Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in climate debate says MIT
Scientist
In a study sure to ruffle the feathers of the Global
Warming cabal, Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT has
published a paper which proves that IPCC models are
overstating by 6 times, the relevance of CO2 in
Earth�s Atmosphere. Dr. Lindzen has found that heat
is radiated out in to space at a far higher rate
than any modeling system to date can account for.
Editorial: The science is in. the scare is out.
Recent papers and data give a complete picture of
why the UN is wrong.
The pdf file located at the link
above from the
Science and Public Policy Institute
has absolutely, convincingly, and irrefutably proven
the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming to be
completely false.
Professor Richard Lindzen of
MIT�s peer reviewed work states �we now know that
the effect of CO2 on temperature is small, we know
why it is small, and we know that it is having very
little effect on the climate.?/p>
The global surface temperature
record, which we update and publish
every month, has shown no
statistically-significant �global warming?br>
for almost 15 years. Statistically-significant
global cooling has now
persisted for very nearly eight years. Even a
strong el Nino ?expected
in the coming months ?will be unlikely to
reverse the cooling trend.
More significantly, the ARGO
bathythermographs deployed
throughout the world�s oceans since 2003 show
that the top 400
fathoms of the oceans, where it is agreed
between all parties that at
least 80% of all heat caused by manmade �global
warming?must
accumulate, have been cooling over the past six
years. That now prolonged
ocean cooling is fatal to the �official?theory
that �global
warming?will happen on anything other than a
minute scale.
-
SPPI Monthly CO2 Report: July 2009
If for no other reason than this:
the IPCC assumes that the concentration of CO2 in
2100 will be 836 ppmv (parts per million volume).
However, current graphs based on real data show that
CO2 concentrations will only be 570 ppmv in 2100,
cutting the IPCC�s estimates in half right there.
Another nail in the coffin of
Global Warming is the observed rate of temperature
change from 1980, which is observed to be 1.5
degrees C per century. The IPCC modeling calls for
a range of 2.4 to 5.3 degree increase per century,
which is far above what is observed in real data
collected between 1980 and 2009. The graph below
clearly represents a far different reality as
opposed to the predictions.
Graph A
Not only is the IPCC basing its
predictions on data that has been doubled from
observed data, it is overstating the role of CO2 in
Climate altogether. As the graph seen below shows,
when charted for the years between 2002 and 2009,
that solid red median line is going down, indicating
global cooling.
Graph B
As significant as the above
results are, it is not the Pi�ce de r�sistance. What
is - the curious minded what to know? It is the ERBE
results. The Earth Radiation Budget Experiment with
15 years worth of data. The ERBE result is
absolutely devastating to the entire Global Warming
Theory.
The following graph (Graph C)
shows the ERBE results in the upper left hand
corner, which is real recorded data, not a computer
model. The 11 other graphs are the results from the
models used by the UN and everyone else which state
that more radiation should be held within Earth�s
system, thereby causing warming of the climate. More
simply put, the UN results illogically predict that
as the oceans got warmer, the earth would simply
hold more heat. The UN explains that it is CO2
which is holding this extra energy. This theory is
not supportable by the simple fact that CO2
cannot hold that much heat, it is a very poor
greenhouse gas compared with water. If anything,
more clouds -water vapor- would conceivably hold the
extra heat, but the corresponding rise in global
temperatures this would cause have not been
observed. This leaves only one conclusion, the Earth
is radiating the extra heat into space, and this is
supported by the data.
The ERBE results, which are
factual data from real measurements made by
satellite, show the exact opposite result from the
UN/IPCC Projections (computer models which are not
real data). As seas warm on earth, the earth
releases more heat into space and the satellite
results prove it.
Graph C
The mismatch
between reality and prediction is entirely
clear. It is this
astonishing graph that provides the final
evidence that the UN has
absurdly exaggerated the effect not only of CO2
but of all greenhouse
gases on global mean surface temperature. -
Lindzen & Choi (2009).
For the sake of making the above
graphs clear in their meanings, the term ?SST stands
for Change in Sea Surface Temperature measured in
Kelvin (A unit of temperature like to Celsius and
Fahrenheit), and is a measurement of change
in sea temperatures. A -1.0 number would indicate
cooling, a zero reflects no temperature change, and
a +1.0 would indicate an increase in temperature.
?Flux, The Vertical line in these
graphs, measures the change in the amount of
radiation released by the planet in the infra-red
spectrum, heat in other words. From zero to +6 shows
more heat radiated out into space. From zero to -6
shows less heat being radiated into space.
0 change in ?SST equals 0 change
in ?Flux or no change. Less infra-red heat radiation
going out into space should correlate to cooler sea
surface temperatures, as there is less heat
available to radiate out. More heat radiating out
appears when sea surface temperature increases have
occurred and more heat is available to radiate. Heat
is radiated out into space as seas warm, and this
overall maintains a climate equilibrium, This is
proven by the ERBE graph in Graph C
above as well as the other graphs presented in this
article, which are based on observed data, not
computer models.
Graph D
The 3300 Argo bathythermograph
buoys deployed throughout the world�s oceans
since late in 2003 have shown a slight cooling
of the oceans over the past five years, directly
contrary to the official theory that any �global
warming?not showing in the atmosphere would
definitely show up in the first 400 fathoms of
the world�s oceans, where at least 80% of any
surplus heat would be stored.
Source: ARGO project, June 2009.
All of this data leads to the
conclusion that the UN/IPCC models are not only
wrong, they are so far off the mark as to be
laughable. The satellite and bathythermograph data
clearly do not match the IPCC theory, which means
that the theory is incorrect.
What this data does tell us is if
CO2 concentration should double, global
temperatures will not rise by the devastating 6
degrees F the UN predicts, but by a completely
harmless 1 degree F. The ERBE data shows an Earth
system that is radiating more heat into space as sea
surfaces warm, in other words a system at
equilibrium, and is clearly demonstrated by observed
data. The UN theory of Anthropogenic Global
Warming is dead wrong.
The UN/IPCC have been using
models that give a result that allow them to tell
Nation States they must reduce and cap Carbon
Emissions or the earth�s climate will warm by a
devastating 6 degrees F. When in reality, more heat
is simply radiated out into space as the ERBE
OBSERVED DATA (Not a computer model) PROVES.
The United States House of
Representatives has passed a Carbon tax (Cap and
Trade) as have other governments in Europe, based on
these completely erroneous models.
There are only a couple of
conclusions to be made of this. Either the world has
been misled by scientists working for the UN and
IPCC due to faulty science, or faulty science has
been deliberately used in a global scheme to
generate tax revenues for the Governments
instituting Cap and Trade Taxation policies.
Either way, the world has been
the victim of some very bad science. The results of
which can be seen in drastically reduced GDP in
countries with the Cap and Trade laws in place, as
well a a 5 - 10% decrease in standard of living for
those citizens living there (Taxing
Carbon designed to fail.), all with little or no
effect on emissions globally.
Perhaps this will finally end the
attempt by the Obama Administration as well as
congress to tax a substance that trees need to
survive, the very air we exhale thousands of times a
day.
Thank you Professor Richard
Lindzen, Dr. Ferenc M. Miskolczi, Dr. Mikl�s Z�goni,
Dr. Mike Fox here in Oregon, and a great many other
Scientists the world over, who decided to look at
facts, instead of playing with models. Science is
based on data, facts not theories. They took the
facts, and let the theory write itself. The IPCC
took theories and tried to cherry pick only the
details that fit, and in the end failed to do even
that.
Public policies should also be
based on facts, not on unproven and in the end
disproven theories. The United States and indeed the
world is in the debt of these and other scientists,
who relied on data and facts to describe our world
and its climate! We are in their debt!
For more info:
Science and Public Policy Institute,
Editorial: The science is in. the scare is out.
Recent papers and data give a complete picture of
why the UN is wrong.
Climate change? Not so fast say Scientists,
Have it your way - Global warming is baloney,
Einstein-like breakthrough in Climate Science (Part
1),
Einstein-like breakthrough in Climate Science (Part
2),
Oregon legislature plays Cap-n-Trade shell game,
Democrats say Cap and Trade is a big tax,
Taxing Carbon designed to fail
Updated to clarify sourcing. All
information in this article is directly from
SPPI June Report. as is stated in the beginning
of article. 8-18-2009 2:02pm Pacific
|
