"In its Second Assessment Report (AR2, 1995), the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change introduced an error that remains today."
It claimed that a modest warming of the surface, particularly over the Tropics, would result in a significant increase in water vapor amplifying a modest warming from CO2 and resulting in more turbulent weather systems.
It claimed to find a “distinct human fingerprint” on climate.
This was a late addition and was not agreed upon during peer review.
Fredrick Seitz stated the claim was the worst abuse of the peer review process he had witnessed in 60 years of science.
The distinct fingerprint has never been found.
After his death, Seitz and three others including SEPP President Fred Singer were pilloried by the climate establishment using unsubstantiated claims.
The major claim against Seitz was that he took money from tobacco companies.
The money came from the Reynolds Foundation, not tobacco companies, and went to Rockefeller University for medical research, which resulted in a Nobel Prize for Medicine.
There was no evidence that Seitz personally benefited.
The error of the distinct human fingerprint and the personal attacks by the climate establishment continue today.
Following the April 10 TWTW which discussed the error regarding water vapor significantly amplifying a modest warming from carbon dioxide (CO2),
Richard Lindzen, Ph.D. sent TWTW a 2009 article written by two noted advocates of strong warming with the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
They recognized that water vapor was ineffective for amplifying the warming from CO2.
Yet the climate models used by NCAR retain the earlier erroneous estimates.
Contrary to the scientific method, government bureaucracies and scientific establishments do not change their views as evidence demonstrates that their views are erroneous.
Instead, these entities insist that their members conform to existing errors.
[The error in the IPCC report was confusing the differences in temperatures with differences in vapor pressures.]"
Total Pageviews
Thursday, May 27, 2021
the Water Vapor Positive Feedback Theory, tripling the alleged effect of CO2 alome, has been wrong since the 1970s
Source: