Discussion paper on CO2 & temperature data from Statistic Norway stating exactly what I’ve been saying for over 2 decades because for the last 2 decades or so this is where most of my analytic mind was spent on a near daily basis. You see, once upon a time I used to believe in all the AGW hype, that was until I started looking into it all and what you find here is a good summary of all the stuff I have learnt over the last couple of decades.
Just remember, Climate change is based on the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere that has changed over the last 200 years. Out of 1 million parts, 140 (0.014%) of these parts have changed to CO2 since 1800, a highly insignificant number to cause anywhere close to catastrophic climate change or global boiling bullshit you hear about on a daily basis.
Here you will find a good summary of the undisputed truths along with the flaws in the current state of climate science. i.e. the thing few MSM, politicians, and climate alarmist will ever tell you due to their own self-imposed ignorance which is the source of all fear mongering agenda’s and ideologies and why they are so successful.
Its why if we’re not careful, people’s ignorance will be the leading cause of death to their blissful lives. Its this ignorance that is being used to destroy and take away from people what they take for granted whilst handing over absolute control to people no one with an ounce of common sense would ever do in a million years.
Thus, the only way to combat this ignorance is to self-educate and stay informed because if you relied on others to do your thinking for you whether it be propagandists or AI, the least you will be able to think, act and behave independently and the more you will rely on the herd or group think to make all your decisions for you. As always, just listening to the same yes men only strengthens your own indoctrination, hence the importance to forever listen to both sides of the coin, something they try as hard as they can to silence, censor and ridicule which is a standing joke to those who see their attempts like water of a ducks back.
So here’s the abstract and some key points made in the discussion paper.
To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions? DISCUSSION PAPERS 1007 – Published: 25 September 2023 John K. Dagsvik and Sigmund H. Moen
Abstract
Weather and temperatures vary in ways that are difficult to explain and predict precisely. In this article we review data on temperature variations in the past as well possible reasons for these variations. Subsequently, we review key properties of global climate models and statistical analyses conducted by others on the ability of the global climate models to track historical temperatures. These tests show that standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures. Finally, we update and extend previous statistical analysis of temperature data (Dagsvik et al., 2020). Using theoretical arguments and statistical tests we find, as in Dagsvik et al. (2020), that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be strong enough to cause systematic changes in the temperature fluctuations during the last 200 years.
Quotes For The Discussion Paper
“Historically, however, there have been large climatic variations. Temperature reconstructions indicate that there is a ‘warming’ trend that seems to have been going on for as long as approximately 400 years. Prior to the last 250 years or so, such a trend could only be due to natural causes.”
“The preceding four interglacial periods are seen at about 125,000, 280,000, 325,000 and 415,000 years before now, with much longer glacial periods in between. All four previous interglacial periods are seen to be warmer than the present.”
“These data indicate that warmer temperatures were the norm in the earlier part of the past 4,000 years, including century-long intervals nearly 1°C warmer than the decade (2001-2010). Therefore, it appears that the current decadal mean temperature in Greenland has not exceeded the envelope of natural variability over the past 4,000 years.”
“These reconstructions show that during the past 10,000 years temperatures over long periods were higher than they are today. The warmest phase occurred 4,000 to 8,000 years ago and is known as the Holocene Climate Optimum or the Atlantic Period.”
“The sun is the main source of energy for the Earth.”
“It is known that the oceans have an enormous capacity to store CO2, depending on the sea temperature. When the sea temperature rises, this capacity decreases.”
“the variation of the storage capacity of the oceans, due to fluctuating temperatures, is the dominating effect”
“In addition to seasonal variations and glacial periods, observed temperatures seem to vary for reasons that are only partly understood. Some of the variations are due to solar radiation, cloud formations and greenhouse gases (water vapor, argon, CO2, aerosols,6 methane, nitrous oxide and ozone).”
“Recently, Zharkova (2020) and Zharkova et al. (2015) have studied the role of the solar background magnetic field in defining solar activity…. Their approach revealed a presence of not only 11-year solar cycles but also of grand solar cycles with duration of 350–400 years.”
“The most recent grand solar minimum occurred during the little ice age (Maunder Minimum) (1645–1710), which led to reduction of solar irradiance by 0.22 percent from the modern one and a decrease of the average terrestrial temperature by 1.0–1.5°C.”
“According to the research by these authors there will be an upcoming grand solar minimum, when solar magnetic field and its magnetic activity will be reduced by 70 per cent. During this grand minimum, one would expect a reduction of the average terrestrial temperature, ceteris paribus, by up to 1.0°C in the decade 2031–2043.”
“In other recent studies (Scafetta and Bianchini, 2022, and Yndestad, 2022) it is suggested that Earth’s global temperature variabilities have solar-lunar forced stationary temperature cycles of up to 4450 years. The primary causes of the identified multidecadal temperature variation is the stationary orbital cycles produced by the Jovian planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune) and the 18.6-year lunar nodal cycle resulting from the Earth’s axis nutation. According to this theory the sea surface temperature will have a deep minimum in 2070.”
“The clouds are known to affect global temperatures on longer timescales. Solar variations and water vapor affect the abundance of clouds in our atmosphere according to research at the National Space Institute at the Technical University of Denmark and the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Svensmark et al., 2016). Large eruptions on the surface of the Sun can temporarily shield Earth from so-called cosmic rays which appear to affect cloud formation.”
“The most important greenhouse gas is water vapor which varies greatly at any given place and time. About 66-85 per cent of the natural greenhouse effect can be traced back to water vapor and small droplets in clouds (Varenholt and Lüning, 2015, ch. 6).”
“But other variations may be the result of the climate system itself (chaotic behavior). In fact, there is no need for “external” influences to produce periodic and seemingly stochastic variations in processes governed by deterministic non-linear dynamic systems, such as Global Climate Models. See for example May (1976) who demonstrates that a simple non-linear dynamic model exhibits chaotic behavior. A phenomenon such as El Niño may be the result of the climate system itself.”
“The GCMs have various limitations. First, the effect of increasing CO2 emissions on the climate cannot be evaluated precisely on time scales that are of the order of less than or equal to 100 years. Second, there is a lack of knowledge of the uncertainty which is partly due to the choice of the subscale models and the parameterization and calibration of these, as well as insufficient data. Third, according to some evaluations, GCMs are not sufficiently reliable to distinguish between natural and man-made causes of the temperature increase in the 20th century. Fourth, GCMs are typically evaluated applying the same observations used to calibrate the model parameters. In an article in Science, Voosen (2016) writes; “Indeed, whether climate scientists like to admit it or not, nearly every model has been calibrated precisely to the 20th century climate records – otherwise it would have ended up in the trash”. Unfortunately, models that match 20th century data as a result of calibration using the same 20th century data are of dubious quality for determining the causes of the 20th century temperature variability. The problem is that some of the variables representing sources of climate variability other than greenhouse gases are not properly controlled for during the calibrations. The resulting calibration of the climate sensitivity may therefore be biased. Further critical evaluations are given by several authors, such as Essex (2022).”
“As mentioned in the previous section climate can also change owing to internal processes within the climate system even without any variations in external forcings (chaos).”
“In fact, slightly different initial conditions can yield wildly different outputs.11 In order to assess the uncertainty due to internal variability, researchers use so-called ICE (Initial Condition Ensembles) simulations. This means that outputs of GCMs are simulated starting from slightly different initial conditions. As the climate system is chaotic, slightly different initial conditions lead to different trajectories.”
“The problem with assessing the effect on the climate from man-made increase of CO2 is that all else is not necessarily equal because other factors are at work that influence climate, such as important amplifiers and feedback mechanisms which are poorly understood.”
“A key question is therefore whether the GCMs can be trusted to provide reliable predictions.”
“At the outset, it is not entirely clear what it means to track global temperatures over time since global temperatures are not observed, they are constructs. Unfortunately, there is, as mentioned above, no obvious way of how global temperatures should be constructed, as it is not clear how the temperature output from GCMs should be interpreted.”
“The ability of GCMs to track global temperature series has not, to the best of our knowledge, been subjected to rigorous empirical testing by means of advanced statistical methods such as cointegration tests.”
“McKitrick and Christy (2020) have done a somewhat similar analysis for the period 1979- 2014 and they found that the GCMs overpredict the global temperatures after 2000.”
“The finding that the GCMs are only capable of reproducing some of the temperature variations in the past casts serious doubts about their ability to produce credible climate scenarios.”
“McKitrick and Christy (2020) are startling and raise serious doubts about the quality of the GCMs, and in particular, if the CO2 sensitivity has been correctly identified.”
“There are also other examples of informal tests, including some by IPCC. In an IPCC review it was claimed that “There continues to be very high confidence that the models reproduce observed large-scale mean surface temperature patterns (pattern correlation ∼0.99)” (IPCC, 2014, p. 743)16 . But as discussed above, the mere fact that these correlations are high does not necessarily mean that the GCMs that produced them have been validated successfully. When the temperatures predictions produced by GCMs have time trends, these correlations may be spurious, i.e., the models may happen to mimic global temperatures without there being any true relationship between them. Therefore, the usual empirical estimator of the correlation coefficient may not be consistent, that is, it may not converge to the true correlation coefficient as the sample increases. The statement by IPCC cited above is therefore misleading.”
“The effect on climate and temperature from some of these sources is not well understood and therefore partly unknown. Consequently, to the observing analyst observed or reconstructed temperature series appear to fluctuate in an unsystematic (stochastic) manner with local trends that may be hard to explain.”
“the temperature process is affected by a set of variables (drivers), such as aerosols, greenhouse gases and variations in radiation from the sun, etc. Some of the drivers that affect the climate might appear to be stationary (including cyclical drivers such as sunspots and grand solar cycles) and others might appear to be non-stationary (CO2 emissions in the period after the industrial revolution). Although some of the drivers may be non-stationary, the temperature process may still be approximately stationary.”
“Thus, these studies raise serious doubts about whether the GCMs are able to distinguish natural variations in temperatures from variations caused by man-made emissions of CO2.”
“The results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2″.