By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
You’re back. The Old Lady of Temperature Records – HadCRUT, the only global data set dating back to 1850 – has published its revised monthly global mean surface temperature anomalies for 1850-2020. The earlier dataset (HadCRUT4) showed a linear least squares regression trend of 0.91K for the monthly anomalies from 1850 to 2020 – just over half a degree per century equivalent.
That wasn’t enough. Like the infinitely adjusted GISS, RSS and NCEI records, HadCRUT5 is accelerating the trend – by an astonishing 14%. The usual method is used: lower the earlier temperatures (we know so much better what the temperature was a century and a half ago than the incompetents who actually took the measurements) and raise the later temperatures to steep the trend and to increase the apparent warming.
Of course, detailed reasons for the changes are given. It’s outside of my pay grade to evaluate them. It is fascinating, however, that the heavily manipulated GISS, HadCRUT, RSS, and NCEI datasets are managed by climate fanatics while the UAH dataset – the only one of the big five that has gone the other way – is managed by climate skeptics .
I know the two skeptics who keep the UAH record. You are an honorable man whose sole aim is to reveal as much as possible the true rate of global warming. However, I do not trust the GISS dataset, which has been repeatedly and reprehensibly manipulated by its keepers. I don’t trust RSS, either: When Ted Cruz showed our graph showing the 18 years and 9 months of the last major hiatus in global temperature to the visible discomfort of “Democrats” in the Senate, I predicted that the keeper of the RSS record would , who describes skeptics as “climate deniers”, would manipulate it to make the break disappear. A month or two later he announced that he was going to do just that, and then he did just that. As for HadCRUT, just read the Harry Read Me file to see what a hopeless state you are in that is located.
And the NCEI dataset was under the influence of the unparliamentary Tom Karl for many years. I testified next to him at the House of Representatives, where he tried to claim that my claim that there had been nearly a decade of global cooling was unfounded – when his own dataset (like everyone else) showed just that.
HadCRUT5 shows a trend of 1.04 K from 1850 to 2020, or three fifths of a degree per century equivalent, an increase of 14% over the trend of 0.91 K in the HadCRUT4 data:
The HadCRUT5 trend can be used to calculate how much warming would ultimately be expected if we were to double the CO2 in the air compared to 2020. One must also know the net anthropogenic forcing since 1850 (2.9 W m – 2); the imbalance in planetary energy caused by the delay in the feedback reaction (0.87 W m – 2); the double CO2 radiative forcing (3.52 W m – 2 as mean in the CMIP6 models); the anthropogenic share of observed warming (70%); the exponential growth factor, which allows more water vapor in warmer air (7% per degree of direct warming); and the Planck sensitivity parameter (0.3 KW – 1 m2).
All of these values are relatively new as everyone has endeavored to obtain the data form for the next thousand-page horror story from the IPCC to be released later this year. The calculations are summarized in the table. I selected the seven input parameters based on three criteria: They should be current, mid-range, and mainstream: that is, from sources that climate fanatics would accept.
The industrial age from 1850 to 2020 is the base period for calculating the feedback response per level of reference sensitivity over the period. This turns out to be 0.065. Then find the unit’s feedback response for 100 to 150 years from 2020 (415 ppmv CO2) to 830 ppmv CO2 by increasing the unit’s feedback response to allow for additional water vapor in warmer air.
Finally, multiply the reference sensitivity of 1.053K to doubled CO2 by the system gain factor, which is the unit’s feedback response plus 1: mean sensitivity in the mid-range of equilibrium known as the ECS, which turns out to be only 1.1K around the HadCRUT4 warming trend ECS would be less than 1K to use. I had previously suspected that the HadCRUT5 trend would be 1.1K, which implied 1.2K ECS.
Compare these small and harmless mean range values with the official CMIP6 predictions: lower limit 2 K; Midrange 3.7 K; Upper limit 5.7 K; Mad Edge 10 K.
One can find out how often the unit’s feedback response after 2020 would be greater compared to the unit’s feedback response from 1850 to 2020 if those absurdly inflated predictions of the latest generation of models were correct: lower bound 14, middle range 19, upper bound 67, maddening edge 130 .
These revealing numbers show how insane, outrageously exaggerated the official global warming predictions are. There is no physical basis to assume that the unit’s feedback response from 2020 will be even 14 times the unit’s feedback response from 1850 to 2020. It can be at most 1.1-1.2 times the device’s previous feedback response. Therefore, even the global warming predicted by the models by 2 K, which implies X = 14, is far exaggerated.
This is the easiest way to show that the global warming models’ predictions are devoid of any legitimacy or credibility. They are elaborate fictions. They suffer from two shortcomings: They are grossly exaggerated and accordingly poorly limited.
As the graph shows, the ECS response to feedback fractions is rectangular-hyperbolic. The feedback fraction (the fraction of the ECS represented by the feedback response) that is included in the ridiculous predictions of the models generally exceeds 0.5: however, there is absolutely no way that the feedback fraction could be around 0 in the near-perfect thermostatic climate .5 could be. When I first showed this graphic to a group of IPCC lead authors, they suddenly stopped the ridicule they had subjected most of my presentation to. Suddenly the leading mockery ceased and then said: “Did you publish that?”
No, I said, because back then I hadn’t found out what climatologists had done wrong. “Well, you have to publish,” he said. “That changes everything.”
It is like that too. However, it will be very difficult to publish, not because we are wrong about it, but because we are right. If there is little more than 1K anthropogenic warming in the next century, there is absolutely no need to do anything to prevent it. The flight of the major manufacturing industries to China, which may benefit from the climate fraud promoted by the crawling front groups it subsidized in the west sedulouos, can and should be reversed.
We are taking steps to force the government to look out for the truth that global warming will not be more than a third of current official mid-range predictions and therefore no net damage. Watch this room.
5
15th
be right
Item rating
Like this:
Loading…
Comments are closed.