Posted on 10/07/2015 4:31:30 AM PDT by NYer
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.
A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
“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 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.
Dr Evans says his discovery “ought to change the world”.
“But the political obstacles are massive,” he said.
His discovery explains why none of the climate models used by the IPCC reflect the evidence of recorded temperatures. The models have failed to predict the pause in global warming which has been going on for 18 years and counting.
“The model architecture was wrong,” he says. “Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.”
There is another problem with the original climate model, which has been around since 1896.
While climate scientists have been predicting since the 1990s that changes in temperature would follow changes in carbon dioxide, the records over the past half million years show that not to be the case.
The new improved climate model shows CO2 is not the culprit in recent global warming.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
“it (Co2) caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.”
The last few decades have seen NO global warming, according to satellite data..
How many years ago was the sun reported as the cause of climate change here on FR? Sheesh! Someday it might stick.
Bookmark
If the global warming theory had been subject to true scientific skepticism since the beginning the model’s flaws would have been revealed and the model discarded as not fitting observed data. However CO2 driven climate change became political as the ideal vehicle for more government control so science was ignored, evidence showing the model was flawed suppressed, anyone who dared question the model being labeled a “denier” (think heretic) and government funding being poured to any researcher who supported the lie.
Of course the science has been applied incorrectly.
They do this so that they can get the result they desire.
“Someone” ones a company that sells squiggly lightbulbs and other ‘green’ marketed crap that hipsters eat up.
That “someone” gives some scientists $20m to fund research.
That “someone” needs the result of this research to be 5.
Well, 2+2=4.
How do we make 2+2=5? we can’t.
Oh yes... we make it 2+3.
There you go. The answer is 5!
I mean afterall... its $20m. If they want anymore money they damnwell better hit that 5 number somehow.
Then, when that 5 number is broadcast far a wide, stock in squiggly lightbulbs suddenly skyrockets. We all hate baby Jesus if we don’t buy a package that says ‘green’ on it.
“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 per cent of the global warming in the last few decades”.
But it’s still a pollutant. This guy’s wisdom pales to
the wisdom of John Roberts and his marry band of liberal know it
all’s on the supreme court. Besides everyone knows that
global, planetary and universal
warming is caused by man.
“The model architecture was wrong,” he says. “Carbon dioxide causes only minor warming. The climate is largely driven by factors outside our control.”
Duh. Like we needed a study to state the obvious.
Lunar eclipse provides evidence of global cooling
http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/lunar-eclipse-provides-evidence-of-global-cooling/
Scotland – Last winter’s snow still hasn’t melted
http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/scotland-last-winters-snow-still-hasnt-melted/
Kashmir – Unseasonal early snowfall worries farmers
http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/kashmir-unseasonal-early-snowfall-worries-farmers/
Massive natural global cooling process discovered
http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/massive-natural-global-cooling-process-discovered/
Top US scientist resigned after admitting that global warming was a big scam
http://iceagenow.info/2015/10/top-us-scientist-resigned-after-admitting-that-global-warming-was-a-big-scam/
ruh-roh shaggy.
Shut up you heretic. The science is settled. Algore tells us so.
Ping for article:
A former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
Oh, he’ll be labeled as a denier, and he’s not “really a scientist,” and the attacks on his character, etc., etc....
Interesting that you use the word buried. When it comes down to it they always fall back on rising oceans as the evidence of global warming. This is heralded as indisputable truth of global warming’s existence. It’s true the sea levels are rising and will continue to rise but the actual cause of it is ignored because of it’s simplicity. The ocean will rise and continue to rise due to erosion of land and it being deposited into the ocean in ways such as rivers, streams and airborne deposit’s. Just the Mississippi river alone deposit’s 146 million tons of sediment a year or 292 billion pounds a year, that displaced water has to go somewhere and it’s up and out. Throw in all the rivers and streams across the globe and that’s an un-calculable amount of sediment. When this happens on the ranch we simply dredge out the stock ponds an ocean might be a little tougher.
Shocker! Others have been telling this for years. I hope he has the proof.
That boy needs to dig a hole in bossman’s yard so that he can get his mind right.
“...but it’s about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is.”
Dear Mr. Six Degrees in Applied Mathematics,
Is it a fifth or a tenth?
(signed)
Wants to know
Facts aren’t relevant to the ‘global warming’ debate. At least that’s the position taken by the Gorites. Just adjust the data to get the results needed.
Remember, science is based on faith, not facts.
Slight verbiage tweak: it wasn’t proven science the Earth was flat and was the center of the universe, but it WAS accepted fact through consensus.
There. Fixed it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.