Archives par mot-clé : CO2 Manipulation

climate-debate

New Study Thoroughly Disassembles The CO2-Drives-Climate Assumption In One Fell Swoop

by K. Richard, Aug 15, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

Not only does CO2 have no discernible effect on climate, but any alleged anthropogenic role within the hypothetical greenhouse effect is not detectable either.

In recent decades there has been a concerted effort to assert it is “settled” science to characterize variability in the atmospheric CO2 concentration – assumed to be modulated by human activity – as the predominant factor in both climate change and the so-called greenhouse effect.

Science, however, is never truly settled.

A new Frontiers study succinctly unsettles this prevailing paradigm with surgeon-like precision. In under 20 pages the authors deliver a cogent critique of the CO2-drives-climate presumption. A few of the key points include:

• CO2 only contributes about 4-5% to the greenhouse effect, whereas water vapor and clouds contribute 95%.

• Of that 4-5% greenhouse effect contribution from CO2, just 4% of that can be attributed to human activities (i.e., fossil fuel emissions). Thus, about 96% of the 4% contribution from CO2 can be attributed to natural processes.

“WV [water vapor] and clouds (for which WV is responsible) dominate the ARE [atmospheric radiative effect], while CO2 contributes only 4-5% to it. Also, anthropogenic CO2 emissions are only 4% of the total, with the vast majority (96%) being natural. Additionally, evidence suggests that changes in temperature precede those in CO2 concentration, thus challenging the assumption that CO2 drives temperature.”

• As Fig. 10 in the study indicates, observed changes in the atmospheric CO2 concentration cannot be demonstrated to have exerted any effect in altering longwave radiation measurements, much less the surface temperature. A hypothetical doubling the CO2 concentration [NC-RAGs, or non-condensing radiatively active gases] “results in a temperature increase of zero”.

“[W]hile the role of CO2 in photosynthesis is important in biochemical terms, it becomes negligible in terms of its contribution to the surface energy balance.”

“[T]he observed increase of the atmospheric CO2 [from 300 ppm to 420 ppm] has not altered the ARE [atmospheric radiative effect or greenhouse effect] in any discernible way.”

…

 

better to know...?, climate-debate

From Record Snow To No Snow, Activist Media Use Climate Change To Stoke Fear

by J. Heller, Mar 7, 2023 in ClimateChangeDispatch

This article is in the tradition of articles that we have seen for decades saying we could look forward to snowless winters because of humans and our use of natural resources.

What is missing from every one of these articles is a direct link connecting oil consumption, CO2 content, or any other such thing with temperatures and snow. [emphasis, links added]

But the truth has never mattered to the media and other leftists when they have set out to destroy the oil industry.

They cannot explain why we had a cooling period from 1940 to 1975, where essentially the same people who are warning of an existential threat of warming were warning of an existential threat that billions would die from an existential threat of a coming ice age.

Here is a hint for sycophant journalists who just repeat what they are told.

…

climate-debate

A Story of CO2 Data Manipulation

by Tim Ball in A. Watts, May 1, 2019 in WUWT

The consistent pattern of the IPCC reveals demonization and misrepresentations of CO2. Here are some basic facts about CO2 that illustrate the discrepancy between what the IPCC claim and what science knows.

  • Natural levels of Carbon dioxide (CO2) are less than 0.04% of the total atmosphere; it is far from being the most important or even only greenhouse gas as most of the public understands.

  • Water vapour which is 95 percent of the greenhouse gases by volume is by far the most abundant and important greenhouse gas.

  • The other natural greenhouse gas of relevance is methane (CH4), but it is only 0.000175 percent of atmospheric gases and 0,036 percent of all greenhouse gases.

  • In order to amplify the importance of CO2 they created a measure called “climate sensitivity”. This determines that CO2 is more “effective” as a greenhouse gas than water vapour

  • Here is a table from Wikipedia showing estimates of the effectiveness of the various GHGs. Notice the range of estimates, which effectively makes the measures meaningless, unless you have a political agenda. Wikipedia acknowledges “It is not possible to state that a certain gas    causes an exact percentage of the greenhouse effect.”

…