Global warming - the world’s biggest, most expensive hoax. We’ll have global cooling for the next 20 years!
As Governments squander billions on idiotic energy non-solutions like windmills, real scientists
are stepping up to challenge the hyped up green lies propounded by windbags like Al Gore- the
only man on earth who could power-up a windmill single-handed. There follows a demolition of
The Big Green Lie Machine by Dr. David Evans, who says he was “once on the carbon gravy train.”
The evidence turned him from “warmist to sceptic.” He says in the next 20 years we can expect
mild global cooling! Here's Dr. Evans' address:
The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions
and is full of micro thin half-truths and misunderstandings.
I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, I understand the
evidence, I was once an alarmist, but I am now a sceptic.Watching this issue
unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying.This issue is tearing society apart,
making fools and liars out of our politicians.Let's set a few things straight.
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent
global warming is based on a guess which was proved false by empirical
evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too
many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the
possibility of world government and total control riding on the
outcome.
So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and
their tame climate scientists, now cheat and lie outrageously to
maintain the fiction about carbon dioxide being a dangerous pollutant.
Let's be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and
other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the
warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the
planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet,
but how much.
Most scientists, on both sides, also agree on how much a given
increase in the level of carbon dioxide raises the planet's
temperature, if just the extra carbon dioxide is considered. These
calculations come from laboratory experiments; the basic physics have
been well known for a century.
The disagreement comes about what happens next. The planet reacts to the
extra carbon dioxide, which changes everything. Most critically, the extra warmth
causes more water to evaporate from the oceans. But does the water hang around
and increase the height of moist air in the atmosphere, or does it simply create
more clouds and rain? Back in 1980, when the carbon dioxide theory
started, no one knew. The alarmists guessed that it would increase the
height of moist air around the planet, which would warm the planet
even further, because the moist air is also a greenhouse gas.
This is the core idea of every official climate model: for each bit
of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three
bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify
the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three so two thirds of their
projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors), only
one third is due to extra carbon dioxide.
I'll bet you didn't know that. Hardly anyone in the public does, but
it's the core of the issue. All the disagreements, lies, and
misunderstanding spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this
guess about moisture in the atmosphere, and there is simply no
evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism.
Which is why the alarmists keep so quiet about it and you've never
heard of it before. And it tells you what a poor job the media have
done in covering this issue.
Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s,
many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that
as the planet warms, a hot-spot of moist air will develop over the
tropics about 10km up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into
the cool dry air above.
During the warming of the late 1970s, 80s, and 90s, the weather
balloons found no hot-spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This
evidence proves the climate models are fundamentally flawed and they
greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.
This evidence first became clear around the mid-1990s.At this point
official 'climate science' stopped being a science. You see, in science
empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are
in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists
scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather
balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead
clung to their carbon dioxide theory - this just happens to keep them in high-paying
jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to
their government masters.
There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that
the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by
dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this
way, counteracting any disturbances, otherwise the system would be
unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it.
But the alarmists say the exact opposite, that the climate system
amplifies any warming due to extra carbon dioxide, and is potentially
unstable. Surprise, surprise, their predictions of planetary
temperature made in 1988 to the US Congress, and again in 1990, 1995,
and 2001, have all proved much higher than reality.
They keep lowering the temperature increases they expect, from 0.30C
per decade in 1990, to 0.20C per decade in 2001, and now 0.15C per
decade - yet they have the gall to tell us 'it's worse than expected'.
These people are not scientists. They over-estimate the temperature
increases due to carbon dioxide, selectively deny evidence, and now
they cheat and lie to conceal the truth.
One way they cheat is in the way they measure temperature.
The official thermometers are often located in the warm exhaust of
air conditioning outlets, over hot tarmac at airports where they get
blasts of hot air from jet engines, at wastewater plants where they
get warmth from decomposing sewerage, or in hot cities choked with
cars and buildings.
Global warming is measured in tenths of a degree, so any extra heating nudge is important.
In the US, nearly 90% of official thermometers surveyed by volunteers violate official siting
requirements that they not be too close to an artificial heating
source. Nearly 90%! The photos of these thermometers are on the
Internet; you can get to them via the corruption paper at my site,
sciencespeak.com. Look at the photos, and you'll never trust a
government climate scientist again.
They place their thermometers in warm localities, and call the
results 'global' warming. Anyone can understand that this is cheating.
They say that 2010 is the warmest recent year, but it was only the
warmest at various airports, selected air conditioners, and certain
car parks.
Global temperature is also measured by satellites, which measure
nearly the whole planet 24/7 without bias. The satellites say the
hottest recent year was 1998, and that since 2001 the global
temperature has levelled off.
So it's a question of trust.
If it really is warming up as the government climate scientists say,
why do they present only the surface thermometer results and not
mention the satellite results? And why do they put their thermometers
near artificial heating sources? This is so obviously a scam now.
So what is really going on with the climate?
The earth has been in a warming trend since the depth of the Little
Ice Age around 1680. Human emissions of carbon dioxide were negligible
before 1850 and have nearly all come after WWII, so human carbon
dioxide cannot possibly have caused the trend. Within the trend, the
Pacific Decadal Oscillation causes alternating global warming and
cooling for 25 - 30 years at a go in each direction. We have just
finished a warming phase, so expect mild global cooling for the next
two decades.
We are now at an extraordinary juncture.Official climate science, which is funded and
directed entirely by government, promotes a theory which is based on a guess about moist air
and is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only
way to curb emissions is to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use.
And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government - how exciting
for the political class!
A carbon tax? Even if Australia stopped emitting all carbon dioxide tomorrow,
completely shut up shop and went back to the stone age, according to
the official government climate models it would be cooler in 2050 by
about 0.015 degrees. But their models exaggerate tenfold - in fact our
sacrifices would make the planet in 2050 a mere 0.0015 degrees cooler!
Sorry, but you've been had. Finally, to those of you who still believe the planet is
in danger from our carbon dioxide emissions: sorry, but you've been had. Yes
carbon dioxide is a cause of global warming, but it's so minor it's
not worth doing much about.
Dr David Evans' address was in Perth, Australia, on 23 March 2011.
Dr Evans consulted full-time for the Australian Greenhouse
Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and
part-time 2008 to 2010, modelling Australia’s carbon in plants,
debris, mulch, soils, forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a
PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of
human endeavour with the most experience and sophistication in dealing
with feedbacks and analysing complex systems is electrical
engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of
understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global
warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from
being a warmist to a sceptic.
--
