The man-made “Global Warming” and “Climate Change" – is it for real?
Let us start from the beginning. The age of the planet Earth is estimated by scientists at 4.5-5 billion years. The hydrosphere was formed about 4 billion years ago from the condensation of water vapor, resulting in oceans of water. The most important feature of the ancient environment was the absence of free oxygen. Evidence of such an anaerobic reducing atmosphere is hidden in early rock formations that contain many elements, such as iron and uranium, in their reduced states. Elements in this state are not found in the rocks of mid-Precambrian and younger ages, less than 3 billion years old.
The amount of ozone required to shield Earth from biologically lethal UV radiation, is believed to have been in existence 600 million years ago. At that time, the oxygen level was approximately 10% of its present atmospheric concentration. Prior to this period, life was restricted to the ocean. The presence of ozone enabled organisms to develop and live on the land. Ozone played a significant role in the evolution of life on Earth, and allows life, as we presently know it, to exist. It means that weather/climate changes as we understand it today happened for 600 million years. During this time there were many, maybe thousands or millions, cycles of climate change – from warm periods (global warmings) to cold periods (global coolings) and vice versa. Humans exist on the planet for maybe 100 thousand years. This, relatively small period, may include many cycles of climate change. It is obvious that the climate changes happen in all points of our planet’s surface as it happened during last 600 million years.
At the present time mankind lives in a current cycle of climate change – not more and not less. The only question is – what kind of cycle is it? Warming or cooling? Advocates of global warming claim that during next 100 years temperature of Earth surface will increase 3degC and they know how to decrease global warming by 1.5degC. The same advocates claim that the majority of scientists, working in area of meteorology, believe that they can predict not weather only but climate change for at least 100 years. Let us discuss if today’s science is capable to predict weather and climate change for period of 100 years with such high precision. We are not sure that today scientist can do it. Therefore we suggest to consider pros and cons of such claims.
The advocates of man-made global warming name following “evidences” of global warming:
Let us start from the beginning. The age of the planet Earth is estimated by scientists at 4.5-5 billion years. The hydrosphere was formed about 4 billion years ago from the condensation of water vapor, resulting in oceans of water. The most important feature of the ancient environment was the absence of free oxygen. Evidence of such an anaerobic reducing atmosphere is hidden in early rock formations that contain many elements, such as iron and uranium, in their reduced states. Elements in this state are not found in the rocks of mid-Precambrian and younger ages, less than 3 billion years old.
The amount of ozone required to shield Earth from biologically lethal UV radiation, is believed to have been in existence 600 million years ago. At that time, the oxygen level was approximately 10% of its present atmospheric concentration. Prior to this period, life was restricted to the ocean. The presence of ozone enabled organisms to develop and live on the land. Ozone played a significant role in the evolution of life on Earth, and allows life, as we presently know it, to exist. It means that weather/climate changes as we understand it today happened for 600 million years. During this time there were many, maybe thousands or millions, cycles of climate change – from warm periods (global warmings) to cold periods (global coolings) and vice versa. Humans exist on the planet for maybe 100 thousand years. This, relatively small period, may include many cycles of climate change. It is obvious that the climate changes happen in all points of our planet’s surface as it happened during last 600 million years.
At the present time mankind lives in a current cycle of climate change – not more and not less. The only question is – what kind of cycle is it? Warming or cooling? Advocates of global warming claim that during next 100 years temperature of Earth surface will increase 3degC and they know how to decrease global warming by 1.5degC. The same advocates claim that the majority of scientists, working in area of meteorology, believe that they can predict not weather only but climate change for at least 100 years. Let us discuss if today’s science is capable to predict weather and climate change for period of 100 years with such high precision. We are not sure that today scientist can do it. Therefore we suggest to consider pros and cons of such claims.
The advocates of man-made global warming name following “evidences” of global warming:
- Existing temperature measurements for the planet show the presence of man-made global warming.
- Majority of scientists support the idea of man-made global warming.
- Political leaders of 190 or more countries of the world support the idea of man-made global warming.
“Evidence“ #1. Existing temperature measurements for the planet show the presence of man-made global warming.
The temperature measurements, used for justification of the Climate Change hypothesis, include several well-known serious inaccuracies:
The temperature measurements, used for justification of the Climate Change hypothesis, include several well-known serious inaccuracies:
- Weather stations are very sparsely located throughout the world, and are often put nearby densely populated areas.
- What about 100 m up in the air? No tree-harvested CO2 isotopes there, or ancient weather balloons temperature records.
What about 100 m down in the sea? Even less tree-harvested CO2 can be found, or ancient oceanic weather stations. - Let us also keep in mind that the very accuracy of weather measurement is at best doubtful until standardized & homogenous weather station’s placement around the “entire” planet. Weather stations are non-existent in the most parts of the world.
- As any respectable meteorological scientist is well aware, weather around cities, due to localized pollutions, is usually hotter than in the country side. Technical term for it is The Thermal Pocket Effect. Every traveler by a car knows that temperature in a city is always few degrees (sometimes 3degC to 4 degC) higher than temperature outside a city.
So, at best the current “measurements” point that very closely around densely populated areas, there is such a phenomenon as localized temperature increase. - If global warming is true, then why do the weather people make comments like, “This is the hottest it’s been in 25 years.” That means 25 years ago it was hotter.It would also be interesting to know why there has been record snow fall, record cold in most parts of the world, even in countries that never had snow, it’s been snowing and colder.References of the weather people could be taken more seriously if they would have reasonably documented information for last 200 years or at least for last 100 years.But they cannot do it because, until the 1960s, we were not keeping such accurate data. can’t use a small sample from a few areas on the planet and make claims like they are doing. Records prove that it has been warming for 10,000 years due to the ice age we had. We will have another Ice Age for that is the natural cycle of this planet.
- “Climategate” clearly demonstrated that some scientists won’t share the data. Why?If one fully believes what he says, then share. People have had to sue (and won) to get the data released under the UK’s Freedom of Information Act. Again, why? If one is so confident, then make the data available. It’s called peer review, not “pal review”. That’s the only way science improves. Douglas Adams’ character, Wanko the Sane, said it best, “If a scientist sees something, he must say he sees it. Otherwise he will only see what he expects.”
So, even today we do not assemble correct information and enough information to support “evidence” #1 to say nothing of information assembled before 1960.
“Evidence“ #2. Majority of scientists support the idea of man-made global warming.
This “evidence”, though it is mentioned by all advocates of global warming, including representatives and members of the USA government and the UN, does not make much sense. Actually it does not make sense at all, since history of science knows many cases of difference in opinions between majority of scientists and a single scientist. In all cases at the end of a conflict a single scientist was right and a majority of scientists and ruling powers (governments, churches, societies of scientists) were wrong. But unfortunately for single scientists, who many years later have been recognized as being right, they have often been destroyed by a ruling power, which has been supported by majority of scientists and low informed people. At one time the world was flat, and the center of the universe. The destinies of Nicolaus Copernicus, who has been terrorized up to his death, and Giordano Bruno, who has been burned at the stake, are only two most famous examples of many similar cases in the history.
Closer to our time and our location, it is also interesting to mention here infamous computer hoax, which happened in our life time (2000 year), when many companies and private citizens were scared very much by the USA Federal Government and by so-called “majority” of scientist about inevitable crash of all computers at midnight of December 31, 1999. People and companies have spent more than $500 billion, which were a real money at that time, on new computers to escape crash. Naturally nothing happened and people lost their money, as very few real scientists predicted. The hoax was pushed forward by The President of the United States, media and a “majority” of scientists.
Another example of propaganda of false information about man-made global warming by world media and Chinese government is going around during last several years. Viewers of TV in the USA during last several years have been shown periodically a heavy smog videos of Beijing, capital of China. Usually those videos are shown to prove how bad air in the city, because of many cars, factories, etc., is. When we traveled in China several years ago we did not see too many cars in the city since the government limited number of cars in the city. I asked one Chinese scientist about the famous Beijing smog. He told me that even many years ago, when there was no cars and large factories, city had the same smog. He explained, that Beijing is located close to a huge desert, which is on West side of the city, and wind in the city is primarily from West. They called it sand (dust..?) storm. It is obvious that population increase in last years did not improve air pollution in the city. Beijing smog is a local phenomenon and standard fixes, used in many other places and countries, may not work as well. Therefore, the advocates (media and members of so-called “majority” of scientists) of man-made global warming in the United States should correctly inform TV viewers, when they show smog videos, instead of trying to scare people by showing videos from Beijing as the worst example of pollution caused by the man-made global warming.
“Evidence“ #2. Majority of scientists support the idea of man-made global warming.
This “evidence”, though it is mentioned by all advocates of global warming, including representatives and members of the USA government and the UN, does not make much sense. Actually it does not make sense at all, since history of science knows many cases of difference in opinions between majority of scientists and a single scientist. In all cases at the end of a conflict a single scientist was right and a majority of scientists and ruling powers (governments, churches, societies of scientists) were wrong. But unfortunately for single scientists, who many years later have been recognized as being right, they have often been destroyed by a ruling power, which has been supported by majority of scientists and low informed people. At one time the world was flat, and the center of the universe. The destinies of Nicolaus Copernicus, who has been terrorized up to his death, and Giordano Bruno, who has been burned at the stake, are only two most famous examples of many similar cases in the history.
Closer to our time and our location, it is also interesting to mention here infamous computer hoax, which happened in our life time (2000 year), when many companies and private citizens were scared very much by the USA Federal Government and by so-called “majority” of scientist about inevitable crash of all computers at midnight of December 31, 1999. People and companies have spent more than $500 billion, which were a real money at that time, on new computers to escape crash. Naturally nothing happened and people lost their money, as very few real scientists predicted. The hoax was pushed forward by The President of the United States, media and a “majority” of scientists.
Another example of propaganda of false information about man-made global warming by world media and Chinese government is going around during last several years. Viewers of TV in the USA during last several years have been shown periodically a heavy smog videos of Beijing, capital of China. Usually those videos are shown to prove how bad air in the city, because of many cars, factories, etc., is. When we traveled in China several years ago we did not see too many cars in the city since the government limited number of cars in the city. I asked one Chinese scientist about the famous Beijing smog. He told me that even many years ago, when there was no cars and large factories, city had the same smog. He explained, that Beijing is located close to a huge desert, which is on West side of the city, and wind in the city is primarily from West. They called it sand (dust..?) storm. It is obvious that population increase in last years did not improve air pollution in the city. Beijing smog is a local phenomenon and standard fixes, used in many other places and countries, may not work as well. Therefore, the advocates (media and members of so-called “majority” of scientists) of man-made global warming in the United States should correctly inform TV viewers, when they show smog videos, instead of trying to scare people by showing videos from Beijing as the worst example of pollution caused by the man-made global warming.
When the debates of man-made “global warming” started about 30 years ago it was yet a time when real scientists, not political appointees, were heads of scientific meteorological laboratories in the USA and many other western countries. The hotter debate grew up, the more members of government were involved in the debates, the more real scientists as heads of scientific meteorological laboratories have been substituted by political appointees. It is a standard approach for any socialist government to create problems for its opponents in any debate. In case of man-made climate change political appointees create problems of assembling correct and complete information needed for creation accurate weather and climate change models in future. So, at the beginning of debates the head of meteorological service in Colorado announced that his laboratory studied the effect of human activities on weather and climate and they came to conclusion that the effect is very small. It is smaller than a thickness of a line on a graphic presentation of any study results. The “majority” of scientists ignored that statement and, I suppose, that after such a statement the leading scientist lost his position.
The simulation models do not produce the same results. This was admitted in a recent study concerning tree-ring records. Tree-ring data offer key observational benchmarks for evaluating and perfecting climate models and their predictions of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation under global warming. The models cannot predict El Nino effects which “cause climate extremes” with confidence: “Current models diverge in their projections of its future behavior, with some showing an increase in amplitude, some no change, and some even a decrease.” Those models are absolutely invalid. “Since El Nino causes climate extremes around the world, it is important to know how it will change with global warming,” says co-author Shang-Ping Xie.
“Evidence“ #3. Political leaders of 190 or more countries of the world support the idea of man-made global warming.
It is not an evidence, it is a fact, which demonstrates one more time that no scientific problem can be solved by majority votes even if those votes belong to leaders of 190 or more countries of the world. As UN proved many times, any votes by political leaders of various countries has nothing with any science, it only reflects political interest of politicians at the moment of voting. To any scientist and, for that matter, to any reasonable person with common sense, who familiarized him/herself with serious publications in discussed area, it is obvious that the man-made global warming claim is a hoax. What especially should put on one’s guard is that the one of the first and the most famous hoaxer (Mr. Al Gore, former Vice President of the USA) is the person who, not being very knowledgeable, once seriously claimed that he has created Internet. And, by the way, it is the same person who has made big money (about $100 millions) frightening low information people by global warming consequences and exploiting peoples fear.
Additional known facts and problems related to global warming:
The simulation models do not produce the same results. This was admitted in a recent study concerning tree-ring records. Tree-ring data offer key observational benchmarks for evaluating and perfecting climate models and their predictions of the El Nino-Southern Oscillation under global warming. The models cannot predict El Nino effects which “cause climate extremes” with confidence: “Current models diverge in their projections of its future behavior, with some showing an increase in amplitude, some no change, and some even a decrease.” Those models are absolutely invalid. “Since El Nino causes climate extremes around the world, it is important to know how it will change with global warming,” says co-author Shang-Ping Xie.
“Evidence“ #3. Political leaders of 190 or more countries of the world support the idea of man-made global warming.
It is not an evidence, it is a fact, which demonstrates one more time that no scientific problem can be solved by majority votes even if those votes belong to leaders of 190 or more countries of the world. As UN proved many times, any votes by political leaders of various countries has nothing with any science, it only reflects political interest of politicians at the moment of voting. To any scientist and, for that matter, to any reasonable person with common sense, who familiarized him/herself with serious publications in discussed area, it is obvious that the man-made global warming claim is a hoax. What especially should put on one’s guard is that the one of the first and the most famous hoaxer (Mr. Al Gore, former Vice President of the USA) is the person who, not being very knowledgeable, once seriously claimed that he has created Internet. And, by the way, it is the same person who has made big money (about $100 millions) frightening low information people by global warming consequences and exploiting peoples fear.
Additional known facts and problems related to global warming:
- The fact that some people embrace the flimsy evidence of what is actually a “redistribution of wealth” scheme is very disappointing. The reading of the IPCC’s current and past reports demonstrates that the “science” in their reports is very sloppy, and they actually undermine their own arguments in the earlier versions of their reports. For instance, they cannot adequately explain why the average global temperature was going down (not up) during the 1940-1975 period, when CO2 was rising sharply. They also claim that there was a warming period during the Middle Ages (when CO2 concentrations were obviously lower due to a less-populated, less-industrialized world). Interestingly, these two references were removed from subsequent IPCC reports.
- We still do not know all the facts and intricacies of our biosphere. Do we have an impact? Yes. Is it to the scale that they say? The largest object in the solar system is the sun at a mere 99%, it goes through cycles. Some publications indicate that the average temperature on Mars has increased by a degree or two.Mankind? CFCs whipped into space and pushed out to the Martian orbit?
- Well known fact is correlation of weather and climate patterns on Earth and sun activity. Sun activity has many various cycles. The most known is a cycle with 11 years period, which affects weather and climate on our planet very much. But the sun has many other cycles with much longer periods. Contemporary meteorological science does not have enough information and does not have powerful enough computers to create reliable simulation models, capable predict weather with reasonable accuracy for several weeks or even for several days ahead. Previous statement does not mean that contemporary meteorological science is underdeveloped science; it means that more or less powerful computers have been created only few years ago. Even if physics of atmospheric behavior is reasonably well developed (which itself is a very serious question), then to make reasonable extrapolation of weather for many years ahead requires computers capable to manage numerical meshes and to solve complex equations for planet atmosphere, oceans of water, various solids of planet continents, and sun activity as one set of equations. Contemporary science is not capable predict behavior of such complex systems for 100 years ahead with accuracy of +-1degC. We speak about billions and billions equations for various medias (plasma, gas, fluids, solids, electro-magnetic waves, etc.) that should be solved simultaneously. We speak about billions and billions of complex equations of physics. I do not think that today’s technology is even close to the level needed to solve such a class of physics and mathematical problems. So all hysterics and screaming about prediction of global warming for next 100 years does not worth attention that we see in all kind of media and government officials statements.
- It does not mean that we should drop on a floor and start crying. For short term predictions of weather in local areas we should and we use reasonable simulation models. However, as everybody knows, today’s models cannot reliably predict weather for a period of 24 hours with accuracy +- 5degC.
- Reading Superfreakonomics puts a new light on what’s going on. A volcano explodes and the world’s temperature drops by a couple of degrees. We think nature has a far larger impact than we do.
- Some scientists believe that one eruption of Mount St Helens volcano, which is most notorious for its catastrophic eruption on May 18, 1980, the deadliest and most economically destructive volcanic event in the history of the United States, has been thrown out more debris and gases in earth atmosphere than mankind for entire time of its existence. And we should keep in mind that this eruption was not unique and was not the largest in the history of the world.
- Another side issue is the (hidden in plain sight) political agendas for financing Climate Change research. Most of the so-called solutions to AGW involves creating new broad-based Taxes, creating new financing for political bodies (conflict of interest?).There is a research-granting agenda for AGW - please point to any climate researcher who does not depend upon a political body.
- There is too much vested interest by scientists and universities to get funding; a sad fact in a society that venerates sports and media more than science. There is also too much arrogance and elitism within the science community to be ignored, many scientists hated Carl Sagan for “dumbing down” science so that the layman can understand it and become excited.
- Back to Climategate, comments in the code on what to change to produce the desired results is a clear indication of the faulty thinking of AGW pushers. Finding one anomalous tree in 10,000 that produces the desired result, then basing your entire thesis on it takes a leap of faith. For faith people with common sense look to religion, for truth they look to philosophy, for facts they look to science.
What is going during last twenty years with the man-made “Global Warming” and “Climate Change” in the USA and Europe resembles very much political campaign of 1930th to 1960th in the USSR and other socialist and communist countries. All computer sciences, genetics, and many other areas of advanced sciences were called capitalist anti-social sciences and have been forbidden for studying and even mentioning. Scientific books have been taken from all libraries. Many famous scientists have been arrested and murdered in jails and matured socialism concentration camps since their opinion did not coincide with opinions approved by communist government. Appropriate scientific books were forbidden to be printed, foreign publications to be sold, etc. People without education and knowledge were put as heads of scientific research centers and laboratories; those people decided life and death of many science branches and real scientists. It continued for many years and created countless damage to development and even existence of many advanced and non-advanced branches of science. It was one of the main reasons why after revolution of 1991 in the USSR, when Russia permitted people travel outside of the country, most real scientist ran out of Russia and worked and are working now in Israel, the USA, European countries and other places in the world.
***
***
To readers, who interested in additional information, I may recommended publications in American Thinker, February 17, 2010, The AGW Smoking Gun, By Gary Thompson;
and Scientist Confesses: "Global Warming as $22 Billion Scam"
B.V. December 2015
and Scientist Confesses: "Global Warming as $22 Billion Scam"
B.V. December 2015
