reminds me of the cholesterol story shifting and swaying throughout my lifetime (a legitimately complex topic that just gets more complex and nuanced over time). The climate change story is unfolding the same way ...

Miranda Devine: Perth electrical engineer’s discovery will change climate change debate



Quote:

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 has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly. He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought. Miranda Devine. Picture: Peter Brew-Bevan Miranda Devine. Picture: Peter Brew-BevanSource:Supplied 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. So, the new improved climate model shows CO2 is not the culprit in recent global warming. But what is? Dr Evans has a theory: solar activity. What he calls “albedo modulation”, the waxing and waning of reflected radiation from the Sun, is the likely cause of global warming. He predicts global temperatures, which have plateaued, will begin to cool significantly, beginning between 2017 and 2021. The cooling will be about 0.3C in the 2020s. Some scientists have even forecast a mini ice age in the 2030s. If Dr Evans is correct, then he has proven the theory on carbon dioxide wrong and blown a hole in climate alarmism. He will have explained why the doomsday predictions of climate scientists aren’t reflected in the actual temperatures. Dr David Evans, who says climate model architecture is wrong, with wife Jo Nova, Picture: australianclimatemadness.com Dr David Evans, who says climate model architecture is wrong, with wife Jo Nova, Picture: australianclimatemadness.comSource:Supplied “It took me years to figure this out, but finally there is a potential resolution between the insistence of the climate scientists that CO2 is a big problem, and the empirical evidence that it doesn’t have nearly as much effect as they say.” Dr Evans is an expert in Fourier analysis and digital signal processing, with a PhD, and two Masters degrees from Stanford University in electrical engineering, a Bachelor of Engineering (for which he won the University medal), Bachelor of Science, and Masters in Applied Maths from the University of Sydney. He has been summarising his results in a series of blog posts on his wife Jo Nova’s blog for climate sceptics. He is about half way through his series, with blog post 8, “Applying the Stefan-Boltzmann Law to Earth”, published on Friday. When it is completed his work will be published as two scientific papers. Both papers are undergoing peer review. “It’s a new paradigm,” he says. “It has several new ideas for people to get used to.”

http://www.news.com.au/national/western-australia/miranda-devine-perth-electrical-engineers-discovery-will-change-climate-change-debate/news-story/d1fe0f22a737e8d67e75a5014d0519c6

https://skepticalscience.com//pics/FeldmanGrowingRF.png

Oh FFS Monk..... ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

’Sup, roach?

That I blew a denialist’s theory out the water?

Husband of Jo Nova  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Not even an original line of bullshit! “It was the sun did it!”    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

It was the sun did it—blown away:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jul/31/2017-is-so-far-the-second-hottest-year-on-record-thanks-to-global-warming

Just look at the chart of total solar irradiance reaching Earth. Wasn’t the sun did it, was CO2 that we put into the atmosphere.


Quote:

Now the first six months of 2017 have been 0.3°C hotter than 1998, despite the former having no El Niño warming influence and the latter being amplified by a monster El Niño. In 1998, there was also more solar energy reaching Earth than there has been in 2017.

I think JoNova’s hubby disgraced himself professionally for what?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 11:52am:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/jul/3...

That other highly regarded scientific magazine. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 11:52am:

Quote: Now the first six months of 2017 have been 0.3°C hotter than 1998, despite the former having no El Niño warming influence and the latter being amplified by a monster El Niño. In 1998, there was also more solar energy reaching Earth than there has been in 2017.

Oh no solar dimming. The suns going out. Help. JM needs help.

Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing.

So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;)

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 12:17pm:

Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing. So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;)

Wow. Even visible emitted light from the sun warms. And it doesn't go out at  night. You do know the ocean has a slow response time?

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 10:57am:

’Sup, roach? That I blew a denialist’s theory out the water? Husband of Jo Nova  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Not even an original line of bullshit! “It was the sun did it!”    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Gee I must have missed that... 
Nope, nothing here to see...

Hate to tell you this Monk, but CO2 itself doesn't cause warming, No Sun, no warming.

:D
lee wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 12:21pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:17pm: Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing. So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;) Wow. Even visible emitted light from the sun warms. And it doesn't go out at  night. You do know the ocean has a slow response time?

Visible light becomes IR, IR gets blocked by GHGs, world warms.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 12:24pm:

:D lee wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:21pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:17pm: Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing. So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;) Wow. Even visible emitted light from the sun warms. And it doesn't go out at  night. You do know the ocean has a slow response time? Visible light becomes IR, IR gets blocked by GHGs, world warms.

Oh dear there's that oversimplification you say you never make again.
Some escapes back into space and some never makes it in the first place.... :D

Grendel wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 12:31pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:24pm: :D lee wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:21pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:17pm: Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing. So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;) Wow. Even visible emitted light from the sun warms. And it doesn't go out at  night. You do know the ocean has a slow response time? Visible light becomes IR, IR gets blocked by GHGs, world warms. Oh dear there's that oversimplification you say you never make again. Some escapes back into space and some never makes it in the first place.... :D

.... :o wow, grendel is so tricky  ::)

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 12:24pm:

:D lee wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:21pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 12:17pm: Yeah, sun does not emit a constant radiance, does it? Last 40 years TSI has been decreasing yet global temperatures have been increasing. So it is not the sun causing global warming, despite JoNova’s hubby  ;) Wow. Even visible emitted light from the sun warms. And it doesn't go out at  night. You do know the ocean has a slow response time? Visible light becomes IR, IR gets blocked by GHGs, world warms.

Tell you what Monk, go hold a flashlight, turn it on then tell me how long it  takes for visible light to make a marked temperature difference... :D :D :D :D :D

It is miranda devine though, and shouldnt he be publishing this?

I just love this. No matter what pretensions to training and qualifications deniers always come down to the same crap: it isn’t CO2, it is the sun!

Only problem: sun has decreased output since the 1980s.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 3:51pm:

I just love this. No matter what pretensions to training and qualifications deniers always come down to the same crap: it isn’t CO2, it is the sun! Only problem: sun has decreased output since the 1980s. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Got a figure for that?

"Overall, radiometers show that the sun's irradiance changes by about 0.1 percent as the number of sunspots varies from about 20 sunspots or less per year during periods of low activity (solar minimum) to between 100 and 150 during periods of high activity (solar maximum)."

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/sun-brightness.html

https://www.pmodwrc.ch/tsi/composite/pics/comp_ext_neu_42_65_1705.png

or

http://lasp.colorado.edu/home/sorce/files/2011/09/TIM_TSI_Reconstruction-1.png

So little variation that YOU think makes a great difference.

"Which measurements are right? Has the sun experienced subtle brightening or dimming during the last few solar cycles? Such questions remain controversial."

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/solarsystem/features/sun-brightness.html

Scientists don't know but JM has been supplied with one of the best? minds in the business. ;)

It has slightly dimmed.

It does cycle longer term than the 11 year sunspot cycle.

Yet the globe WARMED!

Still, every pathetic little denialist says “It is the sun not CO2!” Truly pathetic.

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 3:51pm:

I just love this. No matter what pretensions to training and qualifications deniers always come down to the same crap: it isn’t CO2, it is the sun! Only problem: sun has decreased output since the 1980s. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

here we go again...  so just what are your qualifications again? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Grendel wrote on Aug 7^th, 2017 at 6:10pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Aug 7th, 2017 at 3:51pm: I just love this. No matter what pretensions to training and qualifications deniers always come down to the same crap: it isn’t CO2, it is the sun! Only problem: sun has decreased output since the 1980s. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D here we go again...  so just what are your qualifications again? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

->grendel is back in the rates of change circle game again  ;D