Two University of Turklu (Finland) physicists have determined a) the climate’s sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 is 0.24°C, b) the human contribution to the warming of the past century is only about 0.01°C, c) the IPCC and climate modeling dramatically overestimate CO2’s climate impact, and d) variations in low cloud cover control the climate.
Cloud cover changes “explain the linear trend of global temperature” since the 1980s
In a new paper, O.M. Povrovsky of the Russian State Hydrometeorological University analyzes satellite-observed cloud cover changes during 1983-2009 and their relation to global temperature change.
He found global and regional cloudiness decreased between 2-6% during these decades, and “the correlation coefficient between the global cloud series on the one hand and the global air and ocean surface temperature series on the other hand reaches values (–0.84) — (–0.86).”
Consequently, Povrovsky (2019) concluded changes in cloud cover explain both the increasing global temperature during 1984-2009, but even the interannual variability.
“Since the tropics are dominated by water areas, this fact suggests that the increasing influx of solar radiation primarily entails an increase in the temperature of the ocean surface (TPO). Not surprisingly, the cloud cover values themselves and their temporal trends are close to global characteristics. Thus, changes in cloud cover over three decades during global warming can explain not only the linear trend of global temperature, but also some interannual variability.”
Anthropogenic climate change isn’t supported by experimental evidence
Dr. Jyrki Kauppinen was an expert reviewer for the IPPC’s last climate report (AR5, 2013).
In a comment to the IPCC overseers, Kauppinen strongly suggested the “experimental evidence for the very large sensitivity [to anthropogenic CO2 forcing] presented in the report” is missing (Kauppinen and Malmi, 2019).
In response, the IPCC overseers claimed experimental evidence could be found in the report’s Technical Summary.
But the Technical Summary merely contained references to computer models and non-validated assumptions. Kauppinen writes:
“We do not consider computational results as experimental evidence. Especially the results obtained by climate models are questionable because the results are conflicting with each other.”
Upon examination of satellite data and cloud cover changes, Dr. Kauppinen concluded the IPCC’s claims of high climate sensitivity to CO2 forcing (2 to 5°C) are about ten times too high, and “the models fail to derive the influences of low cloud cover fraction on the global temperature.”
Evidence for natural climate change supported by satellite observations
When low cloud cover data from satellite observations are considered, a very clear correlation emerges.
As low cloud cover decreases, more solar radiation can be absorbed by the oceans rather than reflected back to space. Thus, decadal-scale decreases in low cloud cover elicit warming.
When cloud cover increases, cooling ensues.
In this manner, Kauppien and Malmi (2019) find “low clouds practically control the global temperature,” which leaves “no room for the contribution of greenhouse gases i.e. anthropogenic forcing.”
In fact, Kauppinen and Malmi boldly conclude that the total warming contribution from anthropogenic CO2 emissions reached only 0.o1°C during the last 100 years, which means “anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice.”
No experimental evidence for the
significant anthropogenic climate change
“The IPCC climate sensitivity is about one order of magnitude too high, because a strong negative feedback of the clouds is missing in climate models. If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognize that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice. The major part of the extra CO2 is emitted from oceans , according to Henry‘s law. The low clouds practically control the global average temperature. During the last hundred years the temperature is increased about 0.1°C because of CO2. The human contribution was about 0.01°C.”
“We have proven that the GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 cannot compute correctly the natural component included in the observed global temperature. The reason is that the models fail to derive the influences of low cloud cover fraction on the global temperature. A too small natural component results in a too large portion for the contribution of the greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. That is why IPCC represents the climate sensitivity more than one order of magnitude larger than our sensitivity 0.24°C. Because the anthropogenic portion in the increased CO2 is less than 10 %, we have practically no anthropogenic climate change. The low clouds control mainly the global temperature.”
Image Source: Kauppinen and Malmi, 2019
July 11, 2019 at 09:29AM