Carbon dioxide and a warming climate are not problems, peer-reviewed paper says
According to a peer-reviewed paper published in the American Journal of Economics and Sociology in May 2024, “Carbon dioxide and a warming climate are not problems.”
The authors, Andy May and Marcel Crok, argue that the sceptical position on dangerous man-made climate change is supported by a comprehensive literature review.
In other words, those who are disparagingly labelled by the establishment as “climate change deniers” have credible evidence on their side.
Writing an overview of their paper, May and Crok said:
The case that human greenhouse gas emissions (mainly carbon dioxide) control the climate as claimed in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) or that the resulting climate change is dangerous, is very weak.
How do we show that assertion is weak? There are many options. The AR6 WGI [Working Group I] and WGII reports define climate change as the global warming since 1750 or 1850.
The Little Ice Age, a phrase rarely used in AR6, extends from about 1300 to 1850. It was a very cold and miserable time for humanity, with a lot of well-documented extreme weather in the historical record from all over the Northern Hemisphere. It was also a time of frequent famines and pandemics. We show that arguably today’s climate is better than then, not worse.
Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May Petrophysicist, 30 May 2024
May and Crok’s paper is behind a paywall. However, they have made the submitted version, which contains all the changes suggested by the peer-reviewers, publicly available: See HERE.
Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems
The main argument made in May and Crok’s paper is that the evidence presented by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”) to support the claim that human-caused climate change is dangerous is not convincing.
Firstly, the IPCC claims that human greenhouse gas emissions are the “main driver” of warming since 1979, but this is disputed.
Natural climate oscillations like the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (“AMO”) can explain a significant portion of the 20th century warming.
The AMO is a cyclic phenomenon of sea surface temperature (“SST”) anomalies in the North Atlantic Ocean. It has a significant impact on global weather patterns. The theoretical measure of the variability of the SST of the North Atlantic Ocean is called the AMO index.
The AMO index oscillates between positive and negative phases. During the positive phase, the North Atlantic Ocean experiences warm SSTs, while during the negative phase, SSTs are cooler. The AMO index is associated with shifts in hurricane activity, rainfall patterns and intensity, as well as changes in fish populations.
In their paper, May and Crok “detrend” the AMO index, i.e. plot the raw data rather than show the data as a trend line, and compare it to the UK Met Office’s HadCRUT4 detrended records (see below).
The paper noted:
There are several key features displayed in Figure 2. First, we observe that the secular trend in the AMO of 0.3°C is about 30% of the warming observed globally in the 20th century.
Next we observe that the warming period from 1980 to 2005 coincides with an upturn in the AMO index. The AMO index has been traced to 1567AD, thus it is a natural oscillation.
These observations cast some doubt on the AR6 claim that all 20th century warming is due to human influence and there is no net natural impact. The second feature we will point out in Figure 2 is that the full AMO climate cycle is 60-70 years, and it matches the estimated global temperature changes in the 20th century.
Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May and Marcel Crok, 29 May 2024
Secondly, the IPCC’s evidence for human influence, such as the “atmospheric fingerprint,” is disputed and the statistical methods used are questioned. Climate models also have issues, overestimating tropical tropospheric warming compared to observations.
The paper raises questions about the statistical methodology used by the IPCC to justify the “anthropogenic fingerprint” and argues that the statistical underpinnings of the anthropogenic fingerprint are seriously flawed.
The paper also discusses discrepancies between climate models and observations, particularly in the tropical troposphere. It points out that most Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (“CMIP”) and IPCC climate models overestimate warming in the tropical middle troposphere by a statistically significant amount.
May and Crok argue that there is no clear evidence of unusual or dangerous weather or climate events that can be definitively attributed to human-caused climate change.
It cites trends in extreme weather events like hurricanes and droughts, which are either flat or declining, as well as declining economic losses from weather disasters as a fraction of GDP. This lack of clear evidence challenges the IPCC’s conclusions about the direct impact of human activities on extreme weather events.
In conclusion, the authors note that climate change, whether natural or human-caused, has both benefits and costs, but the IPCC only examines the downside risks and ignores the potential benefits, such as increased plant growth from higher CO2 levels.
Clearly, there are two sides to climate change … Warmer temperatures and more CO2 will mean more food at a lower price for nearly everyone, but in some areas, drought will increase and in others additional precipitation will cause flooding.
However, with modern technology and cheap energy, we can build aqueducts to bring water to dry areas and build dikes and seawalls to protect areas prone to flooding.
Sea level rise is currently a very modest two millimetres per year, it may be accelerating at about 0.02 millimetres per year per year, but the rise in the next century will be less than a foot, about a third of the normal average ocean daily tide.
Conclusions, Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May and Marcel Crok, 29 May 2024
They also point out that “fossil fuels” are not the problem they are made out to be and reducing them to zero will devastate economies and hurt the poor the most:
Currently fossil fuels supply about 80% of our energy, reducing this to zero rapidly will devastate the world economy and cause widespread suffering, especially for the poor.
Modern global warming, since 1950, has reduced GDP by less than 0.5%, a trivial amount given that the economy has grown 800% in that time. Using IPCC scenarios, Lomborg estimates that economic growth will decline from 450% to 434% over the 21st century. Will anyone notice?
The infrastructure to replace fossil fuels does not exist and likely cannot be built in a short time. Current realistic estimates of future energy use suggest that fossil fuels will still supply half our energy in 2050 and beyond.
Yet, no credible evidence exists that this is a problem or will become a problem. Recent research into climate change has suggested that nature plays some role, and certainly greenhouse gas emissions may play some role as well.
What we do not know is how much of climate change is human-caused and how much is natural. No drastic changes to our economy are justified until we can figure this out.
Conclusions, Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May and Marcel Crok, 29 May 2024
In the abstract for the paper, the authors had already explained:
Observations show no increase in damage or any danger to humanity today due to extreme weather or global warming.
Climate change mitigation, according to AR6, means curtailing the use of fossil fuels, even though fossil fuels are still abundant and inexpensive.
Since the current climate is arguably better than the pre-industrial climate and we have observed no increase in extreme weather or climate mortality, we conclude that we can plan to adapt to any future changes. Until a danger is identified, there is no need to eliminate fossil fuel use.
Abstract, Carbon Dioxide and a Warming Climate are not problems, Andy May and Marcel Crok, 29 May 2024
There has been some criticism of May and Crok’s paper which the authors have addressed. You can read their rebuttal on May’s website HERE.
See more here News.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATI ONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Frank S.
| #
Acc. to analysis of ice core samples dating back 12,000 years, the Earth has maintained the same mean temperature, fluctuating only a few degrees up or down every 300 years.
Reply
David Hamilton Russell
| #
GHG induced AGW can be refuted in a single word: thermalization. In the lower troposophere the GHE is reduced by a factor of 200 to 1 by thermalization. This follow from 2 undisputed facts: 1) GHGs are less than 0.5% of the air; and 2) all gas molecules in the air have the same temperature for any given altitude. First conclusion: 99.5% of all the thermal energy in the air is in the non-radiating, non-GHGs. Second conclusion: GHGs can only radiate the residual 0.5% of what IR the absorb. The consensus: GHGs absorb IR, then radiate it (half back to the surface). The truth: GHGs absorb IR conduct 99.5% of away and radiate the residual, which is 200 times less than stated in the consensus.
Reply
David
| #
The variation of emissions from natural sources exceeds the total emissions from human activities by an order of magnitude. Yet we are being brainwashed by doomsayers into accepting that comparatively minuscule increases from humanity are more significant than the effect of natural emissions.
Reply
David Hamilton Russell
| #
I’ve been fighting the AGW alarmist nonsense since 2005. I’ve learned a lot. One of the things I’ve learned is you can’t fight on every front. While your point is worthy, mine makes the whole GHE phenomenon miniscule, specifically by a factor of 200 to 1. Then it really doesn’t matter where the CO2 in the air comes from.
Reply