[added comments] While carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse” gas and it does absorb energy in some infrared wavelength bands, many scientists will argue that its affect on average global temperatures have been considerably exaggerated by the proponents of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. In order to derive effects extreme enough to be considered catastrophic, they have had to rely on strong positive feedback resulting in much larger effects than CO2 could produce without any feedbacks. Many prestigious scientists disagree with that and some even suspect the feedback is not only much less than estimated, but may even be negative.
One must always consider that contrary to that which is frequently stated by climate activists/alarmists, the debate is never over in science.
‘More evidence that Hurricane Michael was definitely NOT a Category FIVE storm at landfall.’
Robert W. Endlich
In late September 2022 Category Four Hurricane Ian struck southwest Florida bringing death and destruction to southwest Florida. Ian’s arrival and wind damage spurred me to take another look at when 2018’s Hurricane Michael struck the Panhandle of Florida, and NOAA’s 2019 declaration that Michael was a Category Five storm at landfall.
Richard S. Lindzen
Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences, MIT
[This essay is a slightly extended version of a lecture delivered to a joint zoom meeting of the Irish Climate Science Forum and CLINTEL on March 31, 2021.]
For about 33 years, many of us have been battling against climate hysteria. We have correctly noted
The exaggerated sensitivity,
The role of other processes and natural internal variability,
The inconsistency with the paleoclimate record,
The absence of evidence for increased extremes, droughts, floods, wild-fires, and so on.
We have also pointed out the very real benefits of CO2 and even of modest warming. And, as concerns government policies, we have been pretty ineffective. Indeed our efforts have done little other than to show (incorrectly) that we take the threat scenario seriously. In this talk, I want to make a tentative analysis of our failure.
Over the past several years I’ve been asked to comment on the notion that there is on-going an active, presumably by the US Government, classified program to use emissions from airborne aircraft to cut down on sunlight arriving at the Earth’s surface for nefarious purposes. The group promulgating this topic is GeoEngineering Watch. They call the supposedly nefarious emissions “Chemtrails.”
[This post first appeared on Dr. Spencer’s web site (here) on 9 April 2022. We have reproduced it on our web site for the purpose of education and discussion under the fair use doctrine. Ed.]
The proper way of looking for causal relationships between time series data (e.g. between atmospheric CO2 and temperature) is discussed. While statistical analysis alone is unlikely to provide “proof” of causation, use of the ‘master equation’ is shown to avoid common pitfalls. Correlation analysis of natural and anthropogenic forcings with year-on-year changes in Mauna Loa CO2 suggest a role for increasing global temperature at least partially explaining observed changes in CO2, but purely statistical analysis cannot tie down the magnitude. One statistically-based model using anthropogenic and natural forcings suggests ~15% of the rise in CO2 being due to natural factors with an excellent match between model and observations for COVID-19 related downturn in global economic activity in 2020.