Politicians and government bureaucrat
"scientists" are leading the demonization
of carbon dioxide (CO2), so we should
immediately be suspicious
of ulterior motives.
After two decades of reading
about climate science and climate change,
I am still shocked by how little real science
is behind the climate scaremongering.
Real science is based on data,
and can be falsified.
But not the coming climate catastrophe!
It's a fairy tale, based almost entirely
on fake (junk) science.
The fake science is wild guess predictions
of the future climate that can never be falsified,
just like a religious belief in God, heaven and hell
can never be proven false to a religious person.
The fake climate science is one assumption
on top of another assumption, all baked into the
programming of computer games ... which are
actually nothing more than the personal opinions
of government bureaucrat "scientists",
expressed in complicated, mathematical terms.
These computer games are based on
an unproven theory:
Carbon dioxide allegedly became
the 'climate controller' at some time --
never specified -- after the ramp up of
fossil fuel burning started in about 1940.
Calling the computer games something else
-- general circulation models -- makes them
sound scientific, but they have been grossly
over-predicting global warming for over
three decades.
Wrong predictions mean the computer models
are not models of any real climate process
on this planet ( or else the predictions
would be right ! ).
These climate computer games have:
(1) predicted two to three times the actual warming
over the past 30 years (strike 1),
(2) failed to predict a flat average temperature
trend from 2000 to 2015 (strike 2),
(3) predicted significant warming of Antarctica,
which actually had a flat average temperature
trend since 1975 (strike 3), and
(4) predicted a rising temperature with altitude,
peaking at about six miles up in the tropics,
a "hot spot" that also does not exist
in real life (strike 4)
It's obvious the computer games have failed
to prove CO2 is the climate controller!
Real science, based on thousands of experiments,
tells us CO2 is airborne plant food, and
most plants want a lot more CO2 in the air,
for faster growth, and reduced water requirements.
That's why I support a doubling or tripling
of current CO2 levels, to green the Earth,
based on real science ( rather than being based
on unproven theories and assumptions, as used
to demonize CO2 ).
The demonization of CO2, and fossil fuels,
is based on emotions -- feelings that humans
are somehow destroying their planet
-- like a secular religion, not real science.
The only real science concerning CO2
is laboratory experiments that prove CO2
is a "greenhouse gas".
Note:
Greenhouse owners actually use
CO2 enrichment to accelerate
plant growth, but "greenhouse
gas" is intended to have another
meaning unrelated to real greenhouses.
There is no scientific proof CO2
actually causes any warming
of our planet, because that can't
be proven with a closed system
laboratory experiment.
However, increasing CO2 in the air,
or increasing any other greenhouse gas,
SHOULD slow the natural cooling rate
at night, meaning that nights SHOULD
be warmer, by some amount.
And nights have been getting warmer,
although there is no way to prove CO2 caused
that warming, other than assuming it did.
For purely political reasons,
unrelated to real science,
government bureaucrat scientists
arbitrarily decided to demonize CO2.
Doing that gave them permanent job security
( to study a coming global warming crisis
they keep predicting year after year ).
These bureaucrats never try to explain
why natural climate changes,
happening for 4.5 billion years,
would have suddenly stopped
in the middle of the 20th century,
and how man made CO2 mysteriously
took over as the "temperature controller".
They never try to explain that switch
from natural warming to man made warming,
because they can't -- it's a fairy tale!
If you want to believe that fairy tale,
you could estimate the worst case
global warming from a doubling
of CO2 levels.
That's called the transient climate sensitivity,
or TCS.
Doubling CO2 in the atmosphere
would take 133 (or 200) years,
with CO2 increasing +2 ppm (or +3 ppm)
per year.
The resulting worst case TCS is + 1 degree C.
of global warming per CO2 doubling,
which would be very gradual and harmless!
But remember:
That +1 degree C. TCS is based on
the assumption that CO2 caused 100%
the warming since 1979, in spite of
no scientific proof that CO2 caused
ANY of the warming since 1979.
I say "no scientific proof" because there was
a warming period from 1910 to 1940,
which no one blames on man made CO2
( it was natural warming - cause unknown ).
That 1910 to 1940 warming period was similar
to the warming period from 1975 to 2000
( which bureaucrats arbitrarily blame
on man made CO2, without any proof ).
The bureaucrats never explain
that the 1975 to 2000 warming
could have had natural causes.
+ 1 degree of global warming in 133 to 200 years
would not scare anyone, especially because
CO2 does not increase daytime temperatures!
But if the public is not scared
of the future climate, then there is
no permanent job security for the
government bureaucrat "scientists".
So the bureaucrat "scientists"
invented a new theory
that global warming from CO2,
( never proven )
would increase water vapor in the air.
( also never proven! )
And a scary "water vapor positive feedback"
reaction to more CO2 in the atmosphere,
would allegedly triple the warming
from CO2 alone.
So, by creating that new unproven assumption,
bureaucrats created a coming climate change
catastrophe ( that will never come ) out of thin air !
The upper troposphere is where 90% of the
CO2 water vapor positive feedback effect
is supposed to happen, tripling the warming
from CO2 alone.
Without the imaginary water vapor "amplifier",
CO2 warming, at worst, would be small
and harmless.
There are many climate theories
and assumptions.
And then there are facts:
The upper troposphere is NOT showing
any increase in specific humidity
as CO2 levels rise !
An analysis of NASA satellite data
shows that water vapor, the most important
greenhouse gas by far, has DECLINED
in the upper atmosphere.
Many scientists believe that doubling
the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2)
in the atmosphere, which would take
about 133 to 200 years, would theoretically
warm the Earth by about +1 degree Celsius
... if there was no change in evaporation,
water vapor and clouds.
Climate computer models
arbitrarily amplify the assumed
+1 degree C. warming effect of CO2,
by a factor of three, simply by ASSUMING
huge positive feedbacks from water vapor
and clouds, for which there is no evidence.
About 2/3 of the warming predicted
by climate models is due to increased
upper atmosphere water vapor
-- an alleged positive feedback effect
that does not exist in real life !
For a steady Earth temperature,
the amount of incoming solar energy
absorbed by the planet
(daytime solar warming),
must be balanced by an equal amount
of outgoing long wave radiation
(nighttime infrared cooling),
at the top of the atmosphere.
An increase of water vapor
in the upper atmosphere,
if it actually existed,
would reduce nighttime cooling
But, even though man made CO2 levels
have significantly increased since 1940,
no water vapor increase has been
measured in the upper atmosphere !
Richard Greene
May 6, 2018
Bingham Farms, Michigan,
since 1987
BS 1975
MBA 1977
Does not speak French
Note:
If anyone ever asks, and they won't:
The water vapor content of an atmospheric layer
is represented by the height in millimeters (mm)
that would result from precipitating all the water vapor
in a vertical column, to liquid water.
The near-surface layer is from the surface to where
the atmospheric pressure is 700 millibar (mb),
or about 3 km altitude.
The middle layer is from 700 mb to 500 mb air pressure,
or from 3 km to 6 km attitude.
The upper layer is from 500 mb to 300 mb air pressure,
or from 6 km to 10 km altitude.