On this blog, I posted some recent peer-reviewed science.
Global Warming Slowdown -or hiatus (peer-reviewed.)
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:
But then, WE knew this all along......and didn't the alarmists also really know this?
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 CO2 increase;
- Temperature itself dominantly controls the CO2 increase.
But then, WE knew this all along......and didn't the alarmists also really know this?
