Climate sensitivity
is the long term
change in the
global average
temperature
( inaccurately
called "the climate" )
after a doubling
of the atmospheric
CO2 level.
A common term is
Equilibrium Climate
Sensitivity, or ECS.
ECS is unknown,
so scientists make
wild guesses.
Lab experiments
suggest more CO2
ought ro cause mild
global warming,
amount unknown.
There has been mild
global warming for
about 325 years.
At least half of that
warming can't be
blamed on man
made CO2.
Natural causes
of climate change
can cause global
warming too.
Canada was covered
with glaciers 20,000
years ago, and they
melted from about
20,000 to 10,000
years ago.
Not caused by man
made CO2, of course.
Warming since 1975
could have been
caused by man made
CO2, and natural
causes of climate
change..
No one knows
the exact causes
of the warming.
We can jump
to a conclusion,
like almost all
climate alarmists do,
and assume ONLY
CO2 levels control
the climate.
Using that
assumption,
we could claim
a doubling of the
CO2 level would
cause about a
+1 to +1.5 degree
increase of the global
average temperature,
which would take
at least one century.
But that would be
a harmless rate
global warming,
and also below
the ECS range
estimated by most
climate alarmists
since the 1970's:
+1.5 to +4.5
degrees C.
Climate alarmists
always refuse
to acknowledge
that PAST global
warming was harmless
... even after 325 years
of harmless warming.
Nor will they predict
harmless FUTURE
global warming.
If you want to
be an alarmist,
you must predict
something
alarming !
And you keep
making the
same scary
prediction
every year,
for over 40 years,
while the temperature
barely changes.
And you use a single
global average
temperature not
one person lives in/
With a single average
you can hide important
details.
You don't have
to show that
actual warming
since 1975,
was mainly
in locations,
and at times,
when warming
was good news
-- such as the
warmer winter
nights in Alaska.
Cimate alarmists
stick with their high
ECS wild guess, and
ignore the fact that
their climate models
over predict warming
by 2x to 3x, using that
fantasy ECS !
There’s not a lot
of warming over
the 20th century
to explain.
So alarmists
came up with
a bizarre theory
to explain that
a high ECS,
that generates
alarming future
climate projections,
is the correct ECS.
They claim that
we are not seeing
a much faster
CO2 warming
rate because
the CO2 warming
is partially offset
by air pollution
blocking some
incoming solar
energy (sunlight).
The "aerosol"
air pollution
(sulphur dioxide
and soot, aka
particulate matter),
allegedly blocks
some sunlight,
causing global
cooling, that partially
offsets some
of the CO2 warming.
There was plenty
of air pollution
in the 1960's
and 1970s.
That theory
might help explain
why the global average
temperature declined
from 1940 to 1975,
based on real time
measurements,
by about -0.3 to -0.5
degrees C.
( Note: The
climate alarmists
have been "adjusting"
away that cooling, over
the past few decades,
so that now temperature
compilations pretend
there was only
-0.1 degree C.
cooling, or the cooling
never happened at all ! )
The HUGE problem
with the aerosol
cooling theory is
global warming
started in 1975.
So what happened
to all the air pollution ?
Did the change from
cooling to warming
happen because
all the air pollution
fell out of the sky
in 1975 !
Of course not !
We have over
four decades of
weather satellite
measurements,
that provide
near global
coverage,
in a stable
environment.
Satellites are also
in the troposphere,
measuring where
the greenhouse
effect occurs.
The satellite
measurements,
ignored by climate
alarmists, reflect
mild global warming.
Measurements
are real data.
That's real science.
Climate models
have predicted
much faster
global warming,
except for one
Russian model.
Models make
wild guesses,
and their output
is not real data.
Model wild guesses
consistently grossly
over-predict global
warming (since the
1970s) !
The fact that errors
are almost always
in the same direction
strongly suggests
climate models
are junk science.
That's no surprise,
because climate
alarmism is
junk science.