…Proof: CO2 is Not a Threat…
Americans have been lied to about CO2 being an existential threat to mankind. See, Americans Have Been Lied To
Here is scientific proof that CO2 is not a threat.
First, Dr. John Cristy, in his Congressional testimony, used the following chart to demonstrate that the IPCC computer projections were overstating temperature rise.
The average of 102 computer programs projected a temperature rise that was more than twice the actual temperature readings taken by satellites and balloons.
He also showed that, when IPCC computer models omitted greenhouse gas data, the program results came closer to corresponding to actual temperature readings, thus casting additional doubt about IPCC projections.
In other words, when GHG data is omitted from the program, the computer output aligns with actual temperatures. Therefore, GHG data is distorting the outcomes.
Dr. Judith Curry in 2017 said: “There is growing evidence that climate models are running too hot and that climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide is at the lower end of the range provided by the IPCC.”
This proves that computer programs, used to support the narrative that CO2 is a threat, are wrong. Their output shows warming that is at least 2 to 3 times what is actually occurring.
Note that the warming detected by balloons and satellites could be from natural causes rather than from increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
These graphs merely prove that the computer programs and the IPCC are wrong.
What is needed is proof that increased levels of atmospheric CO2, and other greenhouse gases, such as methane, are not causing a dangerous increase in temperatures.
Dr. Happer provided that proof in his talk, How to think about Climate Change, at the National Leadership Symposium of Hillsdale College, Phoenix, AZ, February 19, 2021.
This graph from his talk, and a summary of a few of his comments, establishes that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 will have a negligible effect on temperatures.
The top curve, solid line, was developed by Max Planck. It establishes the thermal heat loss at various wave lengths, as if there was no atmosphere.
The lower, jagged curve, was developed by Karl Schwarzschild. Schwarzschild’s curve shows the actual thermal heat loss from the Earth as radiation is interrupted at various wave lengths by components of the atmosphere; In this particular instance, the effect of CO2.
The graph shows the actual heat loss where the percentages of CO2 are:
- 0 ppm, (in green),
- 400 ppm (in black)
- 800 ppm (in red).
These two curves, highlighted by the circle, are virtually the same, indicating that heat loss is nearly unchanged after doubling CO2 from 400 to 800 ppm.
The circled red and black CO2 curves prove that CO2 is not an existential threat to mankind.
There is additional information supporting this discussion that can be best understood by watching Dr. Happer’s presentation at https://bit.ly/3zsXcS6
- The IPCC models overstate the effect of CO2, which should, by itself, demonstrate there is no climate emergency.
- Dr. Happer’s graphs showing there is very little temperature change with a doubling of CO2 levels is scientific proof there is no climate emergency.
This proves there is no climate crisis caused by CO2.
. . .
(1085)Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2021
Quantum-based, IR calculations indicate that near present atmospheric CO2 concentrations, a doubling of CO2 will decrease IR emission to space by about 3 watts/square-meter. Happer also gives this value in his talk, so there is no controversy on this point. (The IR graph shown is not a sensitive way to measure this change; direct calculations are more sensitive.) A change in Earth’s energy emission of 3 w/m^2 is expected to produce a global temperature change of around one deg-C.
A distinction must be made between any temperature change caused by increasing CO2 (e.g. the ~3 w/m^2) and an existential crisis from CO2-caused climate change. A one deg-C increase per CO2 doubling is not a threat (perhaps even a positive change). It is the much larger temperature increase predicted by climate models that are suspect. These are based on many other considerations, including positive and negative feedbacks (e.g., clouds, aerosols), as well as natural temperature drivers (e.g. solar energy input, deep ocean circulation, surface and atmosphere albedo) that are highly suspect. Happer and many others disagree with these larger temperature predictions based on these other factors because these other factors are highly uncertain, and some important factors may not even be included in climate models.
Thanks for your excellent comments.
Please note that in his talk at Hillsdale, Dr. Happer also included a chart showing the effects of several other components of the atmosphere that interrupt thermal radiation. He discusses clouds and water vapor and references the graph for water vapor.
Great post and a great reminder of how bad the climate models are and how any further addition of CO2 to the atmosphere causes no measurable warming. Actually, more CO2 will benefit the earth. For those still in doubt, here is some CO2 therapy … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xcc5-ApXFm8&t
Thanks for your comment and additional information as to why CO2 is beneficial to mankind.
Pingback: Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #459 – Watts Up With That?
Please spend a little time browsing through website: http://www.co2science.org
They have summarized thousands of scientific research papers showing the BENEFITS of increased CO2. While I’m not advocating increasing carbon dioxide, the topic cannot be discussed rationally without acknowledging that higher levels increase plant growth, disease resistance, drought tolerance and fruit/seed/nut production. Increasing CO2 is increasing food production across the world.
Thanks for your comment. The site you recommend is an excellent source of information. Craig Idso has done a great deal of scientific work investigating the benefits of CO2. Another excellent site is CO2 Coalition.