This is an expanded version of the article originally posted yesterday:
Modern climate "junk science" ignores three fundamental rules of real science:
(1)
Real science is never settled,
(2)
Real scientists are always skeptical, so they know a consensus means nothing in science, and
(3)
Minority views are never "debated" with ridicule and character attacks.
Most of what you read in the mainstream media is climate junk science -- not real science.
Most common are the always wrong wild guess predictions of a coming climate crisis. These consistently wrong predictions have been published since the 1960s, yet our climate is better than ever. Winters are not quite as cold as they used to be.
We have only had reasonably accurate measurements of the global average temperature since 1979, using weather satellites (UAH).
The climate alarmists only report surface measurements, which have far from global coverage, so they can make up the numbers for areas with no weather stations.
The numbers they make up (aka "infilling") result in more warming than measured by the weather satellites, so they ignore the weather satellite data.
The following chart showa a comparison of weather satellite (UAH), and one of the surface temperature compilations (hdCRUT from England), from January 1979 through February 2019. The warming is shown by latitude.
Note that the actual warming is very uneven -- not what is expected from adding CO2 into the atmosphere. Both poles should have the most warming, if CO2 caused the warming.
Notice a lot of warming in the northern half of the northern hemisphere ! But no warming trend in the southern half of the Southern Hemisphere? That's not what is expected from greenhouse warming caused by CO2. Climate science is far from being "settled":
Not shown on the chart above is that most of the warming since 1979 has been during the coldest six months of the year, and most of the warming since 1979 has also been at night ! Very pleasant timing to have mild warming !
Think of warmer winter nights in Alaska to describe the uneven warming of our planet. I doubt if people living in Alaska think that's bad news?
In addition to the very pleasant pattern and timing of the warming since 1979, which most people assume is caused by CO2, our planet is 'greening' from more CO2 in the air:
Climate science has gone backwards since the United Nations created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. The IPCC immediately decided natural causes of climate change, in progress for 4.5 billion years, no longer mattered.
The IPCC's only goal was to prove man made greenhouse gasses, primarily carbon dioxide, 'control the climate'. They have never proved that claim about CO2 -- they merely assert it is true.
They claim, with no proof, that the effect of CO2 on the global average temperature is large, based on an unproven theory from the 1970s, with a huge +/- 50 percent range.
Actual temperature measurements since the 1970s suggest the effect of CO2 on global warming, assuming CO2 causes all the warming, is below the range claimed by the IPCC.
And that's a worst case estimate, assuming increased CO2 in the atmosphere is the ONLY cause of ALL global warming. (No one knows the actual effect of more CO2 in the atmosphere).
Laboratory experiments (infrared spectroscopy) of CO2 suggest mild, harmless global warming. Actual global warming has been mild and harmless -- but only half the warming predicted by the IPCC, and their favorite computer games, sometimes called climate models.
We have over 30 years of "climate model" computer games over predicting global warming:
After over 30 years of over predicting global warming, the latest versions of the computer games for the IPCC in 2021 are predicting even faster global warming. It is obvious that accuracy is not a goal of the computer game predictions.
Computer games predict whatever their owners want to predict. They are personal opinions, not real data. With real science, the climate models would have been getting much more accurate over the past three decades, not less accurate !
Adding CO2 to the atmosphere has been good news for over a century. But only when added to the air with modern pollution controls.
CO2 is not a pollutant -- it is the staff of life, for almost all life on our planet. But there are real pollutants from burning fossil fuels without modern pollution controls.
Real pollution is obvious in the air that people breathe in many large Asian cities. But the so-called "environmentalists" could not care less about that real pollution.
Global warming is real. Our planet is always warming, or cooling. It has been warming for the past 20,000 years.
"Official" surface global warming since 1851 (British hadCRUT) is shown in the chart below, in Kelvin degrees: Data
before World War II are very rough estimates. Before 1900 is a wild
guess. Climate alarmists will never tell you that. But I just did:
We are lucky to live in a warm period called the Holocene interglacial, and
in a mild warming trend, within that interglacial period, that started
in the late 1600s. We should be happy about our climate.
We are told the global average temperature and the atmospheric CO2 concentration were 'perfect' in the "pre-industrial" times (around 1750). Even though the global average temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentrations in "pre-industrial" times are very rough guesses.
1750 CO2 levels are guessed from air bubbles in Antarctica ice cores. Global average temperatures are guessed from climate proxy studies -- very few real time measurements from thermometers in 1750 were available.
People living in the 1650 to 1750 period thought it was too cold. But never mind them. What could they possibly know about the climate they lived in?
The mainstream media have provided biased, anti-science environmental alarmism since the 1960s. I thank the mainstream media for making this blog necessary.
Bingham Farms, Michigan,