Null Hypothesis Beckons for Greenhouse Gas Theory
As an explanation of earth’s climate system, the greenhouse gas theory has dominated consensus science for 30 years. But yet another authoritative peer-reviewed study adds to a growing body of dissenting science. The truth may yet be that carbon dioxide is innocent. And in the man-made global warming debate, a ‘denier’ group nicknamed the ‘Slayers’ appear to have been right all along.
The latest study is authored by climate scientist Dr John Christy of the University of Alabama (Huntsville). It may be downloaded at 2017_Christy_McNider (PDF). Dr Christy is a highly-respected veteran in this field who published a similar study about ‘climate sensitivity’ to carbon dioxide (CO2) in 1994: 1994_ChristyMcNIder.
Featured on the WUWT website (November 29, 2017) Dr Christy writes:
“We indicated 23 years ago — in our 1994 Nature article — that climate models had the atmosphere’s sensitivity to CO2 much too high,” said Christy, the lead author in the study, which has been accepted for publication in the 2017 fourth quarter edition of the Asia- Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences and is available online. “This recent paper bolsters that conclusion.”
WUWT’s Anthony Watts noted:
“Other researchers have tried to calculate the climate’s sensitivity using temperature data collected at the Earth’s surface. But that data lacks complete global coverage, especially over the oceans. Changes in the character of the land surface near thermometers (such as paving and urban growth) and changes in the thermometer instruments over time also add uncertainty to the data.”
Moreover, other studies discrediting the greenhouse gas theory are increasingly featured worldwide in respected scientific journals. Some examples may be examined here, here, here, here, here, and here. More are said to be coming down the peer-review pipeline.
Certainly, the U.S. government’s SURFRAD data is itself also becoming a compelling body of data now contradicting the ‘CO2 warming’ hypothesis. It is thus within the realms of reason that with both the known levels of uncertainty in the temperature records and the admitted diminishing accountability to CO2, a diehard clique of government scientists may have to reluctantly accept there is zero provable climate impact from carbon dioxide. In other words, the null hypothesis for ‘greenhouse gas’ warming would become the new consensus view. The UN IPCC provide their own user-unfriendly explanation of the null hypothesis as “null hypothesis HD : a = 0 where 0 is a vector of zero” shown at ‘9.A.2 Methods of Inference‘ in the IPCC Report(2007), ‘Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis.’
This is all music to the ears of an innovative and expanding group of climate researchers known as the ‘Slayers’ (named after their groundbreaking 2010 book, ‘Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory’). These climate ‘deniers’ controversially claimed a famous 19th Century experiment which ‘proved’ the greenhouse gas effect (GHE) does no such thing (see: ‘Why John Tyndall’s Experiment Did Not Prove the Greenhouse Effect’). Instead the ‘Slayers’ point to what they say is a more relevant experiment performed in Monterrey, Mexico by Professor Nasif Nahle, one of their colleagues. Prof. Nahle’s real-world test unequivocally disproves the GHE.
‘Hidden Fatal Flaw’
Lead author of the ‘Slayers’ book is none other than Dr Tim Ball, Canadian climatologist famously sued for six years by Dr Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann. Mann took offense that Ball quipped Mann belonged ‘in the state pen, not Penn State’. In a follow-up book in development by Dr Ball and other researchers newly-uncovered government archives prove the computer coding used in the ‘best’ global climate models has a hidden fatal flaw. Keep in mind most science is NOT based on models, only climate science is so dependent upon models. Models are not real data. But they are ideal tools for advocates who serve in the realms of politicized post-normal science.
Dr Ball, also co-founded Principia Scientific International (PSI) as a counter organization against the rise in post-normal unverifiable ‘science.’ Ball has collaborated with fellow ‘Slayers’ to champion the traditional scientific method as set out in the eminent writings of Karl Popper. Ball and PSI want government science to return to a time when real scientists tested their hypothesis against real, verifiable objective data. They share a strong disgust for the rise of post-normalism, now prevalent in so much government scientific ‘research.’ Indeed, prominent group member, Joe Postma summarizes why bias, group think and incompetence helped sustain the discredited greenhouse gas theory for so long when proper examination shows it is literally ‘flat earth physics.’
Postma, Ball and others at PSI are adamant that the official global temperature data set is based on non-existent data. Other concerned scientists agree and prove that a global temperature probably doesn’t even exist (http://ilovemycarbondioxide.com/archives/andresen.pdf)
In 2009 the ‘Slayer’/PSI group published an astonishing book they say proved the null hypothesis about the radiative greenhouse gas effect i.e. it cannot be shown to exist as a measurable driver of global temperatures in earth’s open atmosphere. They go as far as to claim that outside of the computer modeling world of climate science, applied scientists and engineers accept that carbon dioxide is only a coolant gas – it never ‘traps heat’ or warms anything (in fact, CO2’s primary industrial application is as a refrigerant gas!). [1]
Prominent American climate scientist, Professor Richard Lindzen has said:
“We see that all the models are characterized by positive feedback factors (associated with amplifying the effect of changes in CO2), while the satellite data implies that the feedback should be negative. Similar results are being obtained by Roy Spencer.” [2]
The late Reid Bryson, PhD (Meteorology), the “father of the science of modern climatology” said: “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.”
This all begs the question: if there is very little or no measurable climate impact from CO2, then how can any scientist sensibly claim the carbon dioxide-driven greenhouse theory as the MAIN driver of earth’s climate?
[1] In 1954, Hoyt C. Hottel conducted an experiment to determine the total emissivity/absorptivity of carbon dioxide and water vapor 11. From his experiments, he found that the carbon dioxide has a total emissivity of almost zero below a temperature of 33 °C (306 K) in combination with a partial pressure of the carbon dioxide of 0.6096 atm cm. 17 year later, B. Leckner repeated Hottel’s experiment and corrected the graphs12 plotted by Hottel. However, the results of Hottel were verified and Leckner found the same extremely insignificant emissivity of the carbon dioxide below 33 °C (306 K) of temperature and 0.6096 atm cm of partial pressure. Hottel’s and Leckner’s graphs show a total emissivity of the carbon dioxide of zero under those conditions. See: http://www.biocab.org/Overlapping_Absorption_Bands.pdf
[2] Testimony: House Subcommittee on Science and Technology hearing on A Rational Discussion of Climate Change: the Science, the Evidence, the Response; November 17, 2010
John O’Sullivan is a science writer, serving UK school teacher (fully vetted & approved), co-founder of the ‘Slayers’ and PSI and CEO of Principia Scientific International CIC. PSI is registered in the UK as a ‘not for profit’ Community Interest Company. PSI always welcomes donations from the public to assist researchers in our vital public mission to defend the traditional scientific method.
Trackback from your site.