It Bears Repeating: Earth Will Start Cooling Down in 2017 !

With the signing today of the Paris Climate Agreement at the United Nations by 172 countries the hoodwinking by climate scientists of so many ignorant politicians to accept man-made global warming is now a fait accomplis.

However, ONE of the world's leading climate change experts claims to have discovered mathematical anomalies which effectively 'disprove' global warming.

Dr David Evans, a former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, says global warming predictions have been vastly exaggerated in error.

The academic, from Perth, Australia, who has passed six degrees in applied mathematics, has analysed complex mathematical assumptions widely used to predict climate change and is predicting world temperature will stagnate until 2017 before cooling, with a 'mini ice age' by 2030.

He says fundamental flaws in how future temperatures may rise have been included in the 'standard models' and this has led to inflated mathematical - and therefore temperature - predictions.

He said: "There is an intellectual stand-off in climate change. Skeptics point to empirical evidence that disagrees with the climate models.''

Yet the climate scientists insist that their calculations showing a high sensitivity to carbon dioxide are correct — because they use well-established physics, such as spectroscopy, radiation physics, and adiabatic lapse rates.

He said he "mapped out" the architecture of the climate models used and found, that while the physics was correct, it had been "applied wrongly".

He claims to have found two reasons for it being wrongly applied, the first being a vastly over estimated impact on our temperature from CO2. He said: "There is NO empirical evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide will raise the temperature of the Earth’s surface as fast as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts.''

"Yes, CO2 has an effect, but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is.
CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20% of the global warming in the last few decades”. He said the other problem was the predictions had no reflection on changes that have actually been recorded and never saw the current 18-year temperature stagnation we are now in.

“The model architecture was wrong,” he said.“Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.''

"As such, the wind farms and solar panels are not just bad at reducing carbon dioxide — even if they did succeed in reducing carbon dioxide they’d be useless at cooling the planet. It is only four billion dollars a day worldwide, wasted."

Although he is convinced he is right, he fears it will not be taken on board by world governments.
“These findings here are unlikely to be popular with the establishment. The political obstacles are massive,” he said.

Dr Evans says historic global warming has been down to solar activity - a process called  “albedo modulation” - the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun. Between 2017 and 2021 he estimates a cooling of about 0.3C before the mini ice age in the 2030s.

His theory is unlikely to convince Julia Slingo, UK Met Office chief scientist, who fervently believes increased CO2 levels is the big "smoking gun evidence" for man made climate change.

She said: "Those levels have been rising systematically ever since the Industrial Revolution, and, in fact, have risen very rapidly over the last fifty years, so that the levels we now measure in the atmosphere are at least a third higher than they’ve been for at least 800,000 years. That’s not enough to prove that it’s human activities that are leading to that rise.''
She also argues oxygen levels in our atmosphere have declined for more than 50 years, again caused by burning fossil fuels. "There’s a complete story here, for which there seems to be no other explanation, really, than it is our activities and ways of generating energy that are causing our climate to change."

However, to counter such ''fervour'' an important truth dawns on CSIRO chief Larry Marshall after staff and activists revolt against his planned switch from researching global warming to figuring out

how to cope with it:

“I guess I had the realisation that the climate lobby is perhaps more powerful than the energy lobby was back in the ‘70s - and the politics of climate I think there’s a lot of emotion in this debate.
“In fact it almost sounds more like religion than science to me.”

True. but what conclusions do we then draw about his global warming scientists? Does a religious commitment to global warming make them less likely to accept or announce findings that cast doubt on their creed?

Marshall should go further and discuss how a “religious” belief in global warming theory conflicts with a scientist’s need to be objective. I'm waiting for the next press release.
 

The Way I See It.......There is actually no empirical evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide will raise the temperature of the Earth’s surface as fast as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts. It looks like faith will have to do.