in great detail how the CO2
greenhouse absorption works, it's logarithmic nature and the band saturation. He even shows on a working instance of the MODTRAN model how adding the first ppm of CO2
to the atmosphere has a huge impact on the atmosphere's energy balance. Adding more CO2
, the effect fades away.
Hydropower is one of the cleanest energy sources available. The only downsides known so far are the impact on the landscape and the risk of a dam breaking due to earthquakes. Carefully choosing the locations and high construction standards are needed to solve these problems.
Besides electricity generation, dams also help to regulate the water flow in the rivers, making them better navigatable and useful for irrigation.
So, overall it seems to be quite positive, but recent research has "discovered" a new downside to hydroelectricity and it's a usual suspect: Greenhouse gasses
Interview with Professor William Happer
of Princeton University. Mr. Happer is a renowned physicist, specialized in the field of atomic physics, adaptive optics and spectrometry. This interview from 2015 is part of the series "Conversations that Matter."
Some quotes from this interview:
For many people, a logarithmic relationship can be a fairly abstract concept. It is hard to imagine the implication that it has on the strength of the greenhouse effect that corresponds to the amount of CO2
that humanity emits into the atmosphere. Here we present a visualization to explain in a simple way what we are talking about.
is a greenhouse gas. The presence of CO2
in the atmosphere traps a part of the infrared radiation that the Earth's surface emits into space. The total greenhouse effect of the Earth's atmosphere is about 30 °C, without this effect, the temperature would be -15 °C instead of +15 °C, the actual current average temperature.
Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. CO2 provides 3 °C of heating, that is, 10% of the total effect
When the concentration of CO2
increases, its greenhouse effect also increases, but not in a linear fashion, but logarithmically
. For each increase in concentration, the effect on temperature is less and less.
Water vapor is the single most important greenhouse gas. It makes up 80% to 90% of the total greenhouse effect of the Earth's atmosphere.
Climate models depend on water vapor as a positive feedback for supposed CO2
warming. In these models, CO2
causes a tiny warming that causes the relative atmospheric humidity to increase. That increase in water vapor produces the catastrophic warming they predict.
The problem is that in the real world, while atmospheric CO2
-concentrations increased by almost 30% since the end of World War II, the relative atmospheric humidity has been stable at low altitudes and has even decreased at higher altitudes.