Within the last few years, over 50 papers have been added to our compilation of scientific studies that find the climate’s sensitivity to doubled CO2 (280 ppm to 560 ppm) ranges from <0 to 1°C. When no quantification is provided, words like “negligible” are used to describe CO2’s effect on the climate. The list has now reached 106 scientific papers.
Link: 100+ Scientific Papers – Low CO2 Climate Sensitivity
A few of the papers published in 2019 are provided below.
Krainov and Smirnov, 2019 (2X CO2 = 0.4°C, 2X anthroCO2 = 0.02°C)
“The greenhouse phenomenon in the atmosphere that results from emission of its molecules and particles in the infrared spectrum range is determined by atmospheric water in the form of molecules and microdrops and by carbon dioxide molecules for the Earth atmosphere and by carbon dioxide molecules and dust for the Venus atmosphere. The line-by-line method used the frequency dependent radiative temperature for atmospheric air with a large optical thickness in the infrared spectral range, allows one to separate emission of various components in atmospheric emission. This method demonstrates that the removal of carbon dioxide from the Earth’s atmosphere leads to a decrease of the average temperature of the Earth’s surface by 4 K; however, doubling of the carbon dioxide amount causes an increase of the Earth’s temperature by 0.4 K from the total 2 K at CO2 doubling in the real atmosphere, as it follows from the NASA measurements. The contribution to this temperature change due to injections of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere due to combustion of fossil fuel, and it is 0.02 K. The infrared radiative flux to the Venus surface due to CO2 is about 30% of the total flux, and the other part is determined by a dust.”
Image Source: Krainov and Smirnov, 2019
Ollila, 2019 (2XCO2= 0.6°C)
“If a climate model using the positive water feedback were applied to the GH effect magnitude of this study, it would fail worse than a model showing a TCS value of 1.2°C. If there were a positive water feedback mechanism in the atmosphere, there is no scientific grounding to assume that this mechanism would start to work only if the CO2 concentration exceeds 280 ppm, and actually, the IPCC does not claim so. The absolute humidity and temperature observations show that there is no positive water feedback mechanism in the atmosphere during the longer time periods. … The contribution of CO2 in the GH effect is 7.3% corresponding to 2.4°C in temperature. The reproduction of CO2 radiative forcing (RF) showed the climate sensitivity RF value to be 2.16 Wm-2, which is 41.6% smaller than the 3.7 Wm-2 used by the IPCC. A climate model showing a climate sensitivity (CS) of 0.6°C matches the CO2 contribution in the GH effect, but the IPCC’s climate model showing a CS of 1.8°C or 1.2°C does not.”
Varotsos and Efstathiou, 2019
“The enhancement of the atmospheric greenhouse effect due to the increase in the atmospheric greenhouse gases is often considered as responsible for global warming (known as greenhouse hypothesis of global warming). In this context, the temperature field of global troposphere and lower stratosphere over the period 12/1978–07/2018 is explored using the recent Version 6 of the UAH MSU/AMSU global satellite temperature dataset. Our analysis did not show a consistent warming with gradual increase from low to high latitudes in both hemispheres, as it should be from the global warming theory. … Based on these results and bearing in mind that the climate system is complicated and complex with the existing uncertainties in the climate predictions, it is not possible to reliably support the view of the presence of global warming in the sense of an enhanced greenhouse effect due to human activities.”
If alarmists were seriously alarmed, rather than tribesmen of an ideology, eager to reassure themselves that they are right and morally superior and those outside their tribe are wrong and evil, they would be more than eager to read papers such as these, offering them the hope to relieve themselves of their unspeakable anxiety.
It contradicts human psychology that the fearful would snarl at messages of hope.
What thus appears to be a perversion (the refusal of anxiety-stricken people to look at evidence that could relieve them of their fear), is just a tell-tale sign of partisan prejudice.
Sums it up in a nutshell, Georg.Thanks!
“It contradicts human psychology that the fearful would snarl at messages of hope.” – Georg Thomas
You say “perversion.” I say “pathology.” Let’s call the whole thing “NUTS!”
Seriously though, Georg, that’s a very astute observation, and sheds light on their real motives. Very revealing.
Brilliantly stated. I’ve had similar thoughts but never put them so succinctly. Very direct and clear.
Hi George,
I often think this as well and I believe the answer is two-fold.
To accept there is no AGW would mean to accept the right is and has been correct. Thus, leading to a further, larger implication of governmental malfeasance of epic proportions in which the left would rather die than accept. It isn’t about climate change, it’s about identity and everything they believe to be true. Both truths are not mutually exclusive and the left can’t accept one truth without accepting the other.
“…governmental malfeasance of epic proportions…”
Yet another cut to the heart of the matter comment. Yes.
[…] Fonte: No Tricks Zone […]
“If there were a positive water feedback mechanism in the atmosphere”
That’s a mighty big if. I wonder how it would work …
https://phzoe.wordpress.com/2019/12/12/what-water-vapor-feedback/
There isnt a water feedback.
[…] papers compiled by the NoTricksZone website, now numbering 106, find that CO2 has a minuscule effect on […]
If only we understood how the sun really affects this planet’s temperature and climate, after all historically, global temperature’s follow the sun’s activity as does the climate. There is more to our sun than just TSI!
See:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337915619_Cogent_and_irrefutable_reasons_why_carbon_dioxide_cannot_warm_Earth
& https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337915638_Understanding_Josef_Loschmidt's_Gravito-_Thermal_Effect_and_thus_Why_the_Radiative_Forcing_Greenhouse_Hypothesis_is_False
[…] https://notrickszone.com/2019/12/12/the-list-grows-now-100-scientific-papers-assert-co2-has-a-minusc… […]
[…] papers compiled by the NoTricksZone website, now numbering 106, find that CO2 has a minuscule effect on […]
Great to see you’ve got a couple of Robert Holmes’ papers on your list. Here’s another one: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324599511_Thermal_Enhancement_on_Planetary_Bodies_and_the_Relevance_of_the_Molar_Mass_Version_of_the_Ideal_Gas_Law_to_the_Null_Hypothesis_of_Climate_Change
PS. Robert is also on YouTube as ‘1000frolly PhD’.
It is also important to note that no one has been able to actually measure the possible effect of a doubling of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. There simply is no actual real world (this world) data which is why there is so much uncertainty in this regard.
“There simply is no actual real world (this world) data” – JohnWho
If there were, warmists would rightly be constantly linking to it.
[…] papers compiled by the NoTricksZone website, now numbering 106, find that CO2 has a minuscule effect on […]
[…] papers compiled by the NoTricksZone website, now numbering 106, find that CO2 has a minuscule effect on […]
[…] Read more at No Tricks Zone […]
“The protection from solar radiation afforded by the magnetic field before the poles have shifted has been poor; consequently, global warming would, as now, have been apparent.*
___
* This, of course, is not related to the warming created by the increased presence of greenhouse gases such as water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane and others, largely released by man. After all, man’s annual output into the atmosphere of carbon dioxide is only 6,000 million tons, which is little more than that released by one large volcanic explosion.”
— Sir Ian Rankin, Doomsday Just Ahead, 2004.
[…] ever-increasing number of climate skeptics continue to debunk the alarmists’ theories, as noted here. Oh, by the way, the purpose of that Time article extract above was name Thunberg as Time’s […]
[…] number of climate skeptics continue to debunk the alarmists’ theories, as noted here. Oh, by the way, the purpose of that Time article extract above was name Thunberg as Time’s […]
I feel a bit sorry for that young Thunberg. She thinks we are all going to fry unless somebody, anybody (read governments)would just do something, anything to turn down the heat. It won’t be long before the eating of meat will be banned by the AGW crowd.
The little psychopath wants to put those who don’t agree with her in front of a firing squad.
https://www.weaselzippers.us/439616-greta-thunberg-tells-cheering-crowd-we-will-make-sure-we-put-world-leaders-against-the-wall-if-they-do-not-tackle-global-warming/
Typical Socialist punk.
[…] ever-increasing number of climate skeptics continue to debunk the alarmists’ theories, as noted here. Oh, by the way, the purpose of that Time article extract above was to name Thunberg as Time’s […]
Greta Thunberg is a decoy. “Her” Fossil Free campaign to end investments in oil and gas world-wide has far wealthier sponsors than local Swedish businessmen such as Ingmar Renzhog and Bo Thorén. The billion dollar climate-change industry is hyped up for a reason.
George Soros investments in oil and gas far overshadow his investment in FossilFree eco-environmental groups. He is not the only leftwing billionaire donating to end oil, and at the same time investing heavily in oil and gas. See https://www.hannenabintuherland.com/usa/greta-thunberg-decoy-fossil-free-groups-funded-by-big-oil-billionaires-manipulating
He used to (and may still?) manipulate currencies, so no surprise there.
[…] K. Richard, December 12, 2019 in […]
[…] articles compilés par le site Web de NoTricksZone, au nombre de 106, constatent que le CO2 a un effet minuscule sur le climat. Des mots tels que […]
[…] articles compilés par le site Web de NoTricksZone, au nombre de 106, constatent que le CO2 a un effet minuscule sur le climat. Des mots tels que […]
[…] 61. Over 100 papers show very low CO2 climate sensitivity […]