Hearing- Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method

Dr. Judith Curry
President, Climate Forecast Applications Network; Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology
Dr. John Christy
Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center, NSSTC, University of Alabama at Huntsville; State Climatologist, Alabama
Dr. Michael Mann
Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University; Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC), Pennsylvania State University
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.Professor, Environmental Studies Department, University of Colorado

  • LouisD

    Yes CLIMATE CHANGE is real. Other than that, the CO2 Hoax is ridiculously EASY to refute with real science, mathematics and the actual PHYSICS of Atmospheric Chemistry. One of the most idiotic statements I have ever heard is by the juice toting Oragonian Bonamici. Holy crap on a cracker what an ignorant idiot. She ranks in ignorance of science with Dem (GA) Hank Johnson who believes Guam might overturn if we put more troops there. What follows as an absolute refutation of the idea that CO2 is a driver of climate change. Water is clearly the major force for GHG RF~eK forcing in A.

    1) Yes, GHG’s are the reason we live on a temporarily Temperate Earth, rather than on a perpetual snow-ball earth. Without GHG’s the earth’s mean average temperature (the means by which we measure climate) WOULD = 271.1 DEGREES KELVIN (271.1K). That is the sum of black-body radiation of 255.5K + Convective eK (wind and convective forcing of kinetic energy) of 16.6K = 271.1K.

    2) Given 1 above, CLIMATE = 288.4K right now Therefore the DELTA = 17.3K and THAT is the portion of climate attributed to GHG.s. That means of the earth’s current climate, only 6% is attributed to GHG’s which include water vapor of about 97.4% Water and 2.3% CO2 and other complex organic molecules and acids. Any argument or purported climate scientist that fails to acknowledge WATER VAPOR (H2O) as the principle GHG in climate science forecasting is committing fraud. Dr. (a term that should be loosely applied) MANN is clearly a fraud as proven by the hundred+ esteemed scientists that published a book The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science; NOOK Book; Author – Andrew Montford

    3) Since only 17.4K / 288.4K (>|0|K) is attributed to GHG’s it means just 6% of climate the question is of that value, what role does CO2 play and what role does man-contributed CO2 play in climate? That is what is so easy to discern based on IPCC studies and published data reports. Why the CO2 driver is a HOAX…

    4) Heat Forcing of added eK (RF~eK) varies for different GHG’s. Water (H2O, AtWt = 18) has an RF~eK value of 1.00 as established by physical experimentation. Non GHG’s such as the main atmospheric constituents O2 and N2 are essentially zero or close to it. Of note, these gasses do hold eK as an ambient value and when moving in convective fluids, additional eK and all of that combines to hold as stated above 271.1K of the current climate of 288.4K. Again, ONLY 6% of current climate value is attributed to GHG’s. Now CO2 is a significantly larger molecule (AtWt = 44) will store roughly 2.011 x the around of eK as one molecule of H20. Therefore two critical ratios established in Physics and used by the IPCC are as follows:

    H2O (At Wt = 18) & RF~eK>0 = 1.000
    CO2 (At Wt = 44) & RF~eK>0 = 2.011

    Thus: a CO2 Molecule hods about 2 x the eK as a water molecule.

    This is absolute established FACT. It is also the source of the claim by AGW Alarmists that CO2 is twice as dangerous a GHG as Water.

    5) Most AGW alarmists end the discussion there. That is a huge mistake. Why? Because water accounts for 97.4% of the GHG’s in the atmosphere and CO2 only accounts for about 2.3% of GHG’s. More important are the ratios of cause and effect in GHG:RF~eK.

    6) Start with the misrepresentation of facts by AGW alarmists regarding the ratio of RF~eK{H2O} to RF~eK{CO2}. On a molecular (or PPM basis) the statement that CO2 is twice as powerful as H2O at retaining RF~eK is TRUE! But, there are two critical misrepresentations here scientifically.

    a) At an At Wt of 44, CO2 is 2.444 x as dense as H2O at At Wt 18. (44/18 = 2.444)

    b) Given {a} above, an = physical weight of Water, must hold an RF~eK value of 2.444 when compared to CO2 = 2.011. Therefore when comparative weights of H2O and CO2 are compared, the total RF~eK of water actually exceeds CO2. In fact the RF~eK of an equal weight of H2O > CO2 x 121.554%.

    c) The amount of CO2 world-wide and throughout the entire Troposphere is really not 390~400 PPM. When measured over the open oceans or throughout most of the 96% non-urbanized land masses of the earth, its around 350 ppm. Yes in Cities and close to the earth (first 3-km thick) its nearing 400 PPM, but the overall average is about 350 ppm. Water Vapor in the atmosphere is much lighter and rises to significantly higher altitudes in much greater percentages. Overall, it is reasonable to estimate that H2O is on average about 35,000 ppm (roughly 100 x as significant as CO2 on a molecular count basis (ppm).

    d) Given the weight ratios a 100:1 ppm ratio translates into an actual RF~eK ratio of H2O = 49.837 to 1 over CO2. A tiny fraction (about .0051%) of other gases such as CH4 and H2SO4 account for the rest of heat forcing (RF~eK) > ambient climate. Essentially it means that of the 6% of CLIMATE attributed to GHG’s 97.423% is attributed to water, not CO2.

    e) Climate alarmists worried that these ratios might actually get out, numbers that indicate the reality of GHG’s as a force in climate, could damage their cause. But science is a discovery of fact patterns and deductions regarding the meaning of those facts, nothing more. If 97.423% of the 6% of current climate is attributed to RF~eK stored in H2O, it means that ALL CO2 only accounts for about .43% of ALL of CLIMATE can be attributed to CO2. In other words, if there were no CO2 in our atmosphere at all, the world’s climate would still be 287.968K compared to actual 288.400K.

    f) Remember that perhaps 15% of CO2 is even attributed to human activity and that may be a high exaggeration. But lets assume as much. It means of the .4323K attributed to CO2, only .06484K is human caused. We are saying here that the calculations show that HUMAN INDUCED ACTIVITY has caused global climate warming = 6.5/100 of a degree Kelvin. This is so minuscule it is hard to even quantify, but is also by calculation the most accurate measure of RF~eK in A that is attributed to human induced CO2.

    Sorry Michael Mann and all you idiots in Congress, there is NO getting around these numbers. I dare any of you to refute them. None of you can. Dr. Christy is right. Real Science deals with hard facts, not feelings or phony charts and misstatements to project an altered reality.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.