{"id":332716,"date":"2024-06-13T10:03:15","date_gmt":"2024-06-13T08:03:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332716"},"modified":"2024-06-13T10:03:18","modified_gmt":"2024-06-13T08:03:18","slug":"clausers-case-ghg-science-wrong-clouds-the-climate-thermostat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332716","title":{"rendered":"Clauser\u2019s Case: GHG Science Wrong, Clouds the Climate\u00a0Thermostat"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"482\" data-attachment-id=\"332726\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332726\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?fit=1511%2C1008&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1511,1008\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?fit=723%2C482&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?resize=723%2C482&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332726\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?resize=1024%2C683&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?resize=300%2C200&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?resize=768%2C512&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?resize=1200%2C801&amp;ssl=1 1200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?w=1511&amp;ssl=1 1511w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?w=1446&amp;ssl=1 1446w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">From <a href=\"https:\/\/rclutz.com\/2024\/06\/11\/clausers-case-ghg-science-wrong-clouds-the-climate-thermostat\/\">Science Matters <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/rclutz.com\/author\/ronaldrc\/\">Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full is-resized\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" data-attachment-id=\"332717\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332717\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-295.png?fit=640%2C360&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"640,360\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image-295\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-295.png?fit=640%2C360&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-295.png?resize=640%2C360&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332717\" style=\"width:760px;height:auto\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-295.png?w=640&amp;ssl=1 640w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-295.png?resize=300%2C169&amp;ssl=1 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This post provides a synopsis of Dr. John Clauser\u2019s Clintel presentation last May.&nbsp; Below are the texts from his slides gathered into an easily readable format. The two principal takeways are (in my words):<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>A.&nbsp;<\/strong>&nbsp;<strong>IPCC\u2019s Green House Gas Science is Flawed and Untrustworthy<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>B.&nbsp;<\/strong>&nbsp;<strong>Clouds are the Thermostat for Earth\u2019s Climate, Not GHGs.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Part I Climate Change is a Myth.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The IPCC and its collaborators have been tasked with computer modeling and observationally measuring two very important numbers \u2013 the Earth\u2019s so-called power imbalance, and its power-balance feedback-stability strength. They have grossly botched both tasks, in turn, leading them to draw the wrong conclusion.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>I assert that the IPCC has not proven global warming! On the contrary, observational data are fully consistent with no global warming. Without global warming, there is no climate-change crisis!<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Their computer modeling (GISS) of the climate is unable to simulate the Earth\u2019s surface temperature history, let alone predict its future.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Their computer modeling (GISS) is unable to simulate anywhere near the Earth\u2019s albedo (sunlight reflectivity). The computer simulated sunlight reflected power and associated power imbalance error, are typically about fourteen times bigger than the claimed measured power imbalance, and about twenty five times bigger than the claimed measured power imbalance error range.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The IPCC\u2019s observational data are wildly self-inconsistent and\/or are fully consistent with no global warming.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The IPCC\u2019s observational data claim an albedo for cloudy skies that is inconsistent with direct measurements by a factor of two. Alternatively, their data significantly violate conservation of energy.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Scientists performing the power-balance measurements admit that the available methodologies are incapable of measuring a net power imbalance with anywhere near the desired accuracy. This difficulty is due to huge temporal and spatial fluctuations of the imbalance, along with gross under-sampling of the data.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The observational data they report are self-inconsistent and are visibly dishonestly fudged to claim warming. The fudged final reported values, herein highlighted and exposed, are an example of the proverbial proliferation of bad pennies.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>NOAA\u2019s claims that there is an observed increase in extreme weather events are bogus. Their own published data disprove their own arguments. A 100 year history of extreme weather event frequency, plotted frontwards in time is virtually indistinguishable from the same historical data plotted backwards in time.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>In Part II, I present the cloud-thermostat feedback mechanism. My new mechanism dominantly controls and stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and temperature. The IPCC has not previously considered this mechanism. The IPCC ignores cloud-cover variability.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The IPCC\u2019s two sacred tasks \u2013 both botched!<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<ol class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The IPCC and its collaborators have been tasked with computer modeling and observationally measuring two very important numbers \u2013 the Earth\u2019s so-called power imbalance, and its power-balance feedback-stability strength.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Earth\u2019s net power imbalance is its sunlight heating power (its power-IN), minus its two components of cooling power \u2013 reflected sunlight and reradiated infrared power (its power-OUT).<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Based on their claimed power imbalance and global-warming assertion, the IPCC and its collaborators assemble a house of cards argument that forebodes an impending climate change apocalypse\/ catastrophe.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Additionally, the IPCC and its contributors calculate the strength of naturally occurring feedback mechanisms that presently stabilize the Earth\u2019s temperature and climate<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>They claim only marginal effectiveness for these mechanisms, and correspondingly assert that there is a \u201ctipping point\u201d, whereinafter further added greenhouse gasses catastrophically cause what amounts to a thermal-runaway of the Earth\u2019s temperature.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The IPCC scapegoats atmospheric greenhouse gasses as the cause of global warming, and further mandates that trillions of dollars must be spent to stop greenhouse gas release into the environment with a so-called \u201czero-carbon\u201d policy.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The IPCC also mandates multi-trillion dollar per year geoengineering projects including Solar Radiation Management Systems to stabilize the Earth\u2019s climate and CO2 capture projects to reduce the atmospheric CO2 levels.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>I assert that the IPCC and its contributors have not proven global warming, whereupon their house of cards collapses.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>My cloud thermostat mechanism\u2019s net feedback \u201cstrength\u201d (the IPCC\u2019s 2nd sacred task to estimate) is anywhere from -5.7 to -12.7 W\/m2\/K (depending on the assumed cloud albedo, 0.36 vs. 0.8), compared to the IPCC\u2019s botched best estimate for their mechanisms of -1.1 W\/m2\/K. My mechanism\u2019s overwhelmingly dominant strength confirms that it is the dominant feedback mechanism controlling the Earth\u2019s climate.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Correspondingly, I confidently assert that the climate crisis is a colossal trillion-dollar hoax.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The IPCC\u2019s computer modeling uses flawed physics to estimate the Earth\u2019s temperature history<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"353\" data-attachment-id=\"332719\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332719\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?fit=1920%2C937&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1920,937\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image-296\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?fit=723%2C353&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=723%2C353&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332719\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=1024%2C500&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=300%2C146&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=768%2C375&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=1536%2C750&amp;ssl=1 1536w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?resize=1200%2C586&amp;ssl=1 1200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?w=1920&amp;ssl=1 1920w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-296.png?w=1446&amp;ssl=1 1446w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u2022 The above graph is copied from [AR5, (IPCC, 2013) Fig 11.25].<br>\u2022 It shows the IPCC\u2019s CMIP5 computer modeling of the Earth\u2019s temperature \u201canomaly\u201d. The various computed curves display the earth\u2019s predicted (colored) and historical (gray) \u201ctemperature anomaly\u201d.<br>\u2022 The solid black curve is the observed temperature anomaly<br>\u2022 Note that all 40+ models are incapable of simulating the Earth\u2019s past temperature history. The total disarray and total lack of reliability among the CMIP5 predictions was first highlighted by Steve Koonin (former White House science advisor to Barack Obama) in his recent book- Unsettled? What climate science tells us, what it doesn\u2019t, and why it matters.<br>\u2022 Something is obviously very wrong with the physics incorporated within the computer models, and their predictions are totally unreliable.<br>\u2022 Albedo is the fraction of sunlight power that is directly reflected by the Earth back out into space (OSR=100 W\/m2 portion of power-OUT)<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"293\" data-attachment-id=\"332721\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332721\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?fit=1019%2C413&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1019,413\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image-297\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?fit=723%2C293&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?resize=723%2C293&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332721\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?w=1019&amp;ssl=1 1019w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?resize=300%2C122&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-297.png?resize=768%2C311&amp;ssl=1 768w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u2022 The above Figure, copied from Stephens et al. (2015), shows the IPCC\u2019s CMIP5 computer modeling (colored curves) of the Earth\u2019s mean annual albedo temporal variation. The solid black curve is the Earth\u2019s albedo measured by satellite radiometry. (The variation is not sinusoidal.)<br>\u2022 The added scale shows the associated reflected sunlight power. It assumes a constant solar irradiance \u2013 340 W\/m2<br>\u2022 Note that the IPCC\u2019s computer modeling is grossly incapable of simulating the observed Earth\u2019s reflected power, and especially incapable of simulating that power\u2019s dramatic temporal fluctuation.<br>\u2022 The actual power\u2019s annual variation is actually much greater than is shown by this Figure by about 18 W\/m2, due to the ellipticity of the Earth\u2019s orbit and the associated sinusoidal temporal variation of the so-called solar constant.<br>\u2022 Despite more than 10 W\/m2 gross errors in the computer simulation\u2019s calculated reflected power, as is shown on the Figure, the IPCC [AR6 (2021)] still claims that it has computer simulated and precisely measured this power, yielding an imbalance that is equal to 0.7 \u00b1 0.2 W\/m2 \u2013 Huh?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The IPCC\u2019s observational data are consistent with NO global warming<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u2022 Power-IN is the sunlight power incident on the Earth. The IPCC and climate scientists call it Short Wavelength (SW) Radiation. It is about 340 Watts per square meter of the Earth\u2019s surface area. (It is not actually constant, but varies \u00b1 9 W\/m2.)<br>\u2022 Power-OUT has two components:<br>\u2022 One component is the sunlight energy that is directly reflected by the Earth back out into space, whereinafter it can no longer heat the planet. That component is claimed by the IPCC to be about 100 W\/m2.<br>\u2022 The other component is the far-infrared heat radiated into space by a hot planet. It is claimed to be about 240 W\/m2. The IPCC calls the far-infrared heat radiation component, Long Wavelength (LW) Radiation.<br>\u2022 Measuring the power imbalance consists of measuring power-IN, measuring power-OUT and subtracting. Simple enough? Not really. The problem is that power-IN, and power-OUT are huge numbers, and that the difference between them is miniscule \u2013 0.2% of power-IN. That miniscule difference is the net imbalance that is sought, both experimentally and theoretically.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Unfortunately, it is so small that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to measure to the desired accuracy, 0.1 W\/m2, or 0.03% of power-IN. It is much tougher to measure when power-IN and power-OUT are both also hugely varying in a seemingly random irreproducible fashion. Large variations occur both in time and in space over the surface of the Earth. As noted in a previous slide, this grossly under-sampled fluctuation is about 28 W\/m2, compared with the IPCC\u2019s claimed imbalance, 0.7 \u00b1 0.2 W\/m2.<br>\u2022 A variety of methods has been employed to measure these powers. They include satellite radiometry, (the ERBE, and CERES Terra and Aqua satellites), ocean heat content (OHC) measured using the ARGO buoy chain and XBT water sampling by ships, and finally by ground sunlight observations using the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN).<br>\u2022 The various measured values are all in wild disagreement with each other. Importantly, none of the reported data actually show a convincing net warming power imbalance. Importantly, much of the reported data are totally fudged in a manner that dishonestly changes them from showing no warming to showing warming!<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"379\" height=\"529\" data-attachment-id=\"332722\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332722\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-298.png?fit=379%2C529&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"379,529\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image-298\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-298.png?fit=379%2C529&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-298.png?resize=379%2C529&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332722\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-298.png?w=379&amp;ssl=1 379w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-298.png?resize=215%2C300&amp;ssl=1 215w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 379px) 100vw, 379px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Critiques of Power-Flow Diagrams by Trenberth et al. (2010, 2014)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u2022 Satellites measure the Top of Atmosphere energy balance, while Ocean Heat Content data apply to the surface energy balance. One may legitimately mix power-flux data at the two different altitudes, if and only if one fully understands all of the power-flow processes in the atmosphere that occur between the surface and the Top of Atmosphere. If the latter requirement is not true, then one ends up with an \u201capples to oranges\u201d comparison.<br>\u2022 Trenberth et al. (2010, 2014) are highly critical of Loeb, Stephens, L\u2019Ecuyer, and Hansen\u2019s claimed \u201cunderstanding\u201d of the associated connection between the power flows at these two altitudes.<br>\u2022 Trenberth and Fasullo (2010) point to a huge \u201cmissing energy\u201d indicated by the difference between the satellite data and the OHC data power-imbalance calculations, and specifically ask \u201cWhere exactly does the energy go?\u201d<br>\u2022 Hansen et al. (2011) dismiss Trenberth and Fasullo\u2019s alleged missing energy as being simply due to satellite calibration errors.<br>\u2022 Trenberth Fasullo and Balmesada (2014) further note that despite various considerations of the surface power balance, significant unresolved discrepancies remain, and they are skeptical of the power imbalance claims.<br>\u2022 In effect, Trenberth et al. are the earliest \u201cwhistle blowers\u201d to the above-mentioned data fudges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Part I \u2013The Climate Change Myth\u2013 Conclusions<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. The IPCC and its contributors claim the Earth has a net-warming energy imbalance. I show here that those claims are false.<br>2. The IPCC bases its claims on computer modeling of the Earth\u2019s atmosphere, and on observational data from a variety of observational modalities. Both the computer models and the observational data are grossly flawed, and fudged.<br>3. The IPCC\u2019s computer modeling and its predictions are totally unreliable. There is something clearly very wrong with the physics incorporated within these computer models. Since the computer models can\u2019t even explain the past, why should anyone trust their prediction for the future?<br>4. Not one of the observational modalities for measuring the Earth\u2019s power imbalance convincingly shows net global warming.<br>5. I show where various observers and the IPCC have dishonestly fudged their reported data, and have dishonestly changed it from showing No Warming, to showing Warming. Crucially important data fudges are revealed here and highlighted in red. If you don\u2019t believe me, check my arithmetic.<br>6. The IPCC and NOAA further claim that the purported power imbalance has already caused an increase in dangerous extreme weather events. NOAA\u2019s own data disprove their own claims.<br>7. I thus offer Great News. Despite what you may have heard from the IPCC and others, there is no real climate crisis! The planet is NOT in peril!<br>8. The IPCC\u2019s (and NOAA\u2019s) claims are a hoax. Trillions of dollars are being wasted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Part II \u2013 The cloud thermostat&nbsp;<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. So what is really happening? Why is the earth\u2019s climate actually as stable as it really is?<br>2. The cloud thermostat mechanism is clearly the overwhelmingly dominant climate controlling feedback mechanism that controls stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and temperature. It thereby prevents global warming and climate change.<br>3. The cloud-thermostat mechanism provides very powerful feedback that stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and temperature. It great strength obtains from the observed large fluctuation of the Earth\u2019s power imbalance.<br>4. The mechanism gains its strength from the Earth\u2019s observed very large cloud-cover variation. The power imbalance is actually observed to be continuously strongly fluctuating by anywhere between 18 to 55 W\/m2.<br>5. Clouds modulate the outgoing Shortwave power and therefore control the Earth\u2019s power imbalance, minimally with a 18 W\/m2 available power range (ignoring the added 18 W\/m2 solar-constant variation), which is minimally 26 times the IPCC\u2019s 0.7 W\/m2 claimed power imbalance, and 45 times the IPCC\u2019s \u00b1 0.2 W\/m2 power imbalance error range.<br>6. The above numbers use the IPCC\u2019s assumed data parameters. With more realistic assumptions, the cloud-thermostat mechanism controls the Earth\u2019s power imbalance with a 73 W\/m2 available power range, which is 100 times bigger than the IPCC\u2019s 0.7 W\/m2 claimed power imbalance, and 180 times bigger than the IPCC\u2019s \u00b1 0.2 W\/m2 power-imbalance total error range.<br>7. This seemingly random fluctuation of the power imbalance is not random at all, but is actually a crucial part of a thermostat-like feedback mechanism that controls and stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and<br>temperature. It is observed by King et al. (2013) and by Stephens et al. (2015) to be quasi-periodic,<br>8. Just like the thermostat in your home, the power-imbalance is never zero. The furnace or AC is always either ON or OFF. The thermostat simply modulates the heating\/cooling duty cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Features of the cloud thermostat mechanism<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. In preparation for the introduction of this model, I first describe important, underappreciated, but conspicuous properties of clouds \u2013 their variability and their strong reflectivity of sunlight (SW radiation).<br>2. I show that the cloud-thermostat mechanism involves the dominant (73%) use of sunlight energy by the planet.<br>3. I show that when the cloud-thermostat mechanism is viewed as a form of climate-stabilizing negative feedback, it is by far the most powerful of any such mechanism heretofore considered.<br>4. The IPCC estimates that the net stabilizing feedback strength or the Earth\u2019s climate, including the destabilizing feedback strength of greenhouses is about -1 W\/m2\/\u00baC.<br>5. I show that the cloud thermostat feedback increases the net natural stabilizing feedback strength to about anywhere between -7 W\/m2\/\u00baC and -14 W\/m2\/\u00baC, depending on the assumptions used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"246\" data-attachment-id=\"332724\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=332724\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?fit=1281%2C437&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1281,437\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"image-299\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?fit=723%2C246&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?resize=723%2C246&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-332724\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?resize=1024%2C349&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?resize=300%2C102&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?resize=768%2C262&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?resize=1200%2C409&amp;ssl=1 1200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/image-299.png?w=1281&amp;ssl=1 1281w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">There are&nbsp;<strong>5 important take-home messages<\/strong>&nbsp;to be gleaned<strong>&nbsp;from these satellite photographs.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. Clouds reflect dramatically more sunlight than the rest of the planet does!<br>2. Clouds of all types appear bright white!<br>3. The photos (along with a large number of careful measurements) strongly suggest that the average cloud reflectivity (of sunlight) is about 0.8 \u2013 0.9. (For comparison, white paper has a reflectivity of \u2248 0.99.) [Wild et al.(2019) claim that cloud reflectivity is 0.36.]<br>4. The rest of the planet appears much darker than the clouds. The average reflectivity of land (green and brown areas) and ocean (dark blue areas) is \u2248 0.16.<br>5.Cloud coverage area is highly variable over the Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>What does sunlight mostly do when it reaches the Earth\u2019s surface?<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u2022 It is commonly believed that sunlight that is absorbed by the Earth\u2019s surface simply warms the surface. That may be true over land. But land represents only about 30% of the surface.<br>\u2022 Oceans cover 70% of the Earth\u2019s surface. Correspondingly, about 70% of incoming sunlight falls on the oceans. Virtually all of the Earth\u2019s exposed water surface occurs in the oceans.<br>\u2022 Following the AR6 power-flow diagram, 160 W\/m2is absorbed by the whole Earth, meaning that roughly 70% X 160 = 112 W\/m2 is absorbed by oceans.<br>\u2022 The AR6 power-flow diagram indicates that 82 W\/m2 is used for evaporating water, and not for heating the surface.<br>\u2022 Since clouds are mostly produced over the oceans (because that\u2019s where the exposed water is), then 82\/112 = 73% of the input energy absorbed by the Earth\u2019s oceans is used, not for warming the Earth, but instead simply for making clouds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>How does the cloud thermostat work?<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. Recall that the IPCC\u2019s AR6 power-flow map asserts that 73% of the input energy absorbed by the Earth\u2019s oceans is used, not for warming the Earth, but instead simply for evaporating seawater and making clouds, rather than for raising the Earth\u2019s surface temperature. Recall that the Earth has a strongly varying cloud cover and albedo.<br>2. Temperature control of the Earth\u2019s surface by this mechanism works exactly the same way as does a common home thermostat. A thermostat automatically corrects a structure\u2019s temperature in the presence of varying modest heat leaks. For the earth, the presence of significant CO2 in the earth\u2019s atmosphere, manmade or not, provides, in fact, a very small heat leak (at most, about 2 W\/m2).&nbsp; Note that, just like the Earth, the power imbalance for a thermostatically controlled system is never zero. It is always fully heating or fully cooling.<br>3. How does the cloud thermostat work? When the Earth\u2019s cloud-cover fraction is too high, then the earth\u2019s surface temperature is too low. Why? Clouds produce shadows. Cloudy days are cooler than sunny days. A high cloud-cover fraction equals a highly shadowed area. With reduced sunlight reaching the ocean\u2019s surface and lower temperature, the evaporation rate of seawater is reduced. The cloud production rate over ocean (70% of the earth) is low because sunlight is needed to evaporate seawater. The earth\u2019s too-high cloud-cover fraction obediently starts to decrease. Very quickly, cloud-cover fraction decreases, the temperature increases. The Earth\u2019s cloud-cover fraction is no longer too high. Equilibrium cloud cover and temperature are restored.<br>4. When the Earth\u2019s cloud-cover fraction is too low, the surface temperature is then too high, then the reverse process occurs. With low cloud cover, lots of sunlight reaches the ocean surface. Increased sunlit area then evaporates more seawater. The cloud-production rate obediently increases and the cloud-cover fraction is no longer too low . Equilibrium cloud cover and temperature are again restored.<br>5. Depending of one\u2019s assumption regarding cloud reflectivity (albedo), the cloud thermostat mechanism has anywhere between 18 and 55 W\/m2 power available from cloud-fraction variability to overcome a wimpy 0.7 W\/m2 heat leak (allegedly blamed on greenhouse gasses) and to stabilize the Earth\u2019s temperature, no matter what the greenhouse gas atmospheric concentration is!<br>6. These two fluctuating opposing processes, when in equilibrium, provide an equilibrium cloud-cover fraction, and an equilibrium average temperature. The earth thus has a built in thermostat!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Feedback strength of the cloud thermostat mechanism<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. The resulting cloud-thermostat mechanism\u2019s feedback parameter is now readily evaluated under the two scenarios associated with two choices for cloud albedo. The details of the calculation are shown in Appendix D.<br>2. Using the AR6 choice for cloud albedo, \u03b1Clouds = 0.36, we have \u03bbClouds \u2248 \u2013 5.7 W\/m2 K, which is 1.7 times larger than (the misnamed) \u03bb Planck , heretofore the strongest feedback term.<br>3. Alternatively, using the more reasonable choice for cloud albedo, \u03b1Clouds = 0.8, we have \u03bbClouds \u2248 -12.7 W\/m2 K, which is 3.8 times larger than (the misnamed) \u03bbPlanck.<br>4. These values are plotted as an extension of the AR6 Figure 7.1, which shows the feedback strength for various mechanisms. The total system strength is shown in the left-hand column.<br>5. Viewed as a temperature-control feedback mechanism, in either scenario, the cloud thermostat has the strongest negative (stabilizing) feedback of any mechanism heretofore considered.<br>6. It very powerfully controls and stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and temperature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Part II \u2013 Conclusions<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. I have introduced here the cloud-thermostat mechanism. It is clearly the overwhelmingly dominant climate controlling feedback mechanism that controls stabilizes the Earth\u2019s climate and temperature. It thereby prevents global warming and climate change.<br>2. The IPCC\u2019s 2021 AR6 report (p.978) claims that climate stabilizing natural feedback mechanisms have a net (total) stabilizing strength of -1.16 \u00b1 0.6 W\/m2\/K. My cloud feedback mechanism has a net stabilizing strength of anywhere between -5.7 to -12.7 W\/m2\/K, depending of one\u2019s assumptions regarding the albedo of clouds.<br>3. My cloud thermostat mechanism provides nature\u2019s own Solar Radiation Management System. This mechanism already exists. It is built in to nature\u2019s own cloud factory. It works very well to stabilize the Earth\u2019s temperature on a long term basis. And, it is free!<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>\u201cRecommendations for policy makers\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">1. There is no climate crisis! There is, however, a very real problem with providing a decent standard of living to the world\u2019s now enormous population. There is indeed an energy shortage crisis. The latter is being unnecessarily exacerbated by what, in my opinion, is incorrect climate science, and by<br>government\u2019s associated incorrect muddled response to it.<br>2. Government and business are currently needlessly spending trillions of dollars on efforts to limit the greenhouse gasses, CO2 and CH4, in the Earth\u2019s atmosphere.<br>3. CO2 and CH4 are not pollutants. They must be removed from every list of defined pollutants. They have a negligible effect on the climate. Trillions of dollars can be saved by this one simple measure alone! Additionally, the CO2 Coalition points out that atmospheric CO2 is actually beneficial.<br>4. I recommend that all efforts to limit environmental carbon should be terminated immediately! Trillions of dollars can be saved by eliminating carbon caps, carbon credits, carbon sequestration, carbon footprints, zero-carbon targets, carbon taxes, anti-carbon policies and fossil-fuel limits, in energy policy and elsewhere.<a href=\"https:\/\/rclutz.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/clauser-ar6-power-flow-diagrams.png\"><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> IPCC\u2019s Green House Gas Science is Flawed and Untrustworthy.<br \/>\nClouds are the Thermostat for Earth\u2019s Climate, Not GHGs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":332726,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818432,691818076,691829177,691826963],"class_list":{"0":"post-332716","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-clouds","9":"tag-co2","10":"tag-earths-oceans","11":"tag-methane-ch4","13":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0-clouds-over-the-ocean-23.jpeg?fit=1511%2C1008&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1oyo","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":368277,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=368277","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":0},"title":"Climate Crusade Is a Dead\u00a0End","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/03\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Prof. de Lange demonstrates that there is no credible climate crisis, and that there is much more to climate than CO2 alone.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"Atmospheric physics\"","block_context":{"text":"Atmospheric physics","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=atmospheric-physics"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0shutterstock1685835445-1671006275381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0shutterstock1685835445-1671006275381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0shutterstock1685835445-1671006275381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0shutterstock1685835445-1671006275381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0shutterstock1685835445-1671006275381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":332218,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=332218","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":1},"title":"The \u2018Climate Emergency\u2019 is a Myth, Says Nobel Prize Winner John Clauser. Here\u2019s Why He\u2019s Right","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/06\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In a recent lecture, Nobel Laureate physicist John Clauser exposed how the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) models and analyses, which are relied upon by politicians and activists to support claims of a \u2018climate crisis\u2019, do not meet basic standards of scientific enquiry. Clauser received his Nobel prize in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0dr.-John-Clauser.jpg?fit=1024%2C700&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0dr.-John-Clauser.jpg?fit=1024%2C700&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0dr.-John-Clauser.jpg?fit=1024%2C700&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/0dr.-John-Clauser.jpg?fit=1024%2C700&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269375,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=269375","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":2},"title":"Report: Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. John Clauser \u2014 who recently declared climate science a \u2018pseudoscience\u2019 \u2014 has his IMF talk abruptly canceled","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"25\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"2022 Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. John Clauser declares his climate dissent: \u2018There is no real climate crisis\u2019 \u2013 Warns \u2018climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience\u2019","rel":"","context":"In \"Censorship\"","block_context":{"text":"Censorship","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=censorship"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0cancelled-stamp-3.png?fit=1200%2C794&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0cancelled-stamp-3.png?fit=1200%2C794&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0cancelled-stamp-3.png?fit=1200%2C794&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0cancelled-stamp-3.png?fit=1200%2C794&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0cancelled-stamp-3.png?fit=1200%2C794&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269192,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=269192","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":3},"title":"Cancellations Start for John Clauser After Nobel Physics Laureate Speaks Out About \u201cCorruption\u201d of Climate Science","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"24\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Earlier this month, the 2022 Nobel Physics Laureate Dr. John Clauser\u00a0slammed\u00a0the \u2018climate emergency\u2019 narrative as a \u201cdangerous corruption of science that threatens the world\u2019s economy and the well-being of billions of people\u201d. Inevitably, the punishments have begun. A talk that Dr. Clauser was due to give to the International Monetary\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"cancel culture\"","block_context":{"text":"cancel culture","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=cancel-culture"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0139352-landscape-gallery.webp?fit=1080%2C720&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0139352-landscape-gallery.webp?fit=1080%2C720&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0139352-landscape-gallery.webp?fit=1080%2C720&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0139352-landscape-gallery.webp?fit=1080%2C720&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/0139352-landscape-gallery.webp?fit=1080%2C720&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317206,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=317206","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":4},"title":"New Paper Finds Effect of Human-Caused Carbon Emissions on Climate is \u201cNon-Discernible\u201d","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/04\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Every now and then, a giant of modern science should be allowed to express himself in language that we all understand. In the informative\u00a0Climate: The Movie, the 2022 Nobel physics laureate Dr. John Clauser thundered: \u201cI assert there is no connection whatsoever between climate change and CO2\u00a0\u2013 it\u2019s all a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0Screenshot-2024-04-08-at-00.35.09.jpeg?fit=1200%2C612&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0Screenshot-2024-04-08-at-00.35.09.jpeg?fit=1200%2C612&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0Screenshot-2024-04-08-at-00.35.09.jpeg?fit=1200%2C612&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0Screenshot-2024-04-08-at-00.35.09.jpeg?fit=1200%2C612&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/0Screenshot-2024-04-08-at-00.35.09.jpeg?fit=1200%2C612&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":351791,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=351791","url_meta":{"origin":332716,"position":5},"title":"German Researcher: Doubling Of Atmospheric CO2 Causes Only 0.24\u00b0C Of Warming \u2026Practically Insignificant","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"20\/11\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The CO2\u00a0scam and \u201cclimate denial\u201d German researcher concludes CO2 warming immensely exaggerated\u2026. IR radiation of clouds considerably reduces the greenhouse effect of CO2.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO2)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO2)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co2"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/0-clouds-over-the-oceam56.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/0-clouds-over-the-oceam56.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/0-clouds-over-the-oceam56.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/0-clouds-over-the-oceam56.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/0-clouds-over-the-oceam56.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332716","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=332716"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332716\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":332727,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/332716\/revisions\/332727"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/332726"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=332716"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=332716"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=332716"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}