Technical ReportPDF Available

33 bullet points prove global warming by the Sun, not CO2: by a GEOLOGIST for a change

Authors:
  • Geoclastica Ltd

Abstract

GEOCLASTICA LTD TECHNICAL NOTE 2019-11, UPDATED FEB 2021. Firstly, please be aware that ALL GEOLOGISTS ARE ENVIRONMENTALISTS; we adore nature and abhor pollution. Welcome. You're one of >24,000 people to visit since I posted this item 22 months ago in April 2019 (now Feb 2021). After reading these 33 simple 'bullet points' (9 pages) you will know that: (1) harmless CO2 is certainly not a 'pollutant' (as if!); and (2) it's lunacy to waste trillions of taxpayer dollars on: (i) solar & wind energy (hopelessly inefficient/unreliable; sacrifice essential farmland and natural habitats; desecrate landscapes); and on (ii) 'carbon capture' that is both needless (CO2's small greenhouse effect is negated by feedbacks omitted in 'climate models') and undesirable (man's CO2 additions have made Earth greener, stimulating vital crop yields and forest growth). Nevertheless WE DO NEED TO TRANSITION AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS (i.e. oil, gas, coal; NB I'm a geology consultant for oil companies), but not due to life-giving CO2, instead because they will become too expensive as they grow scarcer. THE SOLUTION IS SIMPLE: (A) freeze fossil-fuel usage at current levels (no new fossil-fuel-burning power stations or industry); (B) ban petrol & diesel vehicles & the REAL pollution they emit (nitrous oxides, unburnt diesel, tyre dust, etc.) immediately in cities & towns; (C) rapidly expand nuclear power (it produces ZERO air pollution; ample barren locations exist for radioactive-waste storage) while we … (D) urgently accelerate development of clean nuclear FUSION. We also must BAN PLASTIC food and drink containers (produced from oil & gas; again YOU drive the demand). PLEASE SHARE THESE 'BULLET POINTS', which collectively prove CO2 did not cause the 'Modern Global Warming'. I have assembled these 33 unquestionable FACTS (as opposed to INTERPRETATIONS, always open to question) during my 5 years, to date (Feb 2021), of self-funded (thus unbiased) full-time literature research on ALL the scientific disciplines relevant to climate- and sea-level change (i.e. geology, geophysics, archaeology, astrophysics, meteorology, oceanography, physics, chemistry, etc.), backed by 30 years as a geological consultant, preceded by a doctorate (Oxford 1982-86), MSc (Calgary) and BSc (London), all in geology. Contrast the IPCC's 2013-14 report and upcoming 2022 report, each with more than 700 authors, NONE (or perhaps 1) of them a geologist (see my 1-page Technical Note 2019-10 here on ResearchGate). We urgently need to get the truth about CO2 out to the public and especially into schools and universities, to end the brainwashing of YOUR children and grandchildren with the 'CO2 is a pollutant' fallacy. The money squandered needlessly and ineffectually 'tackling' beneficial(!) CO2 should instead be spent alleviating GENUINE problems faced by world society, including overpopulation, poverty, famine and REAL pollution (auto emissions, chemical spills, plastics, sewage, etc, etc). If YOUR child's school is indoctrinating him/her with the belief (sic) that CO2 is humanity's enemy, then unless you complain you are complicit. See especially Bullet 24 if you live near sea level: a big rise (2 to 3 METRES) is indeed coming, in fact already began, driven by the Sun, not CO2, and ENDING by 2100. For literature SOURCES, please click on 'Linked data'. For a GERMAN TRANSLATION of an earlier version of the first 25 of these 28 bullet points, see … https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2019/06/18/25-punkte-die-beweisen-dass-co2-keine-globale-erwaermung-verursacht-diesmal-von-einem-geologen/ For a CHINESE TRANSLATION, see … https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334823689 EXTINCTION REBELLION, Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming is as laughable (if it weren't for their wilful, unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight or the force of gravity. These gullible people need to learn to think for themselves. Please consider pressing the 'Recommend' button (blue arrow, on the right). The more scientists denouncing the preposterous 'man-made warming' dogma (it's the Sun!), the more 'civilians', maybe even politicians and opinion-moulding journalists, will take notice and start to ask questions.
!
p.!1!of!9!
33 simple 'Bullet Points' prove global warming by the Sun, not CO2:
by a geologist for a change
Dr Roger Higgs (DPhil geology, Oxford, 1982-86)
Geoclastica Ltd, Technical Note 2019-11, on ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332245803
6th April 2019, amended 11th April 2021
For literature sources see ‘Linked data’ ...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334029086
Abbreviations:
'AD' = anno Domini
'BC' = years 'before Christ'
'BP' = years 'before present', from radiocarbon dating. 0 is 1950AD by convention
~ = about/approximately
1) The IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has no
geologists among the hundreds of authors of its last major report (2013-14) and at
most 1 geologist in the next report (due 2022; see my Technical Note 2019-10). Thus
IPCC focuses on only the last 170 years (since multiple reliable thermometer
measurements began, ~1850), yet Earth is 26 million (sic) times older, 4.5 billion
years. Geologists know that throughout this time Earth has constantly warmed or
cooled (never static). Thus 'climate change' is nothing new; it is perfectly usual.
During the last 11,650 years, our current ‘Holocene’ interglacial epoch, climate
change has repeatedly been fast enough to cause collapse of civilizations (Bullet 20).
2A) The IPCC’s very existence relies on public belief in ‘Anthropogenic (man-made)
Global Warming' (AGW) by CO2 emissions. Most IPCC authors, mainly government
and university researchers, are biased by strong vested interests in AGW
(publications; reputations; continuance of salaries; research grants).
2B) Similarly, universities have sacrificed their impartiality by hosting institutes
financially mandated to promote AGW. For example, London's former bastion of
scientific integrity Imperial College has, since 2007, housed the 'Grantham Institute -
Climate Change and the Environment', founded and funded by investment magnate
Jeremy Grantham (heavily involved in forest destruction for biomass energy
according to the 2019 Michael Moore/Jeff Gibbs documentary 'Planet of the
Humans'). The 'Tyndall Centre for Climate Research' (founded 2000; Bullet 5A) has
branches at the Universities of Cardiff, Manchester, Newcastle and Fudan, and also
at the University of East Anglia, in the same building as the infamous IPCC-linked
Climatic Research Unit (CRU; Wiki 'Climategate').
2C) Well-known scientists formerly associated with the IPCC have subsequently
denounced its methods.
!
p.!2!of!9!
3) Claimed '97% consensus among scientists' that AGW exists is a deception. It
refers in fact to polls of recent publications by only 'climate scientists', i.e.
atmospheric specialists, lacking deep-time perspective (Bullet 1), who deal with
'climate models' (Bullet 6). Graduation and employment of 'climate scientists'
opportunistically boomed in the AGW hysteria since 1990, lavishly funded, creating
a strong incentive for bias (Bullet 2). The vast majority of the world's normal
scientists, numbering millions and lacking any financial bias, are not part of the
'consensus', having never been polled, myself included. In November 2019
Wikipedia deleted its "List of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on
global warming" (Bullet 29).
4) No informed person ‘denies’ global warming: it has been measured (Bullet 11).
‘Global-warming denier’ is a deceitful term, with intentionally despicable
connotations, for doubters and deniers of 'Anthropogenic (man-made) Global
Warming' (AGW), probably the majority of the world's scientists.
5A) The "greenhouse effect ... a slight misnomer" (Wiki; in fact a complete misnomer;
see their references) ... "is the process by which radiation from a planet's atmosphere
warms the planet's surface" (Wiki, citing IPCC). This bold claim that Earth's land-
and ocean surfaces are warmed by the air is 'backwards'. In truth the (solar-warmed)
ocean warms the atmosphere, as shown by three observations: (1) ocean-surface
water (covering ~70% of Earth) is almost everywhere warmer (fractionally) than the
air above it; (2) changes in global average surface air temperature lag 1 to 1.5 months
behind corresponding changes in global sea-surface temperature; and (3) Antarctica
has failed to warm in the last several decades (attributed to the ice sheet's high
elevation delaying the landward penetration of ocean-warmed air). These facts
indicate that heat (only capable of flowing one way, from warmer to cooler) flows
outward, from the ocean to the air, not vice versa. A truthful summary of the
greenhouse effect is that solar energy absorbed at Earth’s surface is radiated back
into the atmosphere as heat, some of which is absorbed on its way out to space by
greenhouse gases. Thus greenhouse gases cause no warming; instead they reduce the
air's heat loss to space, exactly in the manner demonstrated by the great John
Tyndall (Bullet 2B), who experimentally confirmed (1860) what is now called the
greenhouse effect.
5B) CO2 is a ‘greenhouse gas’ (GHG). Due to the 'saturation effect', CO2's theoretical
heat-trapping ability sharply (logarithmically) declines as its concentration rises.
CO2's Climate Sensitivity (CS) is the hypothetical warming due to a doubling of
CO2. IPCC ‘estimates’ CS, based on defective (Bullet 6) climate models (circular
reasoning), as probably between 1.5 and 4.5C°, a 300% contrast! According to a
landmark new paper by van Wijngaarden & Happer (2020), CS for doubling from
400 to 800ppm is theoretically 1.4 to 2.3C°, but their calculations assume cloud-free
conditions; the effect of clouds, which cover about two-thirds of Earth at any
moment (Wiki 'Cloud cover'), is very uncertain (Bullet 5C).
5C) Despite CO2's greenhouse-warming potential, evidently the Sun (not CO2)
governed our climate for at least the last 2,000 years, based on good correlation
between solar-magnetic output (SMO) and Earth's average surface temperature
(Bullet 12), in contrast to CO2's non-correlation (Bullet 12B) except the partial
coincidence (by chance) of its strong rise since 1850 (start of Industrial Revolution)
!
p.!3!of!9!
versus 'Modern Warming' (1815 to present-day; Bullet 11) and SMO's ~1700-1991
surge. This proves that CO2's greenhouse-warming potential, already fallen
logarithmically "well into the saturation regime", is negated by feedbacks. Two
natural feedbacks ignored in IPCC climate models are: (i) little known cloud
feedback; and (ii) “potentially very important” increased biogenic 'BVOC' aerosol
due to faster forest growth by warming & CO2 fertilization. (The only feedbacks
listed in IPCC's influential 2013 Fifth Assessment Report figure SPM.5 are man-made
ones, with very wide "uncertainty intervals".) IPCC admits "aerosols and their
interactions with clouds have offset a substantial portion of global mean forcing
from ... greenhouse gases. They ... contribute the largest uncertainty"; and
"quantification of cloud and convective effects in models, and of aerosol–cloud
interactions, continues to be a challenge." IPCC's underestimation of negative
feedbacks explains why climate models run too hot (Bullet 6), and why 'runaway'
warming has apparently never occurred on Earth.
6A) Computer 'climate models' (by 'climate scientists'; Bullet 3) are so full of
assumptions (stacked upon other assumptions) as to be highly misleading at best,
e.g. 1985-2015 warming forecast by 31 models turned out 2 to 4 times too high. Even
pro-IPCC 'tricky Wiki' (Bullet 29) admitted: “Each model simulation has a different
guess at processes that scientist don't understand sufficiently well”.
6B) Climate models ignore three crucial factors: (i) natural cloud and aerosol-cloud
feedbacks (Bullet 5C); (ii) large changes in solar magnetic output (SMO; Bullet 12A),
driving global temperature changes according to the Svensmark Theory, denied by
the IPCC (Bullet 14), which disingenuously says 'total solar irradiance' (TSI; varies in
step with SMO but proportionally far less) varies much too little to affect climate, so
CO2 must be in charge; likewise the CRU (Bullet 2B); and NASA, which went so far
as to publish 'Atmospheric CO2: Principal Control Knob Governing Earth's
Temperature' in 2010; (iii) 'ocean-lag', the multi-decade delay between changes in
SMO and correlative changes in temperature (Bullet 21). These three IPCC failings,
'Sun denial', ocean-lag omission, and feedback underestimation, render climate
modelling conducted to date worthless.
7A) For much of the last 550 million years (Phanerozoic time), atmospheric CO2 was
2 to 10 times higher than now. Evolution flourished. Plant photosynthesis, the basis
of all life, was stimulated by higher CO2 (Bullet 8). Extinction events due to
overheating by CO2 are unknown.
7B) Throughout Phanerozoic time, CO2 seemingly correlated well with temperature
(although all studies inevitably have low resolution). This is readily explained by
warming oceans releasing CO2 and vice versa (Bullets 9, 10).
8A) Through Holocene time, atmospheric CO2 was a mere 250-285 ppm (i.e. near
plant-starvation level of ~150 ppm; Wiki 'CO2 fertilization effect'; also Bullet 27),
until ~1850 when mankind's industrial CO2 emissions began. Since then,
atmospheric CO2 has climbed steeply. Proving that man's emissions are the main
driver of this post-1850 rise in CO2, ice cores show that the last five interglacial
periods (including the Holocene) all reached levels of 250-300 ppm, i.e. a sort of
!
p.!4!of!9!
'equilibrium' value. CO2 today (January 2021), 415 ppm, is still only 0.04% of our
atmosphere (i.e. less than half of one-tenth of 1%), far less than in the past (Bullet 7).
8B) The present CO2 level of 415ppm is far from hazardous to human health, e.g.
CO2 levels in American Navy submarines typically average 3,000-4,000ppm with no
reported ill effects. Benefits of rising CO2, thanks to the 'CO2 fertilization effect',
include expansion of natural forests ('greening' of the planet) and increased
agricultural productivity, essential for feeding Earth's burgeoning population. Thus,
ironically, man's production of CO2 by burning fossil fuels (for energy and
transport) has unintentionally averted, or at least postponed, a global food crisis.
Commercial growers inject CO2 into their greenhouses. "CO2 enrichment in
greenhouses allows crops to meet there (sic) photosynthesis potential." "For most
crops the saturation point will be reached at about 1,000–1,300 ppm ... Increased CO2
levels will shorten the growing period (5%–10%), improve crop quality and yield".
9) Until man began adding industrial CO2 about 1850, global warming (determined
from ‘proxies’ like tree rings) since the ~1815 cold peak of the Little Ice Age (~1250-
1920) was accompanied by a very slight rise in CO2 (measured in ice cores). A
simple explanation is the well-known release of CO2 by warming ocean water
(decreasing its CO2-holding capacity).
10) Other evidence, besides Bullet 9, that rising CO2 is a consequence, not cause, of
global warming is that Quaternary glacial-interglacial temperature changes were
followed "very closely" by changes in CO2. Based on ice-core data, the time-lag is
somewhere between 400 years and zero, possibly even slightly negative. However,
based on direct thermometer and CO2 measurements covering the last few decades,
changes in CO2 lag behind ~5 months according to Kuo et al. (1990) and 11-12
months according to Humlum et al. (2013).
11) Thermometer records since 1750 show 2.1C° warming (global land average) since
1815 (Little Ice Age nadir; Bullet 9). This 'Modern Warming' (name proposed here)
was interrupted by two 30-year coolings (1880-1910, 1945-1975, 0.2C° each) and the
1998-2013 ‘Global warming hiatus’ (Wiki); and by frequent brief (1-3 years) minor
coolings, some attributable to mega-volcano ‘winters’ (1-10years) and perhaps to El
Niño/La Niña events (seldom if ever exceed 2 years). After the first 30-year cooling,
global average warming was 1.3C° from 1910 to 2016 (slight cooling since then
[Bullet 13]). In contrast, since the start of industrial CO2 additions ~1850 (Bullet 8),
CO2’s rise has accelerated, with only a brief pause (1887-97) and a mini-reversal
(1940-45), both during the 30-year coolings, and both attributable to CO2's increasing
solubility in a cooling ocean (Bullet 9). The 30-year coolings match solar-output
downturns, after applying a temperature lag of ~100 years due to 'ocean memory'
(Bullet 21). In other words, CO2 and global temperature do not correlate. Moreover,
the HadCRUT dataset of averaged global temperature since 1850 contains solar
frequencies, while the CO2 record does not.
12A) This unsteady ‘sawtooth’ (up-down) style of post-1815 'Modern Warming'
(Bullet 11) mimics the sawtooth rise in solar-magnetic output (SMO) from ~1700
(end of sunspot-defined 'Maunder Minimum') to 1991 (peak SMO of Sun's modern
!
p.!5!of!9!
'Grand Maximum' [GM; 1937-2004]; NB sunspot peak was earlier, 1958). A good
cross-match is obtained by applying a temperature delay of ~100 years ('ocean-lag';
Bullet 21), thereby aligning the two 30-year coolings (Bullet 11) with two solar
declines. SMO's ~1700-1991 surge was both the strongest (amplitude) and highest in
at least 9,000 years, increasing 350% from 1700 to 1950 and, in the 20th Century
alone, 131% from 1901 to 1991, and 41% from 1964 to 1996. "The last period which
showed similar high activity and also lasted as long as the current one was about
1700 years ago" (Steinhilber et al. 2008). That particular ~300AD GM caused
warming (and drove a global 2-3m sea-level rise, the 'Romano-British Transgression',
portending another such rise imminently (Bullet 24). Thus I propose that the Sun
drove Modern Warming (via the Svensmark cosmic ray/cloud mechanism [Bullet
14]), with negligible or no help from CO2, in the same way that earlier (lesser) GMs
of the last 8,000 years clearly correlate with (lesser) warmings (Bullet 12B).
12B) Similarly, since at least 2,000 years ago, solar-magnetic output (SMO) correlates
well with temperature (proxy temperatures from tree rings, ice cores, etc. in the pre-
thermometer era before 1750). Both graphs have a hockey-stick shape (Bullet 32): the
'shaft' is an overall ~1,200-year decline from ~400AD to the Little Ice Age (LIA;
Bullet 9), with superimposed 50-200-yr smaller up-down 'sawteeth'; the 'blade' is the
post-1700 surge (Bullet 12A). Applying a temperature lag of ~100-150 years (Bullet
21) aligns: (i) the Sun's ~300AD GM (Bullet 12A) and the ~450AD highest
temperature of the last 2,000 years (possibly surpassed by Modern Warming); and
(ii) the ~1700 LIA solar minimum and the 1815 LIA minimum temperature (Bullet
12A). Moreover, the graphs have the same proportionality: ~3:2 ratio of surge height
versus sawtooth amplitude; and ~1:1 height ratio of the shaft and blade. In contrast,
CO2's correlation with temperature for the last 2,000 years is very poor: the only
(partial) match is CO2's surge since ~1850 (start of Industrial Revolution). CO2
mismatches are: (i) slight overall rise from 500AD into the LIA (i.e. 'shaft' gradient is
backwards); (ii) sawteeth are minuscule; and (iii) the two 30-year solar- and
temperature declines (Bullet 12A) are missing. Further back in time, despite
decreasing proxy availability and looser dating, correlation is also evident for at least
the last 8,000 years, superimposed on long-term slight cooling due to Earth's
declining axial obliquity since ~8,500BP (google Milankovitch orbital forcing).
13) 2016 was the warmest year 'since records began', i.e. only since ~1850, when a
reliable global thermometer network existed. 2017, 2018 and 2019 were all cooler.
(NB no volcanic mega-eruption since 1991). Yet CO2 is still rising. So every passing
day that isn't 'warmest ever recorded' for that date at multiple sites worldwide is
awkward for the IPCC.
14) The breathtakingly elegant and simple ‘Svensmark Theory’ says rising solar-
magnetic output, by deflecting more cosmic rays, reduces cloudiness. This allows
more of the Sun’s warmth to heat the ocean and hence the atmosphere (Bullet 5A),
instead of being reflected back out into space by clouds. In support, a NASA study
of satellite data spanning 1979-2011 (during the ‘Modern Warming’; Bullet 12)
showed decreasing cloud cover. The IPCC dismisses Svensmark's theory.
15) Vocal climate scientist, computer modeller, IPCC lead author, and recipient of a
1999 US$1 million private donation to work on his alarming idea that man-made
!
p.!6!of!9!
warming might stop "Atlantic conveyor belt" ocean circulation, with dire
consequences for regional climate (cooling), ecosystems and society, Stefan
Rahmstorf (Wiki) of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research wrongly said
in 2008: "there is no viable alternative ... [to CO2 as driver of 1940-2005 warming, as]
... different authors agree that solar activity did not significantly increase”. Yet in
1999, physicist Dr Michael Lockwood FRS (Wiki) and co-authors wrote in
prestigious Nature journal that from 1964 to 1996 "the total magnetic flux leaving the
Sun has risen by a factor of 1.4” and from 1901 to 1992 by 2.3! Supporting
Lockwood's work, Steinhilber et al. (2010) showed that "Since the year 1700, the open
solar magnetic flux has increased by about 350%".
16) Lockwood (Bullet 15) showed that averaged solar magnetic flux increased 230%
from 1901 to 1995, i.e. more than doubled. The ongoing (ocean-lagged) warming that
followed the 1945-75 cooling (Bullet 5) was driven by this solar surge, via the
Svensmark effect (Bullet 14), delayed by 'ocean memory' (Bullet 21), which will
ensure continued warming for several more decades. Bullets 17 and 18 also support
Svensmark’s theory.
17) After the ~300AD solar Grand Maximum (Bullet 12), between 350 and 450 global
average temperature warmed to near today’s value. Subsequent ‘sawtooth’ cooling
mimicked the Sun’s 1,000-year sawtooth decline into the Little Ice Age (Bullet 9).
18) In the 'Holocene Climatic Optimum' (Bullet 20) spanning 8,000 to 2,000BC, Earth
was warmer than now except for about five interludes of a few decades each.
Unsteady cooling from 3,000BC to the Little Ice Age (Bullet 9) paralleled unsteady
solar decline.
19) This 4,500-year-long cooling mocks IPCC computer models (Bullet 6) that instead
predict warming by the simultaneous (slow) rise in CO2. This is the ‘The Holocene
Temperature Conundrum’ of Liu et al. (2014). See also Bullet 6.
20) Embarrassingly for the IPCC, the 8000-2000BC warm interval (Bullet 18) was
already called the ‘Holocene Climatic Optimum’ (Wiki) before IPCC's facile 'CO2 =
pollutant' fallacy induced today's AGW hysteria and pointless multi-trillion-dollar
climate-change industry. The warmth may have benefitted development of
civilizations.
21) For at least the last 1,700 years, sawtooth-style global warming/cooling correlate
well with solar-magnetic activity (Bullet 12) by applying an 'ocean-memory' lag of
60-160 years (varying with time), attributable to oceanic thermal inertia (vast ocean
volume, high heat capacity and slow circulation/mixing; Bullet 6), causing delayed
response to changes in solar-magnetic flux, hence cloudiness, which governs global
temperature (Bullet 14).
!
p.!7!of!9!
22) The IPCC says ongoing global warming despite solar weakening (since 1991;
Bullet 12) disqualifies the Sun as the cause of warming. This disingenuously ignores
the time-lag caused by oceanic thermal inertia, of which the IPCC is well aware, and
which brings the Sun's past 'ups-and-downs' ('sawteeth') into alignment with global
temperature ups-and-downs (Bullet 12). Thus one of only three pillars upon which
the 'Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming' dogma stands is demolished. The
other two, namely (i) simultaneous warming and acceleration in CO2 since 1850 (a
chance coincidence; Bullet 24), and (ii) the 30cm sea-level rise since 1850 supposedly
unprecedented in 2,000 years (Bullet 26), are equally easy to dismiss.
23) The last interglacial period, ~120,000 years ago, was warmer than our Holocene
interglacial. Humans and polar bears survived! CO2 was about 275 ppm, i.e. lower
than now (Bullet 8), at a time of greater warmth!
24) The joint rise of temperature and CO2 is a ‘spurious correlation’, mere chance.
Earth's temperature correlates much better with solar output, which increased just as
impressively in the 20th Century (Bullet 12). So IPCC's demonising of CO2 as a
‘pollutant’ is a colossal blunder, costing trillions of dollars in needless and
ineffectual efforts to reduce it. Instead, governments need to focus urgently on the
imminent rapid metre-scale Sun-driven sea level rise, like earlier Holocene ones
(Bullets 12A, 26).
25) Although the Sun is now declining since its 1991 magnetic peak (Bullet 12), solar-
driven global warming will continue until ~2050 due to 'ocean-lag', presently ~60
years (Bullet 21). Meanwhile rising CO2 will continue to raise global food
production (Bullet 8), without affecting climate (Bullet 5). Cooling will begin ~2050
and last at least 28 years (i.e. post-1991 solar-magnetic decline to date). Sadly our
benign Holocene ‘interglacial’ period will eventually end, inevitably, by
Milankovitch orbital forcing (Bullet 12), much more powerful than solar changes.
26) IPCC says sea level (SL) from 0 to 1800AD varied < 25 centimetres (and < 1 metre
since 4000BC) and never exceeded today’s SL, therefore the 30-centimetre SL rise
measured since 1850 is abnormal, they say, blaming industrial CO2. But this claim,
based on flawed cherry-picked evidence, ignores dozens of studies of geological and
archaeological 3000BC-1000AD SL benchmarks globally, which reveal 3 or 4 rises
(and falls) of 1-3 metres in < 200 years each (i.e. > 5 millimetres/year), all reaching
higher than today, long before industrial CO2.
27) If humans were to stop expanding fossil-fuel use and maintain current levels,
CO2 would soon stabilise at a new equilibrium value, nearer the optimum for plants
(Bullet 8). When fossil fuels eventually become too scarce to produce economically,
and we switch inevitably to nuclear energy, CO2 will decrease.
28) NASA's 'ClimateKids' website says "Extra greenhouse gases in our atmosphere
are the main reason that Earth is getting warmer" and "today the planet is warming
much faster than it has over human history." The first statement is untrue (see many
!
p.!8!of!9!
Bullets above). The wording of the second statement, which may or not be true,
gives the impression that man is to blame, and omits to mention that the Sun's
increase in output from the Little Ice Age (Bullet 9) to the 1991 solar-magnetic peak
was the greatest for at least the last 9,000 years (Bullet 12). Society is in a sad state
when even NASA, who put men on the moon, is reduced to uncritically jumping on
the AGW bandwagon/gravy train and scaring children with a fairy tale (i.e. first
statement above) affecting their mental health (see also Bullet 8).
29) In March 2020 I exposed Wikipedia's November 2019 deletion of its 'List of
scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming' (Bullet 4),
which named 79 renowned PhD scientists (each with his/her own Wikipedia entry),
from diverse sciences, brave enough to publically challenge the global CO2 madness.
(Tens of thousands of other 'skeptical' scientists are sadly too timid to join in,
frightened for their jobs.) Thus, your children may never know that many
prominent, impartial scientists disagree with the claim by the under-qualified (Bullet
1), disingenuous (Bullets 6, 22) IPCC that global warming is due to man-made CO2.
This is global censorship by 'Tricky Wiki'. Fortunately the list survives, both hard-
copy (contact me for pdf) and online (for now).
30) Dismissing Modern Warming's clear correlation with 20th-century rising solar
activity based on sunspots (especially after applying a time-lag of ~60-100 years;
Bullets 12, 21), the Royal Observatory of Belgium's SILSO group (connections to
IPCC) produced a "corrected" new sunspot series, now widely accepted, greatly
inflating the 1778 sunspot peak, so that the 1958 peak (Bullet 12) looks much less
exceptional. The result was announced in a 2015 press release by SILSO Director
Frédéric Clette: "The new record has no significant long-term upward trend in solar
activity since 1700, as was previously indicated. This suggests that rising global
temperatures since the industrial revolution cannot be attributed to increased solar
activity." Voilà ! How pleased must the IPCC have been? My Technical Note 2019-17
shows the "correction" to be incorrect.
31) The NASA and HadCRUT graphs (Bullet 11) show global land surface air
temperature rising faster than sea surface temperature since 1985. Land and sea
warming from 1985 to 2016 was supposedly 1.2 and 0.5 centigrade degrees,
respectively (NASA), i.e. the land warmed more than twice as fast! This divergence
is highly doubtful, for two reasons: (1) the same graphs show much less divergence
before 1985 and sometimes in the opposite sense; and (2) the ocean governs global
average air temperature (Bullet 5A), therefore how can the latter warm more than
the former? Computer models blame the divergence on global warming by CO2, but
models can produce any desired result (Bullet 6). A far more likely explanation is
inadequate land-temperature correction for the 'urban heat island' effect. Indeed,
there has been massive urbanisation worldwide since 1985, out-of-control world
population increasing 60% and urban population more than doubling.
32) The 'Hockey stick controversy' (Wiki) refers to Michael Mann's 1999 temperature
graph for 1000AD to 1998, shaped like a hockey stick, with its 'shaft' and 'blade'
joining at the Little Ice Age (Bullet 9). Many AGW skeptics and deniers (Bullet 4)
accused Mann of fraudulently erasing the warm 'hump' of the Medieval Warm
!
p.!9!of!9!
Period (MWP) in the previously accepted temperature graph for 900 to 1950AD by
pioneer palaeoclimatologist and originator of the MWP concept Hubert Lamb (1965),
re-published with minor alterations by IPCC itself (Folland et al. 1990), showing the
MWP peak ~1150AD, and warmer than today. But Lamb's graph was only intended
as a gross approximation, based mostly on historical documents. In contrast, post-
1999 graphs based (like Mann's) on temperature proxies (tree rings etc.) and
extending further back to 1AD, vindicated Mann and confirmed the MWP hump
was lower and broader, and started centuries earlier, and was already surpassed by
Modern Warming by 2000 or possibly as early as 1950.
33) The IPCC assures us that Earth's temperature is controlled by CO2 and that the
Sun has minuscule or zero effect. This is precisely backwards. In truth, solar-
magnetic output controls our climate (Svensmark effect, Bullet 14) and CO2 has little
or no influence (Bullets 1, 10, 11, 19, 32). Varying solar output even controls the
timing of major volcanic eruptions (affecting climate; Bullet 11) and large
earthquakes.
CONCLUSION
'Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming' (AGW) is easily demolished in just
500 words ...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341622566
... and ...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347356327
These 33 bullets collectively prove that any CO2 effect on global temperatures of the
Holocene period (i.e. the last 11,650 years), including the 'Modern Warming' period
since 1815, was nil or too small to detect. Almost certainly CO2's greenhouse effect is
nullified by negative-feedback effects greatly underestimated by the IPCC. This
explains ‘The Holocene Temperature Conundrum’ and why 'runaway' warming is
unknown throughout geological history. Holocene temperature changes were
instead driven by solar-magnetic changes (controlling cloudiness via the Svensmark
Theory), superimposed on long-term cooling due to Earth's declining axial obliquity.
I predict another few decades (to about 2050) of ocean-lagged Modern Warming by
the Sun's 20th-century surge, offset by CO2's net (including feedbacks) cooling effect,
while CO2 climbs nearer the optimum for plant photosynthesis. Then Sun-forced
cooling will begin. There is no 'climate emergency'. There has never been a better
time to be alive. Be happy.
___________________________________________________________________________
GERMAN TRANSLATION of the first 25 of these 33 bullet points ...
https://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/2019/06/18/25-punkte-die-beweisen-dass-co2-
keine-globale-erwaermung-verursacht-diesmal-von-einem-geologen/
CHINESE TRANSLATION ...
https://principia-scientific.org/全球暖的元凶是太阳而不是二氧化碳-个角度看/
or https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334823689
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
The last interglacial period, Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 5e, was characterized by global mean surface temperatures that were at least 2 °C warmer than present1. Mean sea level stood 4–6 m higher than modern sea level2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, with an important contribution from a reduction of the Greenland ice sheet1, 14. Although some fossil reef data indicate sea-level fluctuations of up to 10 m around the mean3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, so far it has not been possible to constrain the duration and rates of change of these shorter-term variations. Here, we use a combination of a continuous high-resolution sea-level record, based on the stable oxygen isotopes of planktonic foraminifera from the central Red Sea15, 16, 17, 18, and age constraints from coral data to estimate rates of sea-level change during MIS-5e. We find average rates of sea-level rise of 1.6 m per century. As global mean temperatures during MIS-5e were comparable to projections for future climate change under the influence of anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions19, 20, these observed rates of sea-level change inform the ongoing debate about high versus low rates of sea-level rise in the coming century21, 22.
Article
Full-text available
The last glacial cycle was characterized by substantial millennial-scale climate fluctuations, but the extent of any associated changes in global sea level (or, equivalently, ice volume) remains elusive. Highstands of sea level can be reconstructed from dated fossil coral reef terraces, and these data are complemented by a compilation of global sea-level estimates based on deep-sea oxygen isotope ratios at millennial-scale resolution or higher. Records based on oxygen isotopes, however, contain uncertainties in the range of +/-30 m, or +/-1 degrees C in deep sea temperature. Here we analyse oxygen isotope records from Red Sea sediment cores to reconstruct the history of water residence times in the Red Sea. We then use a hydraulic model of the water exchange between the Red Sea and the world ocean to derive the sill depth-and hence global sea level-over the past 470,000 years (470 kyr). Our reconstruction is accurate to within +/-12 m, and gives a centennial-scale resolution from 70 to 25 kyr before present. We find that sea-level changes of up to 35 m, at rates of up to 2 cm yr(-1), occurred, coincident with abrupt changes in climate.
Smooth or oscillating late Holocene sea-level curve? Evidence from cross-regional statistical regressions of fixed biological indicators
Journal article: Baker & Haworth 2000a, 'Smooth or oscillating late Holocene sea-level curve? Evidence from cross-regional statistical regressions of fixed biological indicators', Marine Geology, vol. 163, p. 353-365...
Smooth or oscillating late Holocene sea-level curve? Evidence from the palaeo-zoology of fixed biological indicators in east Australia and beyond
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312990537_Smooth_or_oscillating_Late_Holo cene_sea_levels_in_the_Southern_Hemispherea_statistical_analysis Journal article: Baker & Haworth 2000b, 'Smooth or oscillating late Holocene sea-level curve? Evidence from the palaeo-zoology of fixed biological indicators in east Australia and beyond', Marine Geology, vol. 163, p. 367-386...
Red Sea sea level Nature+supplement.pdf ... see Fig. 4c, sea-level curve (red) from data of Shackleton et al
http://www.highstand.org/erohling/Rohling-papers/2003-Siddall et al 2003 Red Sea sea level Nature+supplement.pdf ... see Fig. 4c, sea-level curve (red) from data of Shackleton et al. 2000. Journal article: Thompson & Goldstein 2005, 'Open-system coral ages reveal persistent suborbital sea-level cycles'...
This 4,500yr-long cooling mocks IPCC computer models that instead predict warming by the simultaneous (slow) rise in CO2. This is the 'The Holocene Temperature Conundrum
  • Liu
This 4,500yr-long cooling mocks IPCC computer models that instead predict warming by the simultaneous (slow) rise in CO2. This is the 'The Holocene Temperature Conundrum' of Liu et al. (2014). See also Bullet 6.