Most of the CO2 is not in the atmosphere. 98% of all CO2 is in the oceans (38,000 billion tons), and plants and soils (2,000 billion tons). Only 850 billion tons of CO2 is in the atmosphere (2% of the total CO2), and of that, less than 10% is man-made!
Over 90% of the atmospheric CO2 is produced naturally from decaying vegetation, fires, volcanoes, and the oceans. Also 80% of the world’s active volcanoes are under the sea bubbling out both liquid and gaseous CO2 and methane (and the sea is still alkaline). Indeed combustion reactions (power stations, fires, cars etc) produce CO2 and water, but it is the fine pollutant particles and chemicals (like oxides of sulphur and nitrogen) resulting from incomplete combustion that are the major problems affecting local temperatures, weather, as well as human health. Ruminating animals produce more greenhouse gases that all the buses, trucks and cars in the world combined!
Water by far the major greenhouse gas, cannot be controlled or taxed, so CO2 is measurable, blamed and potentially made taxable, even though most of it naturally occurring. But by contrast, in the sea, plankton growth from extra CO2 has grown tenfold over 50 years, and this is the main supplier of the oxygen that we breathe. Higher crop yields and greater vegetation growth rates have been reported worldwide due to the increased CO2 over the last 3 or so decades.
Dr Geoff Duffy, Professor Emeritus – Chemical Engineering, University of Auckland Fellow of the Royal Society, DEng, PhD, BSc, ASTC Dip, FRSNZ, FIChemE, CEng
Every atom of carbon emitted by grazing animals was taken from the pasture that animal consumed. Which was taken from the atmosphere. Therefore all grazing animals are carbon neutral.
This leaflet by Jim Hawes explains it simply:
Climate Research needs Re-direction
Governments are running huge deficits, but still spend billions on “climate research” especially trying to model the effect of the atmosphere and its trace of carbon dioxide on surface temperature. Benefits are hard to find. It may have improved weather forecasts by a day or so, but official long-term predictions have not improved in the last fifty years. This is because carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not the main driver of weather or climate.
“What is referred to reverently as “climate research” is mainly just grubby advocacy supporting the political war on carbon. Why are we still funding scientists who believe that “the science is settled”? If they believe that they know the answers, what are they are doing with their research funds?”
Around the world there are five official weather data-bases, about 14 weather satellites (some say there are 88 of them!), 73 climate computer models, at least 30 research groups and thousands of academics receiving grants and attending never-ending climate conferences. Much of this torrent of public money is now focussed on trying to torture a climate confession out of one normally un-noticed and totally innocent trace gas in the atmosphere – carbon dioxide.
The major determinants of surface weather are latitude, earth’s rotation, the seasons, the sun with its variable radiations and orbital changes; and nearness to the oceans which maintain the water cycle, moderate temperatures and house massive volcanic chains.
Read more, as well as:
- Warmists Watch Wrong Weather Warnings
- Let’s Hear How They Will Do It
- The Overflow Column
- Obama Baloney
- US/China Climate Agreement triggers Global Cooling in US
- A Lone Australian Farmer Fights back against Kyoto Theft. He needs our help
- Another Climate Change Ransom from the IPCC
Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/science-settled.pdf [PDF, 280KB]
Keywords: Climate research, climate models, oceans, volcanoes, ice ages, biofuels, IPCC, snow storms.
On 22 September, the winter maximum ice sheet extent across the Antarctic reached its greatest area since satellite measurement of the ice extent began in 1979 .
This is consistent with satellite lower tropospheric temperature data for the South Polar region at Dr Roy Spencer’s Web site  which reveals a slight but not statistically significant rate of cooling for the region for the 36 years of satellite measurement.
Coinciding with this, measurements of the atmospheric CO2 have been collected by NOAA at the South Pole and the data is available on the World Meteorological Organisation Web site . It shows that the CO2 concentration has increased by 17.7% in the same period.
Confirmation of this disparity is available on the WMO Web site where measurements by CSIRO are provided for the CO2 concentration at the Antarctic stations of Casey  and Mawson . Comparison of the CO2 concentration with the station’s average temperature data, available at the Bureau of Meteorology Web site , showed that both stations have experienced slight, -0.78 deg C per century at Casey and -1.43 deg C per century at Mawson, but not statistically significant cooling over the terms of the measurement. However the CO2 concentration has increased at Casey by 9% in 16.5 years and at Mawson 11.4% in 23 years.
These results are clear evidence that the IPCC proposition that increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration causes warming of the Earth’s surface is invalid. As the rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 has been much the same across the whole of the globe, the above puts paid to the CO2 – global warming fraud.
 http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/?ref=ftr [Direct links: Casey; Mawson; use the “All years of data” link at the top right to download a ZIP file.]
Bevan Dockery, B.Sc.(Hons), Grad. Dip. Computing, retired geophysicist.
Fellow of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists,
Member of the Australian Society of Exploration Geophysicists,
Member of the Society of Exploration Geophysicists,
Member of the European Association of Exploration Geophysicists,
Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
By Ian McClintock.
There is an old scientific tenet that says “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”.
I commenced an independent, comprehensive investigation of CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) some 25 years ago because of the direct potential impact this would have on my farming enterprise.
Farmers work directly with nature and climate as they pursue their farming and grazing activities and if the world was going to warm, possibly catastrophically, it would at the very least mean a substantial change in my enterprise mix and management approach, and at worst, might mean I could no longer continue to farm.
I therefore had a strong vested interest in attempting to understand the science (and politics) behind the claims that were being made so that I could take appropriate action as future climatic events developed and demanded.
It goes without saying that I needed to seek out the actual truth with an open mind as it would be clearly counter- productive to delude myself with preconceived or incorrect ideas and assumptions.
It is a long story but what I found, quite early on in my investigation, is that the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), despite having spent many billions of dollars on attempting to find compelling evidence to substantiate their hypothesis, have been totally unable to do so.
At first I could not believe this, I must be wrong, so I carefully and critically re-read the IPCC Reports and much other relevant information. The result was the same, NO valid empirical evidence 1 has ever been cited. I was and am astounded.
A very careful study has shown that ‘Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming’ has proven to be no more than a politically generated fairy tale, yet the media, most Governments, many scientific organisations, Universities and others continue to ignore any and all evidence that challenges the IPCC claims and blindly accept what they say.
Read the full paper: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/enigma.pdf [PDF, 2.6MB]
BACK in the 1980s anthropogenic global warming was resurrected. Its emphasis was that man-made CO2 would dangerously heat up the world and had to be controlled.
And there was lots of money available if this could be proved. So a multi-billion dollar industry was born.
The first thing was to speed up the rate of warming. This was done by ignoring a large number of temperature measuring stations from cold areas like Siberia, places with altitude such as Bolivia and only one above the Arctic Circle. So far so good.
Two distractions were the Medieval Warm Period, and the Little Ice Age. Michael Mann removed those with his hockey stick graph. It has since been shown that feeding random numbers into his program always resulted in a hockey stick. It rapidly went from the 1995 IPCC report’s cover and Al Gore’s presentations into obscurity.
There was also a problem with the record high temperatures from the 1930s–1940s. To lower them, the major measuring agencies started to adjust the original temperatures. This can be legitimate if weather stations have been moved or their surroundings compromised. A photographic record of every station in the US shows that 80% are no longer correctly positioned mostly due to urbanisation (green fields are now asphalt parking lots). Logically the old readings should have been regarded as valid and current readings would need to be lowered. They’ve done the opposite.
They started reducing the temperatures pre-1960 (give or take) and increasing them since then. NOAA for example was adjusting temperatures this way by 0.01 Fahrenheit per month, but then went to doing it twice a month. But hey, when you’re on a good thing, do it more often! The Australian, NZ and GB BOMs, and the US’s NOAA and NASA have all been doing this. They have also stopped providing historical data to other weather forecasters.
Parts of NOAA were so concerned with their official figures they established 100 green field stations across the US. After 10 years they show a steady drop, whereas the “official” adjusted figures just keep rising. Satellite measurements, which are difficult to fudge, are also showing a stable or dropping temperature pattern.
So what does this all mean? Our temperature records have been modified to meaningless; the computer models are useless (87 of 89 major models can’t get within two standard deviations of actuals); the actuals haven’t risen for 17 years; our governments do not class CO2 as a pollutant (look it up); environmentalists should embrace the benefits of more CO2; windmills and commercial solar should be junked.
Let’s get back to using coal and gas, which are more reliable, cheaper and are less dangerous (actually beneficial) to our environment.
We have experimented with square wheels and they have been a failure; we need to get back to ones that make the world go round.
John Ibbotson, Gulmarrad NSW
First published in The Daily Examiner 5 Sep 2014
In 2007 John wrote and published one of the first Australian books sceptical of AGW: Planning Ahead For Future Generations, by Highlighting Climate Change Myths.
John is still actively involved in slaying global warming myths and fighting for a better deal for Murray Darling irrigators.
Carbon Dioxide May Calm the Climate, but it Cannot Cause Wild Weird Weather
Every day some place in the world has “wild weather”. And in recent times, human industry gets the blame. “It’s all caused by man-made global warming” (generally shortened to “global warming”, or GW by alarmists).
Floods or droughts – blame GW; bushfires or snowstorms – blame GW; frosts or heatwaves – blame GW; hail storms or dust storms – blame GW; cyclones or tornadoes – blame GW.
In fact, here is a complete list of all the things blamed on global warming:
If all of this were true, then carbon dioxide is surely the most powerful and disruptive gas on the planet. That great scientist, John Kerry, even calls it a “weapon of mass destruction”.
Thanks to cartoonist Steve Hunter who has gambled again that we may raise enough money to pay him.
But carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of the most stable, predictable, unreactive and puny of all climate
factors. And its effect diminishes for each addition of CO2 to the atmosphere. Adding more now has
almost zero effect on temperature.
More, as well as:
- Wandering Professor causes Global Cooling?
- How they cope with Global Warming in Kiwi Land
- As Climate Alarm Unravels, Things are Getting Nasty
- And Still the Money Rolls in
Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/wild-weird-weather.pdf [PDF, 155KB]
Keywords: Wild weather, carbon dioxide, weapon of mass destruction, solar cycles, temperature gradient, ice age storms, snow on rail, abuse replaces debate, climate deniers.
What determines surface temperature at any spot on earth?
Apart from a tad of geothermal heat and a wisp of heat from nuclear power generators, every bit of surface energy (including coal and biomass) comes directly or indirectly from the sun. There is no other source of surface heat – everything else just stores, releases or re-directs solar energy.
Surface heat is maximised when the sun is directly overhead, near a peak in the sunspot cycle and when Earth’s orbit comes closest to the sun (perihelion). The hottest places on earth will be found near the equator, after mid-day, in mid-summer, at perihelion and when there are no clouds in the sky to reflect solar radiation. Temperature will be maximised when there is no cooling wind and no nearby surface water or moist soils to cool things by evaporation. Since higher temperature also occurs at lower altitudes, one of the hottest places on earth is Death Valley, a desert below sea level, where the temperature can reach 56 °C on a mid-summer afternoon.
Frigid temperatures are found near the poles, where solar energy is weak. The coldest place on Earth is Vostok at high altitude in Antarctica where the air is very dry and where the temperature can go as low as minus 89 °C with a cloudless sky in the dead of winter.
Since both extremes could occur simultaneously, Earth’s maximum daily temperature range is thus up to 145 °C. But at any single place, the diurnal variation is more likely to be about 15-40 °C.
Carbon dioxide has no effect on any of the above temperature drivers – it generates no new heat, cannot affect latitude, solar orbits, sun spots, altitude, season, time of day, clouds or the proximity of water. All it can possibly do is encourage plant growth, and intercept, absorb and redirect a tiny bit radiant energy passing either way between the sun, Earth’s surface and space. But that effect is almost exhausted at current levels of carbon dioxide. Doubling the carbon dioxide content from 400 ppm to 800 ppm (which may take the next 100 years) might possibly increase surface temperatures by up to 2 °C – not even noticeable compared to the daily temperature ranges we cope with now.
Everyone can feel the powerful warmth of the rising sun, the variations between summer and winter, the moderating effect of clouds and the shock of hot and cold winds.
But even if carbon dioxide levels doubled overnight, most people on earth would not notice any difference.
More, as well as:
- Water is the Weather Wildcard
- Heatwave Hype and Wind Wisdom
- Heatwaves in Australia are Nothing New
- The Long Retreat from Copenhagen
- My How the Money Rolls in
Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/sun-water-winds-and-weather.pdf [PDF, 52KB]
Keywords: Temperature, sun, solar cycles, water, evaporation, clouds, wind, feedbacks, carbon dioxide, weather, heatwaves, data manipulation, green energy subsidies.
We hear continually that “The Science is Settled”. It is easy to find proof that the science of man-made global warming is not settled. Professor Hayden, in a short submission to the EPA demolishes the IPCC science consensus.
He also demolishes the “tipping point” scares and suggests that a warmer world may be a better world anyway.
Read Howard Hayden’s short sharp report:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/hayden-to-jackson.pdf [PDF, 129MB]
About Howard (Cork) Hayden:
He writes and publishes The Energy Advocate, a monthly newsletter (on real paper) about energy. For a sample copy contact: email@example.com
He is the author of the books:
Bass Ackwards: How Climate Alarmists Confuse Cause with Effect
A Primer on Renewable Energy
A Primer on CO2 and Climate
These and other books are available from Vales Lake Publishing, LLC: www.valeslake.com
The Energy Advocate:
PO Box 7609
Pueblo West, CO 81007
“People will do anything to save the world… except take a course in science.”
“Chromoergic psychosis: The delusion that energy has a color, usually green.”
Next Page »
Carbon Dioxide is not Pollution
The Carbon Sense Coalition has accused those waging a war on carbon dioxide of being “anti-green”.
The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, said that carbon dioxide is the gas of life, feeding every green plant, producing food for every animal and in the process releasing oxygen, another gas of life, into the atmosphere.
A recent report on measuring global vegetation growth notes that data from remote sensing devices show significant increase in annual vegetation growth during the last three decades. They also report that CO2 fertilization is more important than climate variation in determining the magnitude of the vegetation growth. “The CO2 fertilization effect of the carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere by mankind’s burning of fossil fuels, such as coal, gas and oil, is beginning to assume its vaulted position of being a tremendous boon to the biosphere…”
More, as well as:
- Correlation, Causation or a Carbon Tax Con-Job?
- Carbon Tax gets two Vetoes
- Absolute Safety is a Terrible Risk – the Costs of Environmental Scaremongering
- The Last Word: The Big Dollars are against us
Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/greening-the-globe.pdf [PDF, 50KB]
Keywords: Pollution, London, Pittsburgh, Asian smog, carbon dioxide, plant fertiliser, climate correlations and causes, carbon tax, electoral veto, Climate Council, safety and risk.