Global warming: way over-exaggerated (Introduction)
The formulas used are in error and over exaggerate by large amounts:-http://phys.org/news/2015-01-peer-reviewed-pocket-calculator-climate-exposes-errors.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly-nwletter-"The IPCC has long predicted that doubling the CO2 in the air might eventually warm the Earth by 3.3 °C. However, the new, simple model presented in the Science Bulletin predicts no more than 1 °C warming instead - and possibly much less. The model, developed over eight years, is so easy to use that a high-school math teacher or undergrad student can get credible results in minutes running it on a pocket scientific calculator.-"The paper, Why models run hot: results from an irreducibly simple climate model, by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, Willie Soon, David Legates and Matt Briggs, survived three rounds of tough peer review in which two of the reviewers had at first opposed the paper on the ground that it questioned the IPCC's predictions. Among the errors of the complex climate models that the simple model exposes are the following --"The assumption that "temperature feedbacks" would double or triple direct manmade greenhouse warming is the largest error made by the complex climate models. Feedbacks may well reduce warming, not amplify it.-"The Bode system-gain equation models mutual amplification of feedbacks in electronic circuits, but, when complex models erroneously apply it to the climate on the IPCC's false assumption of strongly net-amplifying feedbacks, it greatly over-predicts global warming. They are using the wrong equation.-"Modellers have failed to cut their central estimate of global warming in line with a new, lower feedback estimate from the IPCC. They still predict 3.3 °C of warming per CO2 doubling, when on this ground alone they should only be predicting 2.2 °C - about half from direct warming and half from amplifying feedbacks.-"Though the complex models say there is 0.6 °C manmade warming "in the pipeline" even if we stop emitting greenhouse gases, the simple model - confirmed by almost two decades without any significant global warming - shows there is no committed but unrealized manmade warming still to come. There is no scientific justification for the IPCC's extreme RCP 8.5 global warming scenario that predicts up to 12 °C global warming as a result of our industrial emissions of greenhouse gases.-"Once errors like these are corrected, the most likely global warming in response to a doubling of CO2 concentration is not 3.3 °C but 1 °C or less. Even if all available fossil fuels were burned, less than 2.2 °C warming would result."- Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-01-peer-reviewed-pocket-calculator-climate-exposes-errors.htm...
Complete thread:
- Global warming: NOT! -
David Turell,
2012-10-14, 15:16
- Global warming: NOT! -
David Turell,
2012-10-19, 01:16
- Global warming: follow the money -
David Turell,
2013-10-06, 18:43
- Global warming: is good -
David Turell,
2013-10-18, 15:24
- Global warming: is good -
David Turell,
2014-11-16, 14:57
- Global warming: way over-exaggerated -
David Turell,
2015-01-29, 02:00
- Global warming: way over-exaggerated -
David Turell,
2015-03-22, 01:10
- Global warming: a previous very warm period - David Turell, 2019-08-31, 18:30
- Global warming: way over-exaggerated -
David Turell,
2015-03-22, 01:10
- Global warming: way over-exaggerated -
David Turell,
2015-01-29, 02:00
- Global warming: is good -
David Turell,
2014-11-16, 14:57
- Global warming: is good -
David Turell,
2013-10-18, 15:24
- Global warming: follow the money -
David Turell,
2013-10-06, 18:43
- Global warming: NOT! -
David Turell,
2012-10-19, 01:16