Nature's contribution to Atmospheric CO2. PEER REVIEWED PAPER.

Gee, the Alarmists are gluttons for punishment.

On this blog, I posted some recent peer-reviewed science.

Global Warming Slowdown -or hiatus (peer-reviewed.)


and Dr Ed Berry's new book from his peer-reviewed paper:

Human CO2 does not cause climate change.


Yet the alarmists, THE TRUE SCIENCE DENIERS, spluttered and spat many dummies.

Well, Alarmists, if you do not like Dr Ed Berry's peer-reviewed paper. then you might find this peer-reviewed paper HARDE to accept.

IPCC shot down in flames
IMAGE: Jo Nova
What Humans Contribute to Atmospheric CO2: Comparison of Carbon Cycle Models with Observations


Hermann Harde
Experimental Physics and Materials Science, Helmut-Schmidt-University, Hamburg, Germany
Email address:
harde@hsu-hh.de (Hermann Harde)
To cite this article:
H. Harde. What Humans Contribute to Atmospheric CO2: Comparison of Carbon Cycle Models with Observations. International Journal of Earth Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 2019, pp. x-x. doi: 10.11648/j.earth.20190803.xx.
Received: April 03, 2019; Accepted: May 10, 2019; Published: MM DD, 2019 

READ the Abstract:


The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assumes that the inclining atmospheric CO2 concentration over recent years was almost exclusively determined by anthropogenic emissions, and this increase is made responsible for the rising temperature over the Industrial Era. Due to the far reaching consequences of this assertion, in this contribution we critically scrutinize different carbon cycle models and compare them with observations. We further contrast them with an alternative concept, which also includes temperature dependent natural emission and absorption with an uptake rate scaling proportional with the CO2 concentration. We show that this approach is in agreement with all observations, and under this premise not really human activities are responsible for the observed CO2 increase and the expected temperature rise in the atmosphere, but just opposite the temperature itself dominantly controls the CO2 increase. Therefore, not CO2 but primarily native impacts are responsible for any observed climate changes. 
Yes! 

  • Native (ie Natural) impacts are primarliy responsible for any observed climate changes:
  • Human activities are NOT responsible for the observed COincrease;
  • Temperature itself dominantly controls the COincrease.  

But then, WE knew this all along......and didn't the alarmists also really know this?


Comments