{"id":352748,"date":"2024-11-29T14:28:22","date_gmt":"2024-11-29T13:28:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=352748"},"modified":"2024-11-29T14:28:26","modified_gmt":"2024-11-29T13:28:26","slug":"ipcc-crusade-built-on-science-mistakes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=352748","title":{"rendered":"IPCC Crusade Built on Science\u00a0Mistakes"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Science Matters<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Ron Clutz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMistake\u201d definition (American Heritage Dictionary)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Noun<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. An error or fault resulting from defective judgment, deficient knowledge, or carelessness.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. A misconception or misunderstanding.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Five Major IPCC Science Mistakes<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    \u2666  Surface stations records have warmed mostly from urban heat sources, not IR-active gases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2666  Solar climate forcing varies more than IPCC admits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2666  Experiments show more CO2 does not make air warmer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2666  On all time scales temperature changes lead and CO2 changes follow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u2666  IPCC climate models exclude natural climate factors to blame all warming on GHGs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mistakes on Temperature Records and Solar Forcing<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    The first two misconceptions are described in a recent paper by CERES (Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences).  My post below provides the details.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Overview of CERES Study<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    Our review suggests that the IPCC reports have inadequately accounted for two major scientific concerns when they were evaluating the causes of global warming since the 1850s:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. The global temperature estimates used in the IPCC reports are contaminated by urban warming biases.
    2.  The estimates of solar activity changes since the 1850s considered by the IPCC substantially downplayed a possible large role for the Sun.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    We conclude that it is not scientifically valid for the IPCC to rule out the possibility that global warming might be mostly natural.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
    Fatal Flaw Discredits IPCC Science<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    By way of John Ray comes this Spectator Australia article A basic flaw in IPCC science<\/strong><\/a>.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Detailed research<\/strong> is underway that threatens to undermine the foundations of the climate science promoted by the IPCC<\/strong> since its First Assessment Report in 1992. The research is re-examining the rural and urban temperature records in the Northern Hemisphere<\/strong> that are the foundation for the IPCC\u2019s estimates of global warming since 1850. The research team has been led by Dr Willie Soon (a Malaysian solar astrophysicist associated with the Smithsonian Institute for many years) and two highly qualified Irish academics \u2013 Dr Michael Connolly and his son Dr Ronan Connolly. They have formed a climate research group CERES-SCIENCE<\/strong>. Their detailed research will be a challenge for the IPCC 7th Assessment Report due to be released in 2029 as their research results challenge the very foundations of IPCC science.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The climate warming trend published by<\/strong> the IPCC is a continually updated graph based on the temperature records of Northern Hemisphere land surface temperature stations dating from the mid 19th Century. The latest IPCC 2021 report uses data for the period 1850-2018.<\/strong> The IPCC\u2019s selection of Northern Hemisphere land surface temperature records is not in question and is justifiable. The Northern Hemisphere records provide the best database<\/strong> for this period. The Southern Hemisphere land<\/strong> temperature records are not that extensive and are sparse<\/strong> for the 19th and early 20th Century. It is generally agreed<\/strong> that the urban temperature data is significantly warmer than the rural data in the same region because of an urban warming bias<\/strong>. This bias is due to night-time surface radiation of the daytime solar radiation absorbed by concrete and bitumen<\/strong>. Such radiation leads to higher urban night-time temperatures than say in the nearby countryside. The IPCC<\/strong> acknowledges such a warming bias but alleges<\/strong> the increased effect is only 10 per cent<\/strong> and therefore does not significantly distort its published global warming trend lines.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    Since 2018, Dr Soon and his partners have analysed the\u00a0data from rural and urban temperature recording stations in China, the USA, the Arctic, and Ireland.<\/strong>\u00a0The number of\u00a0stations with reliable temperature records<\/strong>\u00a0in these areas increased from\u00a0very few in the mid-19th Century to around 4,000 in the 1970s before decreasing to around 2,000 by the 1990s.<\/strong>\u00a0The\u00a0rural<\/strong>\u00a0temperature recording\u00a0stations<\/strong>\u00a0with good records\u00a0peaked at 400 and are presently around 200.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Their analysis of individual stations needs to account for any variation in their exposure to the Sun due to changes in their location, OR shadowing due to the construction of nearby buildings, OR nearby vegetation growth. The analysis of rural temperature stations is further complicated as over time\u00a0many are encroached by nearby cities.<\/strong>\u00a0Consequently, the data from such stations needs to be shifted at certain dates from the rural temperature database to either an intermediate database or to a full urban database. Consequently, an accurate analysis of the temperature records of each recording station is a time-consuming task.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    This\u00a0new analysis of 4,000 temperature recording stations<\/strong>\u00a0in China, the USA, the Arctic, and Ireland shows a warming trend of\u00a00.89\u00baC per century in the urban stations<\/strong>\u00a0that is 1.61 times higher that a warming trend of\u00a00.55\u00baC per century in the rural stations<\/strong>. This difference is\u00a0far more significant<\/strong>\u00a0than the 10 per cent divergence between urban and rural stations alleged in the IPCC reports; a divergence explained by a potential\u00a0flaw in the IPCC\u2019s methodology.<\/strong>\u00a0The IPCC uses a technique called\u00a0homogenisation that averages the rural and urban temperatures in a particular region<\/strong>. This method distorts the rural temperature records as over\u00a075 per cent of the temperature records<\/strong>\u00a0used in this homogenisation methodology\u00a0are urban<\/strong>\u00a0stations. So, a methodology that attempts to statistically identify and correct some biases that may be in the raw data, in effect, leads to an urban blending of the rural dataset. This result is biased as it\u00a0downgrades the actual values of each rural temperature station<\/strong>. In contrast,\u00a0Dr Soon and his coworkers<\/strong>\u00a0avoided homogenisation so the\u00a0temperature trends they identify for each rural region are accurate<\/strong>\u00a0as the rural data are not distorted by the readings from nearby urban stations.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    The rural temperature trend measured by this new research is 0.55\u00baC per century and it\u00a0indicates the Earth has warmed 0.9\u00baC since 1850<\/strong>. In contrast, the urban temperature trend measured by this new research is 0.89\u00baC per century and indicates a much higher warming of 1.5\u00baC since 1850. Consequently, a\u00a0distorted urban warming trend has been used by the IPCC<\/strong>\u00a0to quantify the warming of the whole of the Earth since 1850. The\u00a0exaggeration is significant<\/strong>\u00a0as the urban temperature record database used by the IPCC only represents the temperatures on 3-4 per cent of the Earth\u2019s land surface area; an area less than 2 per cent of the Earth\u2019s total surface area. During the next few years, Dr Willie Soon and his research team are\u00a0currently analysing the meta-history of 800 European temperature recording stations<\/strong>. When this is done their research will be based on very significant database of Northern Hemisphere rural and urban temperature records from China, the USA, the Arctic, Ireland, and Europe.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    This new research has unveiled another flaw in the IPCC\u2018s temperature narrative<\/strong> as trend lines<\/strong> in its revised temperature datasets are different from those published by the IPCC. For example, the rural records<\/strong> now show a marked warming trend in the 1930s and 1940s<\/strong> while there is only a slight warming trend in the IPCC dataset. The most significant difference is the existence of a marked cooling period in the rural dataset for the 1960s and 1970s that is almost absent in the IPCC\u2019s urban dataset.<\/strong> This later divergence upsets the common narrative that rising carbon dioxide levels control modern warming trends. For, if carbon dioxide levels are the driver of modern warming, how can a higher rate of increasing carbon dioxide levels exist within a cooling period in the 1960s and 1970s while a lower increasing rate of carbon dioxide levels coincides with an earlier warming interval<\/strong> in the 1930s and 1940s? Or, in other words, how can carbon dioxide levels increasing at 1.7 parts per million per decade cause a distinct warming period in the 1930s and 1940s while a larger increasing rate of 10.63 parts per million per decade is associated with a distinct cooling period in the 1960s and 1970s! Consequently, the research of Willie Soon and his coworkers is discrediting<\/strong>, not only the higher rate of global warming trends<\/strong> specified in IPCC Reports, but also the theory that rising carbon dioxide levels explain modern warming<\/strong> trends; a lynchpin of IPCC science for the last 25 years.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Willie Soon and his coworkers maintain that climate scientists need to consider other possible explanations for recent global warming.<\/strong> Willie Soon and his coworkers point to the Sun, but the IPCC maintains that variations in Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) are over eons and not over shorter periods such as the last few centuries. For that reason, the IPCC point to changes in greenhouse gases as the most obvious explanation for global warming since 1850. In contrast, Willie Soon and his coworkers maintain there can be short-term changes in solar activity and, for example<\/strong>, refer to a period of no sunspot activity that coincided with the Little Ice Age in the 17th Century.<\/strong> They also point out there is still no agreed average figure for Total Solar Irradiance (TSI)<\/strong> despite 30 years of measurements taken by various satellites. Consequently, they contend research in this area is not settled.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The CERES-SCIENCE research project<\/strong> pioneered by Dr Willie Soon and the father-son Connolly team has questioned the validity of the high global warming trends<\/strong> for the 1850-present period that have been published by the IPCC since its first report in 1992. The research also queries the IPCC narrative that rising greenhouse gas concentrations<\/strong>, particularly carbon dioxide, are the primary driver of global warming since 1850.<\/strong> That narrative has been the foundation of IPCC climate science for the last 40 years. It will be interesting to see how the IPCC\u2019s 7th Assessment Report in 2029 treats this new research that questions the very basis of IPCC\u2019s climate science.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The paper is The Detection and Attribution of Northern Hemisphere Land Surface Warming (1850\u20132018) in Terms of Human and Natural Factors: Challenges of Inadequate Data.<\/strong> <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A statistical analysis was applied to Northern Hemisphere land surface temperatures (1850\u20132018) to try to identify the main drivers of the observed warming since the mid-19th century. Two different temperature estimates were considered\u2014a rural and urban blend (that matches almost exactly with most current estimates) and a rural-only estimate. The rural and urban blend indicates a long-term warming of 0.89 \u00b0C\/century since 1850, while the rural-only indicates 0.55 \u00b0C\/century. This contradicts a common assumption that current thermometer-based global temperature indices are relatively unaffected by urban warming biases.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Three main climatic drivers were considered, following the approaches adopted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)\u2019s recent 6th Assessment Report (AR6): two natural forcings (solar and volcanic) and the composite \u201call anthropogenic forcings combined\u201d time series recommended by IPCC AR6. The volcanic time series was that recommended by IPCC AR6. Two alternative solar forcing datasets were contrasted. One was the Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) time series that was recommended by IPCC AR6. The other TSI time series was apparently overlooked by IPCC AR6. It was found that altering the temperature estimate and\/or the choice of solar forcing dataset resulted in very different conclusions as to the primary drivers of the observed warming.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Our analysis focused on the Northern Hemispheric land component of global surface temperatures since this is the most data-rich component. It reveals that important challenges remain for the broader detection and attribution problem of global warming: (1) urbanization bias remains a substantial problem for the global land temperature data; (2) it is still unclear which (if any) of the many TSI time series in the literature are accurate estimates of past TSI; (3) the scientific community is not yet in a position to confidently establish whether the warming since 1850 is mostly human-caused, mostly natural, or some combination. Suggestions for how these scientific challenges might be resolved are offered.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Mistake on CO2 Warming Effect<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    Thomas Allmendinger is a Swiss physicist educated at Zurich ETH whose practical experience is in the fields of radiology and elemental particles physics.  His complete biography is here<\/strong><\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    His independent research and experimental analyses of greenhouse gas (GHG) theory over the last decade led to several published studies, including the latest summation The Real Origin of Climate Change and the Feasibilities of Its Mitigation<\/strong><\/a>, 2023, at Atmospheric and Climate Sciences journal. The paper is a thorough and detailed discussion of which I provide here the abstract and the excerpt describing the experiment.  Excerpts are in italics with my bolds and added images. Full post is Experimental Proof Nil Warming from GHGs.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Abstract<\/strong><\/em><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    The actual treatise represents a synopsis of six important previous contributions of the author, concerning atmospheric physics and climate change. Since this issue is influenced by politics like no other, and since the greenhouse-doctrine with CO2 as the culprit<\/strong> in climate change is predominant, the respective theory has to be outlined, revealing its flaws and inconsistencies.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    But beyond that, the author\u2019s own contributions<\/strong> are focused and deeply discussed. The most eminent one concerns the discovery of the absorption of thermal radiation by gases,<\/strong> leading to warming-up, and implying a thermal radiation of gases which depends on their pressure.<\/strong> This delivers the final evidence that trace gases such as CO2 don\u2019t have any influence<\/strong> on the behaviour of the atmosphere, and thus on climate.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    But the most useful contribution<\/strong> concerns the method which enables to determine the solar absorption coefficient \u03b2s of coloured opaque plates<\/strong>. It delivers the foundations for modifying materials<\/strong> with respect to their capability of climate mitigation. Thereby, the main influence is due to the colouring, in particular of roofs which should be painted, preferably light-brown (not white, from aesthetic reasons).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    It must be clear that such a drive for brightening-up the World would be the only chance of mitigating the climate, whereas the greenhouse doctrine, related to CO2, has to be abandoned.<\/strong> However, a global climate model with forecasts cannot be aspired to<\/strong> since this problem is too complex, and since several climate zones exist.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    4. Thermal Gas Absorption Measurements<\/strong><\/em><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    If the warming-up behaviour of gases has to be determined by temperature measurements,<\/strong> interference by the walls of the gas vessel should be regarded since they exhibit a significantly higher heat capacity than the gas does, which implicates a slower warming-up rate. Since solid materials absorb thermal radiation stronger than gases do<\/strong>, the risk exists that the walls of the vessel are directly warmed up by the radiation, and that they subsequently transfer the heat to the gas. And finally, even the thin glass-walls of the thermometers may disturb the measurements by absorbing thermal radiation.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    By these reasons, quadratic tubes with a relatively large profile (20 cm) were used<\/strong> which consisted of 3 cm thick plates from Styrofoam, and which were covered at the ends by thin plastic foils. In order to measure the temperature course along the tube, mercury-thermometers were mounted at three positions (beneath, in the middle, and atop) whose tips were covered with aluminum foils. The test gases were supplied from steel cylinders being equipped with reducing valves. They were introduced by a connecter during approx. one hour, because the tube was not gastight and not enough consistent for an evacuation. The filling process was monitored by means of a hygrometer since the air, which had to be replaced, was slightly humid. Afterwards, the tube was optimized by attaching adhesive foils and thin aluminum foils (see Figure 13). The equipment and the results are reported in [21].<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"
    Figure 13. Solar-tube, adjustable to the sun [21].<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    The\u00a0initial measurements were made outdoor with twin-tubes in the presence of solar light.<\/strong>\u00a0One<\/strong>\u00a0tube was\u00a0filled with air,<\/strong>\u00a0and the\u00a0other one with carbon-dioxide.<\/strong>\u00a0Thereby, the\u00a0temperature increased<\/strong>\u00a0within a few minutes by approx. ten degrees\u00a0till constant limiting temperatures were attained,<\/strong>\u00a0namely\u00a0simultaneously<\/strong>\u00a0at all positions. Surprisingly, this was the case in both tubes, thus also in the tube which was filled with ambient air. Already this result delivered the proof that\u00a0the greenhouse theory cannot be true.<\/strong>\u00a0Moreover, it gave rise to\u00a0investigate<\/strong>\u00a0the phenomenon\u00a0more thoroughly<\/strong>\u00a0by means of artificial, better defined light.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"
    Figure 14. Heat-radiation tube with IR-spot [21].<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    Accordingly, the subsequent experiments were made using IR-spots<\/strong> with wattages of 50 W, 100 W and 150W which are normally employed for terraria (Figure 14). Particularly the IR-spot with 150 W lead to a considerably higher temperature increase of the included gas than it was the case when sunlight was applied, since its ratio of thermal radiation was higher. Thereby, variable impacts such as the nature of the gas could be evaluated.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Due to the results with\u00a0IR-spots at different gases<\/strong>\u00a0(air, carbon-dioxide, the noble gases argon, neon and helium), essential knowledge could be gained. In each case, the irradiated gas\u00a0warmed up until a stable limiting temperature was attained.<\/strong>\u00a0Analogously to the case of irradiated coloured solid plates, the temperature increased until the equilibrium state was attained where the heat absorption rate was identically equal with the heat emission rate.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"
    Figure 15. Time\/temperature-curves for different gases [21] (150 W-spot, medium thermometer-position).<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    As evident from the diagram in Figure 15, the initial observation made with sunlight was approved that pure carbon-dioxide was warmed up almost to the same degree as air does<\/strong> (whereby ambient air only scarcely differed from a 4:1 mixture between nitrogen and oxygen). Moreover, noble gases absorb thermal radiation, too<\/strong>. As subsequently outlined, a theoretical explanation could be found thereto.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Finally<\/strong>, the theoretically suggested dependency of the atmospheric thermal radiation intensity on the atmospheric pressure<\/strong> could be empirically verified by measurements at different altitudes, namely in Glattbrugg (430 m above sea level and on the top of the Furka-pass (2430 m above sea level), both in Switzerland, delivering a so-called atmospheric emission constant<\/strong> A \u2248 22 W\u00b7m\u22122\u2022bar\u22121\u2022K\u22120.5. It explained the altitude-paradox of the atmospheric temperature and delivered the definitive evidence that the atmospheric behavior, and thus the climate, does not depend on trace gases such as CO2<\/strong>. However, the atmosphere thermally reradiates indeed, leading to something similar to a Greenhouse effect. But this effect is solely due to the atmospheric pressure.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mistake on Warming Prior to CO2 Rising<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

    Changes in CO2 follow changes in global temperatures on all time scales, from last month\u2019s observations to ice core datasets spanning millennia. Since CO2 is the lagging variable, it cannot logically be the cause of temperature, the leading variable. It is folly to imagine that by reducing human emissions of CO2, we can change global temperatures, which are obviously driven by other factors.  Most recent post on this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
    10\/2024 Update Recent Warming Spike Drives Rise in CO2<\/a><\/blockquote>