These steps have also applied to climate change discussions:
The models get core assumptions wrong — the hot spot is missing 22 — 26, 28 — 31 Clouds cool the planet as it warms 38 — 56 The models are wrong on a local, regional, or continental scale.
Figure 1 Climate Sensitivity Comparison empirical methods versus models, for a doubling of the CO2 level. The direct effect of CO2 is only 1. Models amplify that warming with assumptions about positive feedback see the blue region of model estimates in the graph below.
But observations show that net feedback is probably negative, which would instead reduce the direct effect of the extra carbon dioxide.
While independent scientists point to the empirical evidence, government funded scientists argue that a majority of scientists, a consensus, support the theory that a man-made catastrophe is coming.
The test of scientific knowledge is through experiment and observation. The only evidence the government scientists provide on the key points of attribution the cause of the warming come from simulations of the climate done with computers. A multitude of observations are in rough agreement that any increase in global average temperature caused by a doubling of CO2 is more likely to be about half a degree than the 3.
The major problem for models: Feedbacks Our climate changes because of outside effects, called forcings: The Earth is a ball of magma, is a 12, km thick, with a thin crust about 12 km of rock on top, who knows what effects come from within?
The IPCC recognizes only two types of forcings: Forcings are difficult to unravel. Harder still are feedbacks, as systems all over the planet simultaneously adjust to changing conditions.
In a warmer world, for instance, less ice and more plant-life means less sunlight is reflected to space, which creates more warming. The oceans release carbon dioxide, more water evaporates, humidity changes, sea-levels rise, and all of those consequent changes further affect temperatures.
Indeed while CO2 may cause one degree of warming, the feedbacks amplify this — theoretically anyway — by up to three degrees. The major agent of feedback, according to the IPCC, is water vapor ie.
Some details matter more than others. Models assume that relative humidity will stay the same over the tropics as the world warms, that clouds are a positive feedback and not a negative one, and that cloud changes are a feedback and not a forcing in their own right.
These are three critical and demonstrable errors. In addition, if Miscolscki is right, and an increase in carbon dioxide leads to a decrease in water vapor, then the sensitivity due to CO2 could be close to zero.
The global warming predictions are contradicted by the data. The exception proves that the rule is wrong. That is the principle of science. If there is an exception to any rule, and if it can be proved by observation, that rule is wrong.
Lerner, Climate sensitivity: Analysis of feedback mechanisms. American Geophysical Union, pp. Prall,Jacob Haroldand Stephen H. Expert credibility in climate change, PNAS, Cosmic ray decreases affect atmospheric aerosols and clouds.
Geophysical Research Letters Le Traon  Global hydrographic variability patterns during Evidence for strengthening of the tropical general circulation in the s.A number of attheheels.com have written a book chapter asserting that doubts about the theory of human-caused global warming should be considered “real science.” You know, the idea of basing hypotheses.
31, American scientists have signed this petition, including 9, with PhDs For information about this project, click on the appropriate box below. Scientist #1 Refuting Manmade Global Warming: Dr. David Evans. Dr.
David Evans used to work for the Australian Greenhouse Office (the main modeler of carbon in Australia’s biosphere) from to He has 6 degrees, including a PhD from Stanford in electrical engineering. Apr 28, · The V.I. Lenin Academy of Agricultural Sciences announced on August 7, that thenceforth Lysenkoism would be taught as the only correct theory.
Feb 09, · As you can see, the theory is actually a chain of at least three steps: CO2, via the greenhouse effect, causes some warming. A series of processes in the climate multiply this warming by several. This web site is dedicated to the alternative “Global Warming or Climate Change” theory that microwave radio frequencies are polluting our atmosphere and Earth.
Another similar theory to this is the “Broadcast Theory.” The basis of the “Microwave” theory is that microwave radio frequency communications a direct relationship with global warming .