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:
04:55 - "There is very little evidence that humans are making much impact [on the climate] and as far as CO2 is concerned witch is the major focus, that's probably more good than bad."
05:24 - "I know a lot about CO2 compared to most climate scientists because we make CO2 lasers. CO2 is a very interesting molecule, in particular, the model of CO2 that contributes to global warming. CO2 is a rod and it bends up and down, up and down and it's that bending motion that causes global warming. But that is such a strong absorption that's it's saturated now so if you add more CO2 most of what you can do has already been done, there's still a little addition but not very much."
"If you have a barn and you want to paint it red, you know when you paint it once it may not be red enough if you paint it two or three times then it really looks red, after that if you add more red it doesn't make much difference. And that's sort of what CO2 is doing now, most of the easy absorption has been done and so if you add more CO2 you get a little broadening but I don't want to get too technical."
07:20 - remarks on the logarithmic scale of CO2 induced warming.
08:50 - CO2 is food for plants
10:30 - "We're in a CO2 famine, we have too little CO2."
11:00 - CO2 was measured in thousands of parts per million, not hundreds. "Plants have envolved when there was a lot of CO2 to eat, now they don't have enough."
12:20 - There is no "social cost of carbon. The social cost is negative (...) it's a net contributor to agricultural productivity."
14:30 - There is no downside to CO2. This initial argument against CO2 was that there were to be a rapid global warming. It hasn't happened. It's clear that the models have enormously exaggerated it's warming potential.
15:00 - "I mentioned the saturation of CO2 (...) They noticed early on that CO2 has this 'problem', it was disappointing that it didn't make much difference so they invented all sorts of feedback mechanisms that would amplify the effect of additional CO2. Water vapor, clouds, all sorts of things were supposed to be triggered by this CO2. They don't seem to be happening.
15:30 - Water vapor is the main greenhouse gas. Water vapor and clouds.
15:50 - "The most honest modelers try to include clouds, but that's very primitive. Rough estimates. Nothing more."
17:50 - "Antarctic ice is probably growing (...) that's not supposed to happen according to the models, but it is happening."
18:40 - The Arctic is an ocean, the situation is completely different than at the South Pole. The Arctic ice is determined by ocean currents and not the air temperature.
21:00 - Climate models are group-think. They never looked at the world, they looked at other models and they say "look how good we are we're all getting the same answers, that must be right." They adjusted the parameters to get the same answers.
22:00 - "I don't think there's anything to worry about from more CO2. I think more CO2 to be good for the world. Our great-great-grandchildren will look back and say; 'Thank God we have all this CO2, what foresighted people our ancestors were.'"
22:30 - "Environalism should be looking at things that make a difference. Cleaning up real things that make a difference."
Fighting the climate hysteria is time-consuming! 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.
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. Read more...
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. Read more...
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. Read more...
The satellite temperature departure measurement for February 2022 is exactly 0° C.
This means that Earth temperature during February 2022 was exactly the same as the average from 1991 to 2020.
Satellites are the best way to have insight into the short-term temperature variations. They measure the whole surface, independent of weather station distribution, Heat Islands, measurement failures, surface condition (land or water).
There is a step-wise increase in temperature, triggered by two very strong El Niño events (1998 and 2016.) The energy that welled up from the deep oceans established a new level in these two ocasions, where the warming paused. This is a natural phenomenon and has nothing to do with CO2, or human activity.
Where is the Climate Emergency? It just does not exist.
Wake up and spread this information to your government!
The IPCC's CO2 hypothesis, with which Western governments try to incite their citizens to group-think, panic and unnecessary measures and taxes, rests in large part on the belief that there is a positive feedback effect between the greenhouse effects of CO2 and water vapor (H2O). A small increase in temperature, caused by the increase in CO2 concentration, would lead to an increase in water vapor concentration and thus increase the H2O greenhouse effect.
This is a misconception. First, positive feedback effects are extremely rare in nature. Furthermore, there is no sensible word to say about the effect that an increase in the H2O greenhouse effect has on the temperature.
Below are three reasons why it is impossible to model this effect. Read more...
Rob Jetten is the new, brand new Minister of Climate and Energy in the Dutch cabinet Rutte IV.
This is a new ministry, but unfortunately it is characterized by the same ideas as in previous cabinets. The idea that humans, by burning fossil fuels, are responsible for the recent warming of the Earth. Read more...