Sunday, August 24, 2014

Three new studies demonstrate climate sensitivity to CO2 is very low

As climate researcher Paul "Chip" Knappenberger pointed out in a tweet this week, two new studies provide a double-whammy to climate alarm because 1) man-made aerosols have been found to have minimal cooling effects and 2) at least 50% of recent global warming is not anthropogenic. Therefore, the possible role of CO2 in causing global warming has to be far less than previously assumed, and the "climate sensitivity" to doubled CO2 levels therefore very low. 

In addition, a third paper published this week demonstrates that radiative imbalance from large volcanic eruptions resolves within ~2 years, not 20+ years as claimed by James Hansen as his excuse for the 18 year "pause" in global warming. This means that volcanic aerosols have minimal long-term cooling effects and therefore, the warming effect of CO2 has to be much lower than assumed in Hansen's climate models and thus climate sensitivity estimates must be lowered even further.  

Retweeted by Chip Knappenberger
hockey schtick @hockeyschtick1 · Aug 21

@dspillane1 @PCKnappenberger Double-whammy indicates CO2 climate sensitivity very low … …

Chip Knappenberger @PCKnappenberger · Aug 21

Here is the relevant research: little aerosol impact … ~50% recent warming non human …

Chip Knappenberger @PCKnappenberger · Aug 21

New research gives double-whammy to cli alarm: tiny cooling from aerosols + 50% of warming not anthropogenic = very low climate sensitivity. 


  1. I can't help wondering... what happened to the 2007 IPCC 4th Assessment Report... you know, the one that was supposedly based only on peer-reviewed scientific literature (it wasn't), which was claimed to be "the gold standard in climate science"... the settled science... incontrovertible... indisputable?

  2. Climate science has more to do with astrology than anything to do with hard science.

  3. Here we develop the physics, chemistry and biology to quantify the effect of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) on Earth’s temperature. There are five mechanisms and three different temperatures involved.

    Four show a small cooling effect, one warms surface and cools upper atmosphere with no net bulk effect. I am unaware of a rigorous mathematical description of the greenhouse gas theory that purports to do this and show a warming affect. After decades of research attempts, promoters cannot reduce greenhouse gas theory (GHGT) to mathematics of science and engineering.
    Stefan-Boltzmann Law of Radiation

    If non-radiating O2 is exchanged for absorbing/emitting CO2, the emissivity, e, of a planet to space must increase. While emissivity of CO2 is less that global emissivity, it is greater than the O2 it replaced by "fossil fuel" combustion. The Stefan-Boltzmann Law of Radiation is

    I = σ e (T/100)4

    If e increases with CO2 at constant I, T goes down. Therefore, CO2 causes global cooling.

    This is true for all bodies of matter, no matter the composition, rotation speed or weather.

    I = radiating intensity, irradiance, power of any radiating body, w/m2, of its spherical surface, measured by Earth satellite spectrophotometers to be about 239. It is only a transfer rate when surroundings do not radiate, at 0K. Outer space at 3.7K radiate with very low intensity.

    T = temperature of radiating body, K, estimated for Earth to be 4.60C + 273.15 = 277.75

    σ = Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law constant, 5.67

    e = emissivity of radiating body, fraction 0 < e < 1. e varies with composition. Perfect radiator black body e = 1, radiates a given intensity at lowest possible temperature. Colorful Earth radiator e = 0.70827 emits given intensity at temperature higher than black body.

    I = 5.67*0.70827(277.750/100)4 = 5.67*0.70827*59.51 = 5.67*42.152 = 239.0

    If doubling CO2 from 400 to 800 ppmv increases emissivity 0.001 from 0.70827 to 0.70927, T would drop -0.098C from 4.600C to 4.502C.

    I = 5.67*0.70927(277.652/100)4 = 5.67*0.70927*59.43 = 5.67*42.152 = 239.0
    Dan Pangburn August 22, 2014 at 11:05 AM
    NorEastern - Nothing like jumping to the wrong conclusion.

    If you had looked at the paper you might have noticed that I used ALL available measurement data. The reported temperature data is particularly susceptible to mischief so I compare and average all 5 to avoid bias.

    As a statistician you should be able to follow what was done. The method is described in detail and links to all data are provided.

    If you start with the assumption that CO2 change causes warming, you will end up in the same hopeless muddle as the consensus.

    1. The above is an excerpt from a paper by Dr. Pierre Latore .
      The Four Known Scientific Ways Carbon Dioxide Cools Earth's Climate

      Written by Dr Pierre Latour PE

  4. Why don't scientists ask the most basic of every question about nature-where is the experimental data that proves the Hypotheses of the greenhouse gas effect?
    The Hypotheses was proposed in 1824 by a credible scientist but in the 190 years since then much has been learned in science including quantum physics which is all about atoms and molecules absorbing EMR. Why do people believe "climatologists" who are temperature historians at best , lacking a knowledge of "hard science" physics, quantum physics. and chemistry and the most important factors that control weather on this planet, incoming energy from the sun and the water cycle. I learned about the water cycle in my 8th grade general science class 60 years ago, water absorbs sun light heats and evaporates cooling the surface. Water vapor cools in the upper atmosphere when the temperature is below the dew point. Clouds form, blocking some of the sun light cooling the ground below causing turbulence and other effect.
    This is an simple version of what causes weather.
    Definition: Climate is an average pattern of thousands of weather event end to end for one location. There are thousands of different "climates" in the world
    Adding 50 or a 100 years of weather days to an average pattern made up of hundreds of thousand data point will have little or no effect on the average pattern.
    There are experiments that prove that the greenhouse gas effect does not exist. Science is never settled.
    Mann-made global warming is a four letter dirty word-Hoax,