Transient Climate Sensitivity
(TCS), and
(TCS), and
Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity
(ECS)
(ECS)
are guesses of the short term
and long term warming,
of the average temperature,
caused by a doubling
of carbon dioxide (CO2) levels
in the atmosphere.
The guesses assume CO2 warms
the atmosphere, although the
scientific proof of that doesn't exist
in any historical temperature data.
Climate change in the 20th century
could have had 100% natural causes.
Climate change in the 21st century
century was almost invisible,
except for a natural, strong
El Nino heat release from
the Pacific Ocean,
in late 2015 and early 2016,
that counts as global warming
but has nothing to do with CO2 !
Remember that we only have
simple lab experiments to
prove CO2 is a weak greenhouse
gas, and then people ASSUME
it must cause some warming
mainly at night, by slowing
nighttime cooling
(i.e.; warmer nights),
with little effect on daytime
high temperatures.
The primary greenhouse gas
is water vapor, whose effect
should overlap with CO2's effect.
That's why CO2 should have
very little greenhouse effect
in areas with high humidity,
such as the tropics.
And that's why
CO2 should have the most
greenhouse effect in dry
(low water vapor) areas,
such as areas surrounding
the north and south poles.
We have had a lot of warming
around the north pole (Arctic),
but little or no warming around
the south pole (Antarctic),
since the 1970s.
The warming may not be "global"
but HAS mainly been at night.
That's a mixed signal about CO2,
but enough evidence to say
CO2 may be causing some of
the warming, even though
"some" is an unknown percentage!
TCS and ECS are only guesses,
that require many assumptions,
and usually the use of very
questionable surface
temperature "data",
(which include more wild guesses
for areas with no thermometers,
than actual measurements
in areas that do have thermometers,
... and remember that the raw data
from those thermometers
have been "adjusted",
usually more than once,
by government bureaucrats,
who want to show more warming,
because that's what they have
been predicting for decades).
The best guess
we can do for now
is a WORST CASE estimate
of CO2 warming,
by assuming that 100%
of the measured warming
in a given time period
was caused ONLY by CO2.
If you use weather satellite data,
which are close to global data,
and are available since 1979,
(warming started in 1975)
and assume ALL the warming
was caused ONLY by CO2,
then the TCS is about
+1 degree C. per CO2 doubling:
(that would be +1 degree in 133 years,
assuming CO2 rose
+3 ppm per year), or
(that would be +1 degree C. in 200 years,
assuming CO2 rose
+2 ppm per year)
Both assumptions would be for
harmless, mild, nighttime warming.
If you use the period
since 1850,
and blame
ALL of the warming***
ONLY on CO2,
which even the IPCC does not do,
then the WORST CASE TCS
is about +1.5 degrees
per CO2 doubling
= also harmless
*** (haphazardly measured,
mainly wild guessed temperatures,
with minimal Southern Hemisphere
data before 1940)
Any attempt to claim
that one “knows” TCS,
or the more difficult
long-term concept of ECS,
is a self-serving lie.
Even the worst case
TCS or ECS estimate
is just a rough estimate,
because temperature
measurements before
weather satellites in 1979
provide very rough
far from global data,
and any feedbacks
that could reduce,
or amplify, the warming
from CO2 alone,
remain a mystery.
The UN's IPCC claim
of a water vapor
positive feedback,
eventually causing
runaway warming,
(with no scientific proof)
is an unbelievable claim:
— That claim is saying
we had no positive feedback
(or runaway warming)
for 4.5 billion years
… and then suddenly
man made CO2 triggered
a brand new water vapor
positive feedback
in 1975 !
Of course anything goes
in modern climate “science”.
I suppose the fairy tale
of a “new” water vapor
positive feedback
starting after 1975,
goes well with
the other fairy tale
global warmunists love,
which is their belief in a
"new" climate controller (CO2),
starting after 1975 !
— Warmunists' bizarre belief
is that 4.5 billion years
of natural climate change
suddenly stopped in 1940.
— Aerosols took over
as the “climate controller”
in 1940, then
— Aerosols fell out of the air
in 1975, and then CO2 took over
as the “climate controller”
in 1975.
No warmunist tries to explain
how a water vapor
positive feedback
would suddenly appear,
… or how natural climate change
would suddenly disappear,
… because in modern climate “science”,
you can PONTIFICATE anything,
but never have to PROVE anything !
Some climate science skeptics
who don't believe the IPCC fairy tales,
meaning they have sense,
seem overconfident in their
own theories of climate change ...
... but in my 20-years experience
reading about climate science,
skeptic 'pet theories' have been
proven WRONG 100% of the time
by other skeptics !
In climate science,
which I consider to be
“no one knows science”,
one can be closer
to “the truth” than the IPCC,
but still wrong -- perhaps
less wrong than the IPCC,
but still wrong !
I still believe the person
who says “I don’t know”
can be the smartest person
in the room, when the subject
is climate science.
My four lessons
from 20 years of
climate science reading:
(1)
Don’t predict the future climate,
or believe predictions
of the future climate,
because predictions
have always been wrong !
(2)
Don’t be so sure you, or anyone else,
have “the answer” -- an unproven,
theory is just an opinion !
(3)
Don’t think you can make
precise calculations using
the huge margin of error
surface temperature
“measurements”
(my logical opinion,
not the “official” tiny,
unbelievable margins)
(4)
Remember that politicians
love to use a “crisis” to gain power,
and they don't care if the crisis
is real, or a fake crisis like the
"coming" global warming crisis,
that is always "coming",
but never arrives!
Leftist politicians simply proclaim
that a catastrophe is coming,
and only THEIR GOVERNMENT
knows how to prevent it !
The three global warmunist
fake claims about CO2:
(1)
CO2 controls the average temperature.
The truth:
No one knows
what causes climate change,
other than planetary geometry,
which can only explain
very large temperature changes,
with cycles of over 10,000 years,
not harmless minor changes,
of a degree or two,
over a century or two,
that warmunists obsess about.
(2)
People can predict the future climate,
simply by estimating future CO2 levels,
The truth:
People have been predicting
the future climate for over 30 years,
but the predictions were very wrong
-- calling for global warming
that was triple of what
actually happened,
and the measured warming
was far from being "global"
-- barely affecting Antarctica,
which should have had
as much warming as the Arctic,
if greenhouse gasses,
such as CO2,
were the cause
of the warming !
(3)
Doubling CO2 levels will cause
+3 degrees C. warming,
+/- 1.5 degrees C.
The truth:
+1 degree C. is the worst case,
assuming ALL of the warming
in the satellite era,
since 1979,
was caused ONLY by CO2
(Note:
There is no scientific proof
that ANY of the warming
was caused by CO2,
because 1975 to 2000 warming,
when CO2 was rising rapidly,
was almost the same as
1910 to 1940 warming,
when CO2 was NOT rising rapidly,
so even the IPCC admits
only a tiny percentage
of 1910 to 1940 warming
could be blamed on CO2).
There is no reason to assume,
that two similar warming periods
in the same (20th) century,
had completely different causes
-- one natural warming,
from 1910 to 1940, and
one man made CO2 warming,
from 1975 to 2000,
as the IPCC claims,
without evidence!
Skeptics can successfully attack
IPCC claims without having a better
theory of what causes climate change,
and without ever predicting,
what the future climate will be.
Many skeptics think saying
"no one knows"
makes them appear weak.
I believe saying "no one knows"
makes one appear smart.
And that's why I say
no one knows
enough about what variables
control climate change,
to even create a correct
physics model
of climate change.
Climate science is mainly
"no one knows science",
surrounded by a lot of:
babbling,
big mouth,
blabbermouth,
blowhard,
blustering,
chattering,
gasbag,
jabbering,
jabbering,
know it all,
loud mouth,
ranting,
raving,
windbag,
yapping,
leftist politicians,
claiming they know everything,
about the future climate,
and only their leadership
can save our planet,
for the children ...
... and the politicians,
and their hired
government bureaucrats,
with science degrees,
perform like trained parrots:
CO2 is evil
CO2 is evil
CO2 is evil
squawk, squawk
... while actually
knowing nothing
about the future climate,
yet they foolishly
demonize CO2,
to attack fossil fuels,
not realizing CO2
is the staff of life,
and is still at a low level,
that stunts the growth rate,
of green plants used for food,
by people and animals.