Two Portuguese Scientists Identity 8 Areas Of The Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis That Lack Scientific Validation; + The JMA Has El Niño Collapsing Next Year
Two Portuguese Scientists Identity 8 Areas Of The Greenhouse Gas Hypothesis That Lack Scientific Validation
Despite the clever establishment silencing tactics of putting fingers in ears and yelling “settled science!”, two Portuguese researchers (Khmelinskii and Woodcock, 2023) have identified eight assumptions in the greenhouse gas hypothesis that lack scientific validation.
In an editorial published in the MDPI journal Entropy, responding to an editorial written by the consensus-following editors of the journal Earth System Dynamics (ESD), these two plucky scientists lay out their challenges.
Their abstract opens:
“We respond to an editorial article in the climate journal Earth Systems Dynamics (ESD 14, 241–242, 2023): the headline title of which makes two scientifically incorrect assertions: (i) that the greenhouse-gas hypothesis, i.e., cause of global warming by ~1K in 1950-2020, is an established scientific truth, and (ii) that heat emissions from global fuel combustion are, by comparison, negligible.
“Both statements are inconsistent with, and illustrate editorial ignorance of, the laws of classical thermodynamics, of the limitations of the Earth’s global energy budget multivariate computer models, and of the known absorption and emission spectroscopy of carbon dioxide (CO2).”
For the sake of brevity, four of the challenges are summarized below (courtesy of Kenneth Richard, via climatechangedispatch.com):
• CO2 can only absorb 10% of all radiation in the specific IR bands CO2 affects. CO2 “absorbs absolutely nothing at all other IR wavelengths.” Thus, CO2 has no effect on IR in 90% of absorption bands.
• CO2 can only absorb IR in the top 300 m, or 0.3 km of the surface troposphere, which is 10 km thick. Thus, CO2 can only affect 10% of the IR in 3% of the surface troposphere where climate change occurs.
• Because of its vanishingly small effects, doubling CO2 concentrations could only lead to a 0.015°C surface temperature change, at most. Understatedly, “this effect would not even be measurable.”
• Uncertainty in the Earth’s radiation balance is ±17 W/m². The estimated radiation imbalance is 0.6 W/m², which is “orders of magnitude” smaller than the uncertainty in its derivation. Thus, the “global balance of energy fluxes…cannot be derived from measured fluxes“… and this “profoundly affects our ability to understand how Earth’s climate responds to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases.”
“The editors at ESD do not view observational uncertainty –or questions regarding the magnitude of CO2’s effects– as worthy of critical analysis,” concludes Richard.
For a read of Khmelinskii’s and Woodcock’s comprehensive editorial in full, click here.
The JMA Has El Niño Collapsing Next Year
If a period of global cooling is indeed on the cards then we would expect La Niñas to be the dominate ENSO pattern.
Supporting this theory are latest Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) forecasts, which call for a collapsing El Niño next year, dipping below neutral perhaps as early as April, and potentially reentering La Niña territory by next summer:
As the Multivariate ENSO Index (MEI) shows (below), multiyear El Niños have not been able to sustain themselves in recent times, not since the ‘super’ El Niño of 1997-98.
Clear to see, it is their cooler counterparts La Nina’s that are starting to dominate:
My contention remains that media pleadings for a strong El Niño will fall on deaf ears, and that instead a swift return to La Niña will play out.
“Weather is beginning to revert back to pre-1982 patterns around the world,” so say Prof David Dilley, who states the key driver as being the return of a 230-year Climate Pulse: “Winters will become colder, longer lasting and more severe,” warns Dilley, “it’s going to be very cold.”
And as the eminent Dr Theodor Landscheidt posited moons ago, author of the study ‘New Little ICE Age Instead of Global Warming?‘ which, for me, has the claim of priority among scientific papers forewarning of a solar-driven spell of cooling:
“We need not wait until 2030 to see whether the forecast of the next deep Gleissberg minimum is correct. A declining trend in solar activity and global temperature should manifest long before the deepest point in the development. The current 11-year sunspot cycle 23 with its considerably weaker activity seems to be a first indication of the new trend, especially as it was predicted on the basis of solar motion cycles two decades ago. As to temperature, only El Niño periods should interrupt the downward trend, but even El Niños should become less frequent and strong.”
Related:
A new research paper (2022) suggests that La Niñas could keep on coming, and, in turn, deliver a snowballing of the climatic woes the phenomenon delivers (such as harsher winters across the N. Hemisphere, and heavy precipitation for the likes of Australia):
As a side note, a return to La Nina could lead to a strong hurricane season, so watch out for more misplaced catastrophic cries there.
The day’s other article:
Further reading (specifically section three on Hunga Tonga’s eruption):
Global Cooling Will Follow El Nino – By Joseph D’Aleo
Strong El Niños are usually followed by a pendulum with a strong La Niña with a cooling.
Posted in August 2015.
https://sandcarioca.wordpress.com/2015/08/05/o-resfriamento-global-seguira-el-nino/
It is extremely important to observe what many scientists said (wrongly prejudged) 10…15 years ago and check it with current data.
All scientists agree that La Nina will become more common as the world warms. Floods are the new norm
:^ (
Contradictory statements much?
There are two types of science deniers:
Those who claim CO2 does everything and those who claim CO2 does little of nothing.
Both are extreme positions ignoring all data.
This article is extreme and ignores all data.
Real science is based on data.
There are two real science positions on CO2
CO2 is a mild greenhouse gas above 420ppm and should inhibit night cooling by a modest , b ased on lab spectroscopy measurements, with and without water vapor.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas whose effect in the atmosphere can not be directly measured because there are too many other climate change variables whose effects can not be eliminated to see exactly what CO2 does. THAT IS THE “WE DON’T KNOW YET: NEUTRAL position.
People who demonize CO2, or claim CO2 does nothing, are equally foolish extremists.
I don’t claim CO2 does ‘little of nothing’ (if “This article is extreme an ignores all data” is aimed at me).
That’s a ludicrous position and I’ve never stated it.
Cap, if this Mr Greene is the same person who commented over at WUWT, be assured his assertions are flimsy and it will eventually move on.
The cult members are noticeably becoming more personal in their comments as their religion is imploding on the facts that are not prejudiced to their ignorance. We must remember that they have dranm the cool aid for many years without a skerrick of sceptism to the religious narrative of their cult.
Be assured Mr Greene will become irrelevant here as did Mr Black, and Mr Blue when Tarantinoed.
There is very strong evidence that CO2 above 420ppm is a mild greenhouse gas that will inhibit night cooling.
Character attacks don’t change that.
Alternative conclusions must reject all data collected on CO2 in the past century and then explain why 99.9% of scientists have been so wrong for so long … including well known skeptic scientists such as Richard Lindzen, William Happer, Roy Spencer and John Christy, all science Ph.D.’s
This study fails to explain why it’s arbitrary claim of the CO2 ECS being 0.015 degrees C. is relevant while the skeptic scientists range of +0.75 to +1.5 degree C. is wrong and the IPCC range of +2.5 to +4.0 degrees C. is also wrong.
The world does not need yet another wild guess of ECS, and that is exactly what this flawed study provides.
It provides the lowest ECS guess i have ever seen in print in 26 years of climat science reading.
To be fair, there are many articles at this website that I recommend on my climate and energy blog, with over 92,000 page views so far this year. This article is a rare exception.
https://honestclimatescience.blogspot.com/
Winter is coming….
Cap…maybe you already know about this:
-Double-digit frosts hit Scandinavia
The night of October 20th ended up being the first truly cold night. In the mountains of northern Sweden, Norway and Finland, the temperature dropped to -12… -19°C.
At the same time, a snowstorm broke out in southern Scandinavia. In the mountains, the wind increased in gusts of up to 40 m/s.
https://www.gismeteo.ru/news/weather/v-skandinavii-udarili-dvuznachnye-morozy/
Massive increase in Greenland SMB.
“If a period of global cooling is indeed on the cards then we would expect La Niñas to be the dominate ENSO pattern.”
Oh what a load of RUBBISH ! In reality, a warmer world = more La Ninas, while a cooler world = more El Ninos. Warmer world = more rain and that’s an undisputable fact.
We need you desperately so we can understand unhinged uninformed minds that simply must follow the narrative. As you freeze your A## off, think about how stupid you were in not properly preparing and leading others to their freezing deaths like in Texas a couple of years ago. Or do you deny THAT reality? You have NO basis for global warming except the lies and cognitive dissonance you live. Wake up, before it is too late for you and the others you are leading to early deaths.
The warming here in SE Michigan USA since the 1970s has been huge. Much warmer winters with much less snowfall. We LOVE global warming here in Michigan and will be very disappointed if it stops.
But even with the winter warming, last summer was unusually cool with the most rain of any Summer since I moved here in 1977. Give us MORE of that climate change please.
The arguments about the causes of climate change will continue forever.
The much more important question is whether your local climate, where you live and work, has improved over the decades.
Our local climate has improved and if CO2 contributed to that improvement, we love CO2, as do our plants.
Twenty years ago, Robert Felix said our summers would get cooler. I’m still waiting. The weather hasn’t gotten better in Missouri, it’s gotten less predictable. Not good for farmers.
It takes a long time to cool something as large as the Earth at the low power radiation emitted at ambient Earth temperatures.
I’d bet Richard Greene thinks space is cold LOL.
How’s fishin?
Did I ever tell you that when there were only two cars in the whole country, they ran into each other in St. Louis? It’s probably the same thing with fish.
Fishin’ is more readily attainable than fusion.
Then fishin’ it is, lol. That’s an excellent survival skill, and if you’re not very good at it, Jesus will probably help you. After all, He helped Peter.
“while a cooler world = more El Ninos.”
So the 2015/16 and 2020 El Ninos were because the world is cooling.
I don’t care you said it… that’s just funny 🙂
Cat 3 Tropical Cyclone 5 headed for Yemen:
https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/indian-ocean/2023/tropical-cyclone-five
Cat 3 Hurricane Norma headed for Mexico:
https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/eastern-pacific/2023/hurricane-norma
https://weather.com/storms/hurricane/video/hurricane-norma-to-be-a-big-rainmaker-for-mexico?cm_ven=hp-slot-1
Ocean temp off US East Coast 82F, Atlantic warmer than ave:
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?sst,2023102918,35.246,-75.597,7,m:eCNad2T
https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/data/cb/ssta/ssta.daily.current.png
There is strong evidence CO2 above 420ppm is a mild greenhouse gas that will inhibit night cooling.
Character attacks don’t change that.
Alternative conclusions must reject all data collected on CO2 in the past century and then explain why 99.9% of scientists have been so wrong for so long … including well known skeptic scientists such as Richard Lindzen, William Happer, Roy Spencer and John Christy, all science Ph.D.’s
This study fails to explain why it’s arbitrary claim of the CO2 ECS being 0.015 degrees C. is relevant while the skeptic scientists range of +0.75 to +1.5 degree C. is wrong and the IPCC range of +2.5 to +4.0 degrees C. is also wrong.
The world does not need yet another wild guess of ECS, and that is exactly what this flawed study provides.
It provides the lowest ECS guess i have ever seen in print in 26 years of climat science reading.
To be fair, there are many articles at this website that I recommend on my climate and energy blog, with over 92,000 page views so far this year. This article is a rare exception.
https://honestclimatescience.blogspot.com/
Sorry I posted this twice, please delete this duplicate post.
Oh you forgot the one about to form in the coral sea, next few days should see it
Still waiting to see a cyclone cross the coast of Queensland, been many years since a cyclone has got anywhere near Queensland
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?gust,2023102300,-12.855,168.618,5,i:pressure,m:dlbakRA
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?tcso2,2023102223,-12.855,168.618,5,i:pressure,m:dlbakRA
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?cloudtop,2023102300,-12.855,168.618,5,i:pressure,m:dlbakRA
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?thunder,2023102300,-12.855,168.618,5,i:pressure,m:dlbakRA
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/?extent=-38.51379,-215.37598&extent=-3.99578,-175.29785&range=month&listOnlyShown=true
https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?waves,2023102300,-12.855,168.618,5,i:pressure,m:dlbakRA
Omygosh-Don’t encourage him!
Volcano erupting where that cyclone is forming following a minor solar flare which produced a Kp5 and small mag spike. SO2 plume is thicker now eight hours later could increase cyclone strength and is headed for NZ more new snow 15″ next ten days. Same ol’ pattern, constant volcanic activity for years there.
Yemen Cyclone a bit odd and Cabo is getting the Wabbo today, ‘oly crap check out the radar!!!!!! 18 foot wind chop every eight seconds!!! Kite surf nirvana.
Mexi hurricane, same thing, Mexi volcano powering the cyclone.
.https://www.windy.com/-Show—add-more-layers/overlays?tcso2,22.938,-102.129,6,i:pressure,m:ecnadqL
Are all cyclones powered by volcanos?
Couldn’t say that but many are and then get modified by the heat from further solar activity. Rapid intensification as Ben Davidson would say. Can’t just say from climate change or cosmic rays or wavey jet streams many combinations that only God can know. Solar wind density sets them off. One of the first readings I look at making the rounds is SWD on Space Weather. Easy to read number black n white top left corner page 24/7 easy cheezy.
https://www.spaceweather.com/
SWD goes up, temp goes up on the chart, sometimes, if God wants it to;)
..https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/real-time-solar-wind
Jack the speed up to 999kps from a coronal hole, temp goes up, convection, rotation more possible. Bad as a solar flare. Solar flares cause ’em. Rapid heat intensification IPCC discounts X rays and counts them as heat from carbon, according to Ben Davidson many times over the years. SO, ie, the X17 solar flare in Sept ’05 that caused Katrina was counted on the CO2 side of the ledger. Tricky. 43 major flares in 23 days that set were alll counted as heat from CO2. Bad math. It was the Sun, many cyclones that Season all from flares.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Atlantic_hurricane_season
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Pacific_typhoon_season
Thanks, sweetie! Then I guess the answer is no…?
Get a life Deb.
Thank you, I will.
I was just waiting for your permission.