Regardless how one might construe the atmospheric physics of CO2, a few critical facts remain, and the subject is academic:
(1) There is a statistically significant correlation between temperature and CO2 emissions and these data are robust.
(2) The current trend of increasing CO2 is a consequence (an effect) of warming, not the cause of warming.
(3) There is no correlation between changes in net atmospheric CO2 concentration and fossil fuel emissions. An estimated 300% increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuels since 2000 is so small relative to the overall net natural CO2 increasing trend that it is undetectable in the data of CO2 trend, and
(4) since human-produced CO2 is not affecting the overall rate of CO2 trend, then by logical inference human-produced CO2 cannot be significantly affecting temperature, and
(5) these data are statistically robust.
(6) Warmer oceans desorb CO2 into air and colder water absorbs CO2 into the water. The atmospheric fraction of CO2 and the fraction of gaseous CO2 in ocean water has not changed. “..terrestrial ecosystems and the oceans have a much greater capacity to absorb CO2 than had been previously expected….” This study re-examines the available atmospheric CO2 and emissions data including their uncertainties. It is shown that with those uncertainties, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 ±1.4% per decade, i.e. close to and not significantly different from zero.”
” Despite the predictions of coupled climate-carbon cycle models, no trend in the airborne fraction [of CO2] can be found.”
(7) There is about 50 times more gaseous CO2 in the oceans than in the atmosphere, and the oceans are an infinite sink for ionized CO2, such that the oceans can never become acidic due to CO2. There is not enough carbon on earth to make the pH of the oceans less than 7, or acidic. The ocean has multiple buffering systems for ionic CO2 forms.
(8) Except for limited runs done of the Russian climate model, the other 100+ climate models fail to validate, that is, the models fail to predict known temperatures.
(9) The Russian climate model predicts cooling, not warming.
(10) The hypothesis of human-caused global warming due to CO2 is falsified. There is no empirical evidence that a trend of increasing global CO2 concentration causes a statistically significant trend of global warming. Empirical evidence contradicts the AGW hypothesis.
(11) The ONLY pathway for carbon to enter the food chain that sustains life on this planet is via atmospheric CO2 absorption by plants. Ice core data of paleo historic CO2 proxies shows that during the Jurassic period, which was very abundant with plant and animal life, CO2 concentration reached 2800 ppm. The current 400 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentration is historically very low, not far above the 150 ppm concentration causing mass extinction of plant life during the more than 50 million year period of the Carboniferous and Permian ice age.
(12) Since atmospheric CO2 concentration is not far above paleo historic lows, efforts to limit CO2 emissions are by definition self-destructive.
(13) Far more people die from cold than from warmth.
(14) According to satellite studies the planet is getting greener as CO2 concentration increases.
(15) The predicted sensitivity of climate to increasing CO2 which is found in many years of peer-reviewed science publication has been declining.
(16) Despite the large and continuing increase in total atmospheric CO2 concentration, of which 99.9% is non-human, no statistically significant increase is detected in the rate of change of sea level increase. This is contrary to AGW theory and UN IPCC predictions.
(17) Despite the continuing increase in total atmospheric CO2 concentration, of which 99.9% is non-human, no “tropical hotspot” is detectable, contrary to AGW theory and UN IPCC prediction.
(16) Earth is reliably predicted to have recently entered a cooling trend, although it may be years before we can measure this at the surface.
(17) CO2 trend and temperature trend are diverging, contrary to AGW theory.
In the words of Professor Richard S. Lindzen, “Can increasing carbon dioxide cause climate change? …The climate is always undergoing change, and if the changes due to increasing CO2 are smaller than the natural variability, then these changes will be of only modest concern except as an exercise in weak signal detection….”
- Professor Salby:
- Professor Munshi:
- Professor Valentina V. Zharkova: