By Guus Berkhout & Kees de Lange
There is no climate crisis, even if politicians, climate institutes and the media would like to believe it. Climate change is a fact, but it is a change because everything is changing, both inside and outside our atmosphere. No surprise! We will show that we should not make climate change a drama. On the contrary, we should take advantage of it. An encouraging message from Emeritus Professors Guus Berkhout and Kees de Lange.
In Part I we call on politicians, climate researchers and journalists to stop scaremongering and to stop citing the results of faulty climate models. Our leaders must tell citizens the honest story.
By climate we do not mean the changeable daily weather, but the average weather over a few decades (more than thirty years is the common definition). Climate is an extraordinarily complex physical system and responds to all sorts of external influences inside and outside our atmosphere. This has been happening for 4.5 billion years. We call these external influences the causes of climate change. The major scientific challenge is to know and understand the main causes of past and present climate change. These scientific findings form the basis of an effective climate policy.
Mitigation and adaptation
If it can be proven that climate change is dangerous and the main causes can be controlled by humans, climate policy must focus on eliminating these causes. This is called mitigation policy. But if humans are powerless against the prevailing causes, then climate policy must focus on adaptation, adaptation policy.
The drama begins when, for ideological reasons and/or dubious scientific research, mitigation is chosen when accommodation is the right path.
A critical look at the mainstream climate research of the last few decades as well as a look at the geological history of the earth over 4.5 billion years shows that we are now moving in the wrong direction with our climate policy. As a result, we will spend hundreds of billions on policies that do nothing and cause a lot of harm. This is exactly what experience has shown for decades.
Serious science
It's good to first remember how serious scientists work. Science begins with reliable observations. Today, satellites can collect an unimaginable number of valuable measurements about the properties of the climate system, such as temperature, pressure and humidity. These observations tell the story of climate change. Therefore, analyzing these measurements is the first big step. This analysis provides important empirical relationships such as: B. the temperature as a function of space (x, y, z) and time
Figure 1: Over the centuries, we have seen people with new ideas, even if they were based on reliable observations, being silenced. It is sad that this phenomenon is still thriving in the 21st century.
Explain observations
Then the second scientific phase begins: providing a scientific explanation for why the observations are the way they are. This is done through the development of theories in which computer models play an important role in modern times. If a computer model can reproduce all relevant observations – and therefore all empirical connections – then we are on the right track with the theory. If that's not the case, the only thing left for the theory is the trash.
This is a ruthless test. It is precisely this harsh approach that has brought science to its current level in just a few hundred years, since the work of prominent scientists such as Galileo Galilei (see Figure 1). Selling a theory or model by selecting only appropriate observations is a mortal sin, scientifically speaking. Changing measurements to ensure that those measurements agree with model results is scientific fraud. Universities should teach their students these basic principles of science.
Reliable observations
So everything starts with reliable observations. This is not an easy task! Astronomy is a good example. What is happening in the universe is so complex that only the very best telescopes can provide people with reliable observations that help us understand all the wonderful things that happen in space. The Hubble Telescope's successor, the James Webb Telescope, produces images that amaze us every day. These images allow humans to discard old assumptions and bring existing models about the origins of the universe closer to the truth.
Temperature measurements
Back to Earth's climate. Temperature measurements are of great importance in climate research. It would be very simple to say: you stick weather stations with thermometers in the ground and archive the results in a table every day. While this has been the case in the past, the question is, “Are these results reliable and representative?” If only that were true. Scientific professionalism is also required when measuring.
First, the planet's surface is 70% water, so you can't place weather stations in the ground in the oceans. In addition, in the past there were hardly any measuring stations and some parts of the world were much better covered than others. Additionally, due to increasing urbanization, measuring stations that were once located in the middle of nowhere are now located in the suburbs of large cities or right next to a factory or airport. Due to the so-called urban island effect, these locations are anything but ideal. It was only a little over forty years ago that satellite measurements made it possible to measure temperatures worldwide in a much more consistent, reliable and representative manner.
Climate models and satellite measurements
Climate models have been telling us for many decades that the Earth is warming to worryingly high temperatures and that CO2 gas is the main cause. UN chief António Guterres sums it up: “We are on the way to climate hell” if we don’t stop emitting “evil” CO2 gas. It would also be nice to add to this statement that 97% of scientists agree. However, is this story true?
Figure 2: UN chief Antonio Guterres warns the global community: “We are on the way to climate hell” if people don’t stop emitting the evil CO2 gas.
Nonsensical scenarios
Worse still, to support UN chief Guterres' message of panic, nonsensical scenarios are being used that are impossible in practice. For example, the infamous RCP 8.5 scenario was built into climate models (an extreme CO2 emissions scenario) to scare people on a large scale. This scenario, which predicts warming of more than 60°C by 2100, is still used today, although it is known that these predictions are based on nonsensical assumptions.
CO2 contribution
And 100% of scientists also agree that more CO2 contributes to warming, but only a minority actually believe that human CO2 is the main cause of the current warming. Hard facts prove this too. First, in the history of Earth's climate (long before humans existed), we see that there were periods of high CO2 concentrations and low temperatures, but also periods of low CO2 concentrations and high temperatures. So there were other causes at play that had a major influence on the earth's temperature.
Saturation effect
But even more interesting are the modern satellite measurements that show that with more CO2 emissions, a saturation effect occurs, as we so often observe in nature. The more CO2, the smaller the influence on temperature. The linear behavior in the climate models does not correspond to reality. This partly explains the panicked predictions of these models. A word to those in the know. Le Chatelier's law states that nature always strives to counteract disturbances (“negative feedback”). This law explains, for example, that in climate history, ice and interglacial periods have always remained within certain temperature limits, regardless of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
Figure 3: Nobel Prize winner Dr. John Clauser, signatory of the Clintel World Climate Declaration, puts it this way: “Truth has the quality of being in harmony with reality, and good science means observing reality in nature and reporting it accurately without thinking.” Consequences.”
molecule of life
Against this background, we would like to say a few words about CO2. Laboratory measurements suggest that more CO2 does indeed have a warming effect, but these measurements also suggest that this warming is moderate and nonlinear. Therefore, we repeat, there is no scientific evidence to support any of these AGW horror stories. In addition, measurements also show that CO2 is the molecule of life for all of nature on Earth. The more CO2, the greener the earth becomes and the higher the productivity of agriculture. When we compare CO2 characteristics, non-linear warming and agricultural productivity, the extremely expensive and destructive “net zero” climate policies being pursued are scientifically, economically and socially irresponsible.
cause and effect
After all, the question of cause and effect in complex systems is one of the most difficult problems in science. For example, there is also scientific evidence that warming oceans are causing more CO2 to enter the atmosphere (Henry's Law). This means that not only humans, but also nature influences the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The complete history should be taught in all schools. Not just the well-known fear story, but the complete story should be told. Why are our children so one-sidedly informed about the climate?
Cooperation
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tells us an overly simplistic and alarming story about climate change. This story cites anthropogenic CO2 as the primary cause (“The science is settled”). The consequence of this rigid statement is that a rapid phase-out of the use of fossil fuels is necessary. However, technical and economic realities do not allow this.
Aside from the practical impossibility, there are the scientific arguments. We showed above that there are many signs that there is much more going on than just man-made CO2 (“The science is not settled at all”). We still know far too little about Earth's climate to claim that humans can control it.
An appeal is made to both worlds of climate science, alarmists and realists, to stop fighting each other and to work together to gather more scientific knowledge about how the climate is changing, and to do so more quickly. We should be guided by reliable measurements. This is the only way to get closer to the truth with climate models.
In Part II we will argue that we should work together to address the opportunities presented by climate change, both scientific, technological and economic. However, a completely different approach to climate policy also means a completely different approach to the energy transition. The benefits will be great for everyone.
3.7
6
Voices
Article review
Like this:
Is loading…
Comments are closed.