An email from Norm KalmanovitchThere is a very good case to be made for anthropogenic global cooling from CO
2 emissions. The beginning of rapid increases in global CO
2 emissions started in 1945 with the rapid increase in post war industrialization that has seen CO
2 emissions rise from under 4gt/year in 1945, to over 31.5gt/year today. This increase in CO
2 emissions over the past 63 years has resulted in over 40 years of global cooling. The only time that there was a decrease in emissions was from 1979 to 1982 when the world was warming.
This forms a positive correlation of sufficient statistical significance to make a reasonable case for this relationship to be valid. Although correlation is not causation, there is nothing in the current science literature database that demonstrates any contrary evidence so based solely on "peer reviewed" science literature (as is the case for AGW), this hypothesis could be taken as valid.
The original paper on this topic by Svante Arrhenius in 1896 can be shown to be in error because at the time quantum physics had not yet revealed the physical process of interaction between the Earth's radiative energy and atmospheric CO
2.
The only part of the Earth's thermal radiative spectrum that is affected by CO
2 is the 14.77micron band, but Arrhenius, unaware of this fact used measurements limited to only 9.7microns and therefore was not actually measuring the effect from CO
2. He also used an experimental source for thermal radiation that was at 100ยฐC, and the radiative spectrum from this source includes the 4.2micron wavelength band of CO
2 that is not part of the Earth's radiative spectrum, so he was not measuring the actual effect from the thermal radiation from the Earth.
In 1970 the Nimbus 4 satellite measured the Earth's radiative spectrum showing that the spectral band affected by CO
2 had a deep notch in it centred on 14.77microns. This deep notch demonstrated that well over 90% of the possible effect had already been achieved from just the 325ppmv atmospheric concentration of CO
2, so further changes in concentration would have only minor effects, and increases in CO
2 concentration could neither be responsible for either global warming or global cooling of any significant degree.
While CO
2 concentration increases can be demonstrated to have little further effect on global temperatures, this has no bearing on CO
2 emissions because there is no correlation between CO
2 emissions and CO
2 concentration, and CO
2 emissions may alter the global temperature by processes other than changes to the greenhouse effect. It is easily demonstrated that there is no correlation between CO
2 emissions and atmospheric CO
2 concentration. Over the three years from 1979 to 1982 when CO
2 emissions were decreasing due to the rapid increase in the price of oil that drastically reduced consumption, there was no change in the rate of increase in atmospheric concentration of CO
2 proving that humans were not the primary source for the increase in concentration.
The science literature data base is filled with articles about global warming and CO
2, but none of these articles actually relate CO
2 emissions to global warming, and just falsely assume that emissions and concentration are interchangeable. All of the articles are based on projections from climate models, which also make this false assumption about emissions and concentration, and these models have yet to demonstrate a result that matches physical observation. This is because models use a contrived CO
2 forcing parameter that was clearly not designed on any physical basis either experimental or empirical. In fact there is nothing in all the global warming literature, even the articles about polar bears and melting ice, that can refute the anthropogenic global cooling hypothesis.
Even though there is nothing in the literature data base that can refute the hypothesis of anthropogenic global cooling, the hypothesis can be clearly shown to be false by strict adherence to science protocol and the scientific method. There is clear observational evidence that the Earth warmed from 1975 to 1998 as emissions increased, so even though the world cooled for more years than it warmed with increasing CO
2 emissions, these 23 years provide observations contrary to the hypothesis that can't be explained by the hypothesis, and therefore the hypothesis must be abandoned.
Another hypothesis that explains the current global cooling is based on solar cycles and their effect on solar output and changes to the Earth's albedo from cloud cover. The driving mechanism for this is not fully understood, but to date there is absolutely no contrary evidence to the overall hypothesis. There is in fact clear supportive evidence including observational evidence from a project called Earth Shine which measures the Earth's albedo by its reflection on the moon. The albedo measurements show reducing albedo concurrent with global warming, changing to increasing albedo concurrent with global cooling in 1998. (Figure 2 page 21). See
here (PDF).
This is the way science is supposed to work, and while it is a simple matter to falsify the Anthropogenic Global Cooling hypothesis, it should be far easier to falsify the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, because everything stated in the theory is contrary not only to observation, but contrary to established physical principles and physical laws as well. The fact that AGW still exists as a valid hypothesis seven years after the Earth started to cool in spite of the continued rapid increase in global CO
2 emissions, is testament to how easy it is to misinform the public with well executed propaganda and media control.
... this means 'Cap and Trade' is still a go?
The title of this article should read: "Co-option - how to keep your cause alive".