Edwin Berry, PhD, CCM
The whole global-warming/climate-change fraud is built upon one big misconception, namely, that our carbon dioxide emissions continue to add to atmospheric carbon dioxide. The IPCC and other climate alarm groups merely “assume” their claim is true.
Yes, the IPCC has arguments to support its hypothesis, but all its arguments fail the scientific method. Their arguments violate the Equivalence Principle of physics and make outrageous, even laughable, incorrect predictions. Therefore, the alarmists have no existing argument to support their most basic claim. If we follow physics, their game is over.
On the flip side, I have proposed a model hypothesis that shows a completely different view of how human and natural emissions contribute to the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide. My model accurately predicts the carbon-14 data. The IPCC model does not. My model makes no known incorrect predictions.
My model is independent of, but fully compatible with, the hypothesis that the rate of change of carbon dioxide is proportional to temperature. In fact, my method identifies the constants in this proportionality.
In keeping with the scientific method, I cannot prove my model hypothesis is true. However, it is now the ONLY existing hypothesis on this subject that has not been proven to be wrong.
An analogy
Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is like water in a lake. The inflow of carbon dioxide is like a river that flows into the lake. The outflow of carbon dioxide is like the lake water that flows out over a dam. When outflow equals inflow, the lake level equals its balance level.
Yes, the IPCC has arguments to support its hypothesis, but all its arguments fail the scientific method. Their arguments violate the Equivalence Principle of physics and make outrageous, even laughable, incorrect predictions. Therefore, the alarmists have no existing argument to support their most basic claim. If we follow physics, their game is over.
On the flip side, I have proposed a model hypothesis that shows a completely different view of how human and natural emissions contribute to the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide. My model accurately predicts the carbon-14 data. The IPCC model does not. My model makes no known incorrect predictions.
My model is independent of, but fully compatible with, the hypothesis that the rate of change of carbon dioxide is proportional to temperature. In fact, my method identifies the constants in this proportionality.
In keeping with the scientific method, I cannot prove my model hypothesis is true. However, it is now the ONLY existing hypothesis on this subject that has not been proven to be wrong.
An analogy
Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is like water in a lake. The inflow of carbon dioxide is like a river that flows into the lake. The outflow of carbon dioxide is like the lake water that flows out over a dam. When outflow equals inflow, the lake level equals its balance level.
If inflow becomes greater than outflow, the lake level will rise and increase the outflow. When outflow equals inflow, the lake level will equal its new balance level.
Inflow sets the balance level, not only for the lake but also for the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The level will always move toward the balance level set by the inflow.
Continued constant inflow will not increase the level. Continued constant inflow only maintains the level.
A paradigm shift
Our carbon dioxide emissions increase the carbon dioxide inflow into the atmosphere. Like our lake analogy, this increased inflow adds to the level, which increases outflow. As the level approaches its balance level, outflow approaches inflow. When outflow equals inflow, the level equals its balance level.
When the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide is at its balance level, continuation of constant human carbon dioxide emissions will not further increase the level of carbon dioxide.
Like the accelerator on your car. A constant accelerator maintains vehicle speed. Release the accelerator and vehicle speed decreases.
The human-produced balance level and the nature-produced balance level are independent. But they add to create a total balance level.
This is a paradigm shift in how we should view the effect of human carbon dioxide emissions on the level of carbon dioxide.
Our emissions DO NOT continue to add to the level and DO NOT create an irreversible level. Our emissions only maintain the human-produced balance level that adds to the nature-produced balance level. Balance levels quickly reverse when emissions decrease.
Read More at edberry.com.
