All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

Whenever someone asserts that a scientific question is “settled,” they tell me immediately that they don’t understand the first thing about science. Science is never settled. Dr David Deming

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf
A lie told often enough becomes the truth.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin - See more at: http://thepeoplescube.com/lenin/lenin-s-own-20-monster-quotes-t185.html#sthash.aTrSI3tG.dpuf

Thursday, 9 October 2014

Global Cooling: Is it a possibility?

Chris Dawson
CEO Lord Monckton Foundation

In preparing for Natural Climate Change going forward, are we looking at Global Cooling as a possibility? 

If not, why not?

You will be ASTONISHED to find that NO scientist, voter, journalist, politician or bureaucrat can nominate or cite any specific empirically based, reputably published, peer reviewed paper/s which convinced them that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming has recently happened or is happening now or will happen soon.

In part one of our two part series (link) we looked at the very powerful but completely fabricated claim that 97% of scientists accept the Catastrophic Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming (CAGW) hypothesis as being settled. We demonstrated that this 97% consensus claim was false and indeed fabricated. As there is no evidence of a consensus amongst scientists, we must examine the actual physical empirical evidence itself. And here you will see why so many good scientists (as opposed to Alarmist Activist Scientists), those scientists committed to the scientific method, reason and logic, reject the CAGW hypothesis on the basis of a simple lack of empirical scientific evidence. 

In any event, even if there were a consensus among scientists of even this implausible 97% magnitude, science is not consensus and consensus is not science.

Here in part two of this series we examine the CAGW hypothesis through the prism of what science actually is. This simple logical analysis will demonstrate clearly that there is no empirical evidence in support of the CAGW hypothesis, and this fact alone will demonstrate why many scientists do not now accept the CAGW hypothesis.
We will now break the CAGW hypothesis down into its component parts that even a ‘journalist’ or a Prime Minister can understand.

The CAGW hypothesis is usually presented along the following lines:



“The Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming science is settled and an overwhelming scientific consensus of over 97% of all scientists say that – 
human carbon dioxide emissions are the main cause of increasing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide which, as a greenhouse gas, is the main cause of our current global warming which is unprecedented, accelerating and dangerous and which is the main cause of melting ice caps and the loss of sea ice, rising sea levels, increasing storms, droughts, floods and extreme weather events and if we don’t act now by reducing carbon dioxide emissions and paying large amounts of cash to third world dictators and UN bureaucrats we will reach an unstoppable unimaginable catastrophic climate change tipping point.”



Remember, people have been brainwashed to believe that there is a 97% consensus of scientists supporting the CAGW hypothesis and that the evidence is so overwhelming that only a rabid sceptic would question the science.

However the scientific method requires scepticism and an ongoing process of questioning and testing of any hypothesis against the slowly growing body of empirical evidence and scientific knowledge.

The Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis breakdown:

1)    Rapidly accelerating human emissions of Carbon Dioxide –
is the main cause of  
2)    rapidly increasing concentrations of the Greenhouse gas, Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere
which is the main cause of
3)    rapidly accelerating unprecedented dangerous global warming as was, and is currently, measured by average global near surface temperatures
which is the main cause of 
4)    rapidly rising sea-levels, pacific island inundation, melting ice caps and the loss of sea ice, increasing storm energy, droughts and floods and so on. 
and if we don’t act now by reducing carbon dioxide emissions and paying large amounts of cash to third world dictators and UN bureaucrats
5)    we will reach an unstoppable unimaginable catastrophic climate change tipping point.

Remember this CAGW hypothesis is a relatively new hypothesis, which replaced the earlier generally-held Natural Background Climate Change hypothesis.

Natural Background Climate Change, it was argued by CAGW protagonists, did not explain the rapidly accelerating unprecedented dangerous global warming as was then measured by average global near surface temperatures. The CAGW protagonists stated that only increasing human carbon dioxide emissions could explain this rapid rise. At this point, the UN IPCC was set up with an unscientific ‘Charter to find the evidence in support of the CAGW hypothesis’.

The argument against the Natural Background Climate Change, derived as it was from the geological and historical record suggesting a continuous and ongoing flow, through a number of natural cycles, with Ice Ages and Interglacial Periods being the most obvious manifestations, was that it was apparently not enough to explain the unprecedented rise in global temperatures.

Now in science it is incumbent upon those who develop a new hypothesis to better explain a new phenomena (like rapidly rising temperatures) to demonstrate with reproducible experiments or observations (empirical evidence) how the new hypothesis is superior to the old.

Advocates for the CAGW hypothesis must demonstrate that Natural Background Climate Change does not adequately explain a particular phenomena of Climate Change past and present; and must simultaneously demonstrate that the CAGW hypothesis does explain Climate Change past and present, including the particular phenomena (like the rapidly rise of temperatures from 1975 to 1996) in question. 

However, as NO scientist, voter, journalist, politician or bureaucrat can nominate or cite alone or in combination, any specific empirically based, reputably published, peer reviewed paper/s that demonstrate/s that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is happening now and/or will happen in the future, there is no empirical evidence in support of the CAGW hypothesis. Thus, in the opinion of the writer, the new CAGW hypothesis never superseded the old. 

We will now examine in detail the evidence (or lack thereof) for the doubtful elements of the CAGW hypothesis:


Rapidly accelerating Human emissions of the Greenhouse Gas, Carbon Dioxide is the main cause of rapidly increasing concentrations of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.

Summary
It is not clear that human carbon dioxide emissions is the main cause of the rise in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. It is estimated that ~96% of annual emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere have natural (non-human) sources. Only ~4% of annual carbon dioxide emissions are from human sources. There is strong empirical evidence from the Vostok Ice Core data and other sources that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide follows, by ~700 years, a Warming Period; and this seems to happen rather than a Warming Period being caused by carbon dioxide emissions. Similarly, the warming effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide increased concentrations in the atmosphere is logarithmic. In other words each additional carbon dioxide molecule will have less affect than its predecessor, so it may well be that any warming from increasing emissions has already occurred. Who knows?
However, for simplicity, we will assume here that rapidly accelerating human emissions of carbon dioxide is the main cause of rapidly increasing concentrations of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.


Rapidly increasing concentrations of the Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is the main cause of rapidly accelerating unprecedented dangerous global warming as currently measured by average global near surface temperatures.

We have had rapidly accelerating increases in human carbon dioxide emissions and we’ve had rapidly increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere with increasing industrialisation. We have had some global warming as measured by average global near surface temperatures at a similar rate of increase, twice before in the 20th Century; and we have had the Minoan Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period, the Mediaeval Warm Period, all possibly warmer than the Modern Warm Period. Each of these Warm Periods as part of Natural Background Climate Change is associated with periods of human prosperity.

However, for the last eighteen (18) years, despite the fastest increase in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide due mainly to the rise of China, there has been no measurable increase in average global near surface temperatures. In fact, contradicting all the CAGW models projecting large temperature rises, Global Warming stopped 18 years ago.

This empirical evidence derived from the same datasets used by the UN IPCC, showing no measurable increases in average global near surface temperatures for the past 18 years, falsifies the hypothesis that atmospheric carbon dioxide increases, is the main cause of rapidly accelerating unprecedented dangerous global warming as currently measured by average global near surface temperatures. The whole CAGW hypothesis is falsified as Global Warming stopped 18 years ago, while human emissions and atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide increased at their fastest rates in recent times.

So, the warming is not unprecedented; nor is it dangerous for humanity; nor is it outside the bounds of Natural Background Climate Change variability; and therefore the CAGW hypothesis does not explain, nor is it required to explain, nor can it explain, the current state of global warming such as it is, or such as it isn’t.



Rapidly accelerating unprecedented dangerous global warming as currently measured by average global near surface temperatures; is the main cause of rapidly rising sea-levels; pacific island inundation; and is the main cause of melting ice caps and the loss of sea ice; increasing storm energy, droughts and floods and so on.

If there is or was any recent rapidly rising sea-levels, pacific island inundation, melting ice caps and the loss of sea ice; increasing storm energy; droughts and floods and so on, it can hardly have been caused by Global Warming, when there hasn’t been any for 18 years. 


And that the only way to fix this is to dramatically cut carbon dioxide emissions and to dramatically reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and to dramatically reduce average global near surface temperatures. 

As Global Warming stopped 18 years ago, logically, Global Warming cannot be blamed for any recent rapidly rising sea-levels, pacific island inundation, melting ice caps and the loss of sea ice; nor increasing storm energy; nor droughts and floods and so on, there is no CAGW problem; and therefore there is no pretext to dramatically reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide; nor to dramatically reduce average global near surface temperatures.

Since there has been no Global Warming for 18 years, we have to accept the possibility that the Alarmist Activist Climate Scientists of this world are trying to ‘solve’ a political problem as they perceive it, rather than defining and solving a scientific environmental problem.


And the only way to do this is to rapidly ‘de-carbonise’ and ‘de-industrialise’ our western economies, transfer vast sums of money from the west to third world dictators via the UN as our ‘climate debt’.

Even if one assumes that carbon based fuels are limited; and even if one assumes that carbon based fuels have some drawbacks; and unless and until the empirical evidence demonstrates that the CAGW hypothesis explains climate change using reason and logic, we are stuck with the conclusion that the CAGW hypothesis has never been supported by empirical evidence; has never properly explained why the Natural Background Climate Change was ever found wanting; the protagonists of the CAGW have never explained why destroying western civilization by decarbonisation and the transfer vast sums of money from the west to the third world dictators via the UN through our ‘climate debt’, helps our economy in Australia or other Western economies; helps the world prepare for possibility of natural Global Cooling; and helps third world people enjoy the benefits of electrification, prosperity and low birth rates.

Chris Dawson
Chief Executive Officer & Director
Ph: 03 9878 3333 - Int’l: (+61) 3 9878 3333 - Mobile: 0409 805 425
PO Box 14, Nunawading LPO, Nunawading VIC Australia 3131



No comments:

Post a Comment





All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!