Climate "science" is missing the science

"Climate science" 

has no idea 

how much warming 

will result from

adding CO2 to the air, 

by burning fossil fuels. 

“Climate scientists” realized 

warming from CO2 alone

was likely to be minor,

and harmless.

No crisis -- not even close.

But they wanted a crisis,

for job security, 

so they invented one:

  A CO2 / water vapor 

positive feedback effect,

to arbitrarily triple the best guess

of climate sensitivity to CO2 alone.

Then they invented 

a runaway greenhouse effect 

-- a fictional boogeyman 

that does not exist.

Our planet has had 

more CO2 in the air

than we have today 

for almost the entire 

4.5 billion years

 ... with no known 

runaway warming 

in spite of CO2 levels 

up to 10 or 20 times

 the current level.

The "Climate Sensitivity"

to a CO2 doubling is unknown, 

but warmists latched on 

to a range from 1979, 

and have stuck to it ever since

 (+3 degrees. C. warming,

+/- 1.5 degrees C. 

per doubling of CO2)

There is no science behind 

the +3.0 degrees C.

It is a wild guess.

There is no science 

behind the water vapor 

positive feedback theory.

In fact, "climate science" 

is about 99% politics

and 1% science!

Simple lab experiments --

—using infrared absorption 

spectroscopy (IRS)

-- determined the infrared

absorption spectrum of CO2.

That tells us CO2 is 

a minor greenhouse gas,

at least in a closed system 

laboratory experiment.

That's all we really know --

everything else is assumed.

CO2 has a small band 

of frequencies at which it

can absorb and emit 

infrared (IR) radiation 

-- that should slightly slow 

the cooling, in the half 

of our planet that

is cooling off at night.

There has been some 

global warming 

from 1975 to 2000,

mainly from the 

early 1990s to early 2000s,

mainly at night in one cold, 

dry area -- the northern half

of the Northern Hemisphere.

That warming could be a "signature" 

of warming from a higher level

of a greenhouse gas, 

such as water vapor, 

CO2 or methane.

Another important "signature"

would be a lot of warming at night

in the southern half 

of the Southern Hemisphere, 

but that warming has been slight. 

CO2 is selective, 

so the vast majority 

of infrared radiation (IR)

passes right through it, 

and on to space 

as half of the Earth 

cools at night. 

Water vapor, 

the main greenhouse gas, 

has a much wider band 

of IR absorption frequencies, 

but it also misses 

some frequencies.

Water vapor and CO2’s 

IR absorption frequencies overlap, 

so there is a limit to how much IR 

is available for CO2 to absorb.

“Catastrophic manmade 

global warming” (CAGW) 

is disproved by the actual 

global average temperature data 

since 1940.

Atmospheric CO2 increased 

while the average global temperature 

went down from 1940 to 1975, 

up from 1975 to 2000, 

and sideways from 2000 to 2015.

Three different CO2 / temperature

correlations in only 75 years.

The maximum estimate 

of "Transient Climate Sensitivity" 

to CO2 alone is about +1 degree C. 

per doubling of CO2 

(Christy and McNider 2017)
https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/2017_christy_mcnider-1.pdf

That study is based on weather satellite 

temperature data from 1979 to mid-2017 

(satellite data are the only reasonably 

accurate global average temperature data 

available for this worst case estimate). 

What does +1 degree C. 
per doubling of CO2 mean?

It means the average temperature
would increase by:
 + 1 degree C.
in 200 years, 
with CO2 increasing
+ 2 ppm per year,

... or + 1 degree C. 
in 133 years,
with CO2 increasing 
+ 3 ppm per year.

The maximum 
climate sensitivity estimate

(worst case CO2 warming) 

requires huge assumptions.

It is merely assumed that

ALL the measured warming 

in the weather satellite era,
since 1979, 

was due to increasing 

atmospheric CO2 

(an unlikely assumption,
but certainly a worst case
estimate). 

Please note that 
even the maximum 

climate sensitivity to CO2 

estimate is quite low

 -- it's so low there is

no credible global warming crisis.

A logical minimum 

climate sensitivity estimate

is near zero, by assuming 

warming after 1979 

was natural, with little or no 

warming from CO2. 

Natural global warming 
from 1910 to 1940 

(before the ramp up of 

fossil fuel use after 1940) 

was similar to the so-called 

“man-made global warming” 

from 1975 to 2000. 

There is no reason to believe 

warming in the satellite era,
after 1979, was entirely due 

to increasing man made

atmospheric CO2.

That assumption would mean

4.5 billion years of natural

climate change suddenly ended 

in the 1970s, and man made CO2 

suddenly became the new

"climate controller",

with no explanation of how, 
or why, that could have happened !

"Catastrophic man-made 

climate change” 

is a leftist fairy tale 

not based on any science 

other than simple experiments 

(showing CO2 acts as a minor 

greenhouse gas in a closed system 

laboratory environment).

The lack of real science is

demonstrated by 

the bizarre claims, that

increasing atmospheric CO2, 

can cause almost anything:

– warmer weather, 

-- colder weather, 

-- wetter weather, 

-- drier weather, 

-- windier weather, etc. 

The bizarre claims are 

like a "warmist" comedy hour

for real climate scientists!

The warmists' 

over-active imaginations 

have turned CO2 into 

a “miracle molecule” 

that can cause anything 

that frightens 

the chronically fearful. 

The lack of real science 

is stunning.

It is almost unbelievable 

that an imaginary 
coming climate crisis 

can be believed 

by so many people, 

on faith, like a religion, 

treating government bureaucrats 

with science degrees, 

as if they were climate gods.

Wild guesses, 

and unproven theories, 

stated by 

government bureaucrats, 

with science degrees,

year after year, 

do not become real science 

simply because they are repeatedly

stated with great confidence!