planet earth

3 downloads 0 Views 5MB Size Report
Dec 23, 2017 - ENSO El Niño–Southern Oscillation (eastern pacific, warm El Niño, cold La Niña) ... would be heading for a substantially colder climate, based on time series ...... term downtrend since the Roman times (GISP2 temperature ...
C L I M AT E C H A N G E O N B A S E D O N O B S E R VAT I O N S A N D M E A S U R E M E N T S

PLANET EARTH H I S T O R Y, P H Y S I C S , S C I E N C E F A C T S , C O N S E Q U E N C E S , COUNTERMEASURES, AND CONCLUSIONS

Jochem H. Hauser HPCC-Space GmbH, HH and Campus Suderburg, Ostfalia Univ., D presented at Burschenschaft Germania zu Giessen, Germany, 18 November 2017 rewritten on 23 December 2017

INTRODUCTION T H E G R E AT C L I M AT E D E B AT E

FOR several decades the great climate debate has been going on. Needless to say that it is highly controversial both among scientists and the public. Before anything else is discussed, it should be noted that there are three different subjects: Environmental protection, optimal use of our resources, and the topic of climate change. They are interrelated to a certain degree, but are logically different. In these lectures I will attempt to provide an unbiased scientific basis and to assess the current state of the climate as well as the anthropogenic effects of the carbon dioxide. The main topic in each section is discussed by specifying the proper literature (textbook chapter, journal, article, newspaper article or video/movie). Derivations are given on the blackboard/flipchart.

Comments or questions to: jh@hpcc- space.de. μ0 and wind tunnel testing arrive at the same results, enough confidence has been established to build the aircraft or spacecraft.

If you want to have topics to be added, feel free to express your wishes, and I will see if it can be done. The lectures will discuss material from books, scientific publications, and newspaper articles that I have found to be more or less correct and a few ones that are downright incorrect, in order to provide examples for irresponsible journalism that has become fairly widespread. Furthermore, I will present and discuss several videos that I deem to be of importance and also to provide other voices on climate change. Simulation models and their results will not be discussed, since the present state the of the art does not allow, in my opinion, to draw any final and firm detailed conclusions based on these ocean-atmosphere models, to justify far reaching political and financial decisions based on their output. In particular, the dire predictions of sea levels rising of several meters etc. do not seem to be realistic, i.e., they are not compatible with current measurements. However, climate models and simulation are most important and should not be neglected, since they give insight in partial processes that cannot be gained by measurements and, there is the possibility, that after an extended period of time, climate models might acquire the capability to produce realistic predictions. There is no need to resort to climate models in order to assess the consequence of climate change and to distinguish between so called anthropogenic effects and natural climate change. I will refrain from using any results from computer simulations, since these results may be misleading, because of insufficient knowledge of model parameters and, as will be mentioned below, because the important interplay regarding cosmic rays and the Sun’s magnetic field seems to be missing in all of these models. Of greatest importance for this topic is the Cloud experiment at CERN (European Center for high energy physics), Geneva (after an eight year delay). Cloud is an experiment that uses a huge bubble chamber to investigate the influence of cosmic radiation on cloud formation at an altitude of 2,000-3,000 m. The predecessor to Cloud was Sky done by Prof. H. Svensmark, DK, Here a personal statement seems to be in order. Having spent my whole career as a modeler in solving the NavierStokes equations and the magneto-hydrodynamic equations, first for ten years at the Helmholtz Zentrum Geesthacht and later at the European Space Agency and NASA, experience has shown over and over again, that computer models are most valuable tools, but do need extensive validation. They are highly important scientific- technical tools, but cannot be used at present to implement any specific climate policy, much less to justify spending hundreds of billions of Euros to prevent scenarios that will not occur in Nature. Even in aircraft design today, where a huge database is available with fully validated models, nobody would design and build an aircraft solely based on computer simulation. However, now, December 2017, a sufficient amount of measured data have become available that allow to draw firm conclusions.

COURSE OVERVIEW:

SET OF FOUR LECTURES AND VIDEOS

1. CLIMATE: past, present, future Climate History Currrent Climate Situation Climategate, Politics, and Political Correctness in Science 2. PHYSICS Misconceptions in Climate Physics Global temperature variation from 1880-1970, and 1900-2016 Climate Models and Experimental Data Temperature and sea level measurements from space Global sea level measurements Physical mechanism: Temperature and CO2 Physical mechanism: Cosmic and solar radiation Physical mechanism: Impact of the sun on global temperature: SKY and CLOUD experiments 3. FACTS and CONSEQUENCES (?!) of Climate Change Rising CO2 levels Global temperature increase Solar Activity Sea Ice Levels and Glaciers Droughts

3. FACTS and CONSEQUENCES of Climate Change cntnd. Sea level rise and inundation Heat from the Depths of the Earth Flora and Fauna Hurricanes and tornados Flooding and storm floods Acidification of sea water Reduction in agricultural production Transformation of agricultural land into steppe

4. COUNTERMEASURES and OUTLOOK Anthropogenic CO2 output CO2 emission reduction CO2 emission reduction effectiveness Population Explosion 1950-2016 Beneficial Effects of CO2 increase? 5. CONCLUSIONS and OUTLOOK 6. REFERENCES and VIDEO evaluation 5

About the Author

Education: Jochem H. Hauser gained his diploma (simulation of particle beams for the GSI accelerator) and Dr.rer.nat in space physics (electric space propulsion) from Giessen University, Germany. Professional Positions: He worked for ten years in the Institute of Coastal Research, Helmholtz Research Center, Geesthacht on numerical fluid dynamics models for both coastal waters and the atmosphere. After that, he joined the European Space Agency (ESA) for five years as the chief of the Aerothermodynamics Section (reentry simulation) at the European center of Science and Technology, Noordwijk, The Netherlands. He also worked (seconded by ESA) at the NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. In 1993, he became professor (now, em) of High Performance Computing in the Faculty H at Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences, Germany and also was an adjunct professor at the Univ. of Greenwich, London. Since 2007, he is the Scientific Director of the HPCC-Space GmbH, Hamburg, Germany. Visiting Scientist: He has held guest scientist positions at the mathematics department of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, Switzerland in 2000, and at the Dept. of Mech. Eng. of the University of Clausthal, Germany in 2007. He has lectured widely both in the U.S. and in Europe. From 2009-2011 he lectured on the Physics of Climate Change for Master of Science students at the Univ. of Luneburg. Research: His research ranges over the field of fluid dynamics and plasma physics simulation, aerospace science and gravitational physics. Current research topic is on novel space propulsion using extreme gravity-like fields. Professional Societies: He is a senior member of the American Institute of Aeronautics and a member of the Technical Committee for Future Flight of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Dr. Hauser is also a full member of the Society of Scientific Exploration (SSE), and an affiliate member of the American Astronomical Society. He is the editor/coauthor of 10 books in computational physics and advanced space propulsion and authored about 80 papers (available from Researchgate). Contact: [email protected] Together with W. Droscher he co-authored the recent book: Introduction to the Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology of Gravity-Like Fields, 25 November 2015, 526 pp., color, available from Amazon.de or Amazon.com

Acronyms in Climate Science

AGW Anthropogenic Global warming CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research IPCC Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change ENSO El Niño–Southern Oscillation (eastern pacific, warm El Niño, cold La Niña) ESA European Space Agency EPA Environmental Protection Agency GCM Global Circulation Model HFG Helmholtz Forschungszentrum Geesthacht MAAT Mean Annual Air Temperature MIT Massachussetts Institute of Technology NASA National Aeronautics and Astronautics Agency NCAR National Center of Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO NOAA National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency NSIDC National Snow & Ice Data Center PDO Pacific Decadal Oscillations PIK Politisch Ideologischer Klimawandel, Potsdam ppm Parts per million, CO2 = 406 ppb Parts per billion, CH4 = 1,800 RSS Remote Sensing System by microwave satellite observations UAH University of Alabama at Huntsville UHI Urban Heat Island TSI Total Solar Irradiation (solar energy flux J m-2 s-1 , solar constant 1,367 W m-2) WES Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg (sea level gauges) 7

GLOBAL WARMING

VS.

GLOBAL COOLING

Up to the late 1970s, as will be shown in this talk, there was a consensus among scientists that our planet is heading for the next ice age. Then global temperatures started to rise from about 1978 till 1998 (similar to the period 1890-1945) and consensus changed to global warming. Despite several hundred billion tons of CO2 released to the atmosphere since then, temperature has remained practically constant since then. Now this consensus is (slowly) disappearing

In 1986, my former boss, Prof. H. Grassl, HFZ Geesthacht, published a dramatic appeal in the Physikalische Blätter, Germany stating that the world was heading for severe global warming and warned about the most dire consequences without immediate counteraction. We are still waiting for these consequences to happen, but what happened in the meantime is that climate research funding increased tenfold. The so called consensus changed from global cooling (late 1970s) to global warming, but with exactly the same environmental consequences. Even if your research is only remotely related to global warming, but a catastrophic scenario is painted, funding will be approved. In 1988 the IPCC was founded by the U.N. to scientifically assess human made climate change, with the (political) aim to eventually justify the redistribution of hundreds of billions of $ to the developing countries as recompensation for damage caused in their countries by climate change. Consequences of the population explosion never were addressed. 8

GLOBAL WARMING

VS.

GLOBAL COOLING

Since 1999 the global temperature (Climategate: hide the decline) is practically constant, despite the additional 550 billion tons of CO2 released anthropogenically into the atmosphere, mainly by developing countries (see slide 78), which, however, amounts to only about 3% of the total CO2 production, i.e., the rest is done by Nature itself. During the last decade the so-called consensus has disappeared, as shown by H. von Storch, HZG and others.

In addition, as will be shown, NASA recently, 2016, demonstrated a totally unforeseen scenario, namely that the biosphere of our planet is thriving because of the increased CO2 content. Since a few years, warning voices can be heard, e.g. slide 84, that, starting in the 2020s, we would be heading for a substantially colder climate, based on time series analysis, from which climate patterns have been reconstructed (also David Dilley, former NOAA meteorologist at http://www.globalweatheroscillations.com/gwo-home). This is is still a maverick opinion, but global cooling would have a much severe effect on us, because of worldwide crop failure. This effect is too well known from history (e.g. 1815 in Europe). In this presentation a cooling scenario will not be considered; the focus is on global warming. However, because of the most severe consequences, I will investigate these claims in a later update of this talk trying to find out whether the methods utilized to predict global cooling can be considered serious science, or must be classified as pseudo-science. 9

GLOBAL WARMING:

RELGION, MEDIA, POLITICS, AND BUSINESS

Warning to the reader:

It should not be too surprising that the four above mentioned groups have detected global warming as a means to advance their own goals and are abusing this originally scientific topic to foster their own political or financial agenda. For the media catastrophic news are good news. They easily switched from global cooling to global warming, retaining the same catastrophic scenario. For many of the journalists man made global warming is a means to advocate their own extreme political views, disregarding scientific facts altogether. Hence, the credibility of most magazines, newspapers, and TV stations is nil. It is also interesting to see that, at least in Germany, major print media like, for instance, the Welt, seem to have purged their staff from climate critics, i.e., firing those journalists that in the past retained some sense of scientific integrity. They can now be seen contributing articles to independent, but less prominent newspapers, e.g. Junge Freiheit. As a result, the Welt, FAZ, Bild, and other major print media, have seen a major reduction of their readership, whereas the Junge Freiheit steadily gained readers over the last several years. Readers are not that stupid and honor journalistic correctness, but not political correctness. Politicians have detected Climate Change as a means to justify their dreams of redistribution of wealth, increasing taxes and claiming that they are the ones that can save the world. They are trying to mislead their voters about their real goals. UNESCO is misusing this topic as as a means to obtain hundreds of billions of $, while it is the irresponsibility of the politicians and the peoples in the developing countries that is causing their local environmental disasters, but definitely not climate change. Worst is the combination of politics and religious fervor, as shown by the present governor of California, Brown, who is evoking the wrath of God against President Trump. It is hard to believe that this kind of insanity exists in the 21 st century in the U.S. Regardless of political conviction, that kind of people have to be removed from public office. The once renowned journal Science has been converted into a NON-Science journal as I will demonstrate by the example of two recently published articles on climate change - it appears, as was revealed in the Climate gate e-mail messages of 2009, that the wrong people took charge of the journal Science, and science itself has become the victim.

10

U N C L I M AT E C O N F E R E N C E AT B O N N , 6 - 1 7 N O V 2 0 1 7

T R U T H O R P R O PA G A N D A ? F I J I C ATA S T R O P H E

Guardian Newspaper 5 Nov 2017 We will investigate … 11

Exactly one day before the U Climate Conference the Guardian Newspaper published this photo and similar photos, claiming that, because of current sea level rise, these people have to abandon their homes. The photos are without date.

This is what I found out: The dramatic pictures of the Guardian are not recent, showing not the Fiji, but low lying reef atolls of the Kiribati Islands, that are not disappearing recently but since 1947, which is well documented. These atolls are disappearing mostly because of wave erosion, a phenomenon, well known from islands like Wangerooge or Sylt, North Sea, Germany, where a sea level rise of only about 2 mm per year is reported, but strong beach erosion is taking place, because of their shape. Measured sea level rise for the Kiribati islands is about 7 mm per year, for the Pacific ocean < 3 mm per year. In other words, 70 cm sea level rise per 100 years. The situation shown in the Guardian photograph is at least 1 m above normal or even more, and thus cannot be the result of recent sea level rise. A most recent study for Fiji, however, shows a yearly rise of sea level of about 1mm per year, based on a 122 year long time series, see Prof. N.-A. Mörner, ref. 11. Links between climate change and the sinking of five islands in the Pacific Ocean have been exaggerated, the author, Dr. S. Albert of a new study has said. The major misunderstanding stems from the conflation of sea12 level rise with climate change.

I found that flooding on the Fijis has a long history: The main island of the Fiji’s, Viti Levu, was indeed flooded but this happened in Dec. 1938 by a tropical cyclone bringing 1133 mm of rainfall imagine the commentaries if this happened today 13

Conclusion:

The Guardian picture shows an atoll (tiny size of a few ha), that is, a low lying coral reef, of the Kiribati Islands (between Australia and Hawaii). An atoll is readily destroyed by wave erosion and a few cm of sea level rise. Only a few people are living there. This has nothing to do with climate change. The Fiji islands (volcanic, sunken continent) are more than 2,000 km away and are mountainous islands (highest mountain about 1,300 m, Fiji Islands Handbook) with a rocky coastline. Viti Levu is the largest island of the Fijis, home to 70% of the population (about 600,000, strongly growing), and is the hub of the entire Fijian archipelago. By contrast, the island measures 146 kilometers by 106 kilometers and has an area of 10,389 square kilometers. A sea level rise of a few cm is totally insignificant, but even this does not happen for the Fiji islands as proved by Prof. N.-A. Mörner et al. (next slide) refs. 7-10. The report of the Guardian is scientifically wrong and DELIBERATELY tries to mislead the reader. The journalists who concocted this fraudulent message knew exactly what they were doing. They are part of an international network of irresponsible journalists that are trying to deceive the public. Of course, this does NOT mean that all journalists cannot be trusted anymore, but fake news are widely promoted by the media, e.g. the German Fake News State TV ARD and ZDF. Investigative journalists have become a minority — no chance with 14 ARD or ZDF.

THE FIJI ISLANDS ARE NOT GOING UNDER Sea level changes

in the Fiji Islands Courtesy and copyright Prof. N.-A. Mörner, Oct 2017, refs. 7-10 in the Maldives

in Goa, India

in Bangladesh

15

FIJI ISLANDS NOVEMBER 2017 O B V I O U S LY T H E T O U R I S T O F F I C E O N T H E F I J I I S L A N D S D I D N O T L I S T E N T O T H E I R G O V E R N M E N T

The catastrophe does not take place, except Fiji or theMaldives are going under during each climate conference and reappear miraculously after. Fiji sea level is decreasing since 1800 The UN climate conference in Bonn, Nov. 2017 costs 117 million Euro.

Fiji is going under in Bonn on 11/11/2017 at 11:11 a.m., but at the same time remains a paradise for tourists and, of course, for their inhabitants. 16

Fiji president gets 7 million Euro.

Who pays? the German taxpayer

Fiji is not sinking but the sea level is going down

Fiji is growing, not shrinking

dead shells sea level decreased by 10 cm over 25 years

150 m in 25 years

living shells

Courtesy and copyright Prof. N.-A. Mörner, refs. 7-10

17

MALDIVES ARE SINKING Professor A.-N. Mörner (right) excavating a centuries old scull that became visible owing to sea level reduction at the Maldives not the Maldives but the sea level is sinking

18

Before we continue: let us hear and see (video in German) the fundamental remarks from Prof. N. Bolz, TU Berlin about Climate Change as a replacement for religion in its wake scientific misconduct has surged ! Exemplified by the German Ministry of the Environment, 2017 deliberately misrepresenting scientific facts, see the exhibition in Bonn at the UN climate

conference by

faking the sinking of the Fiji Islands 19

Video: Interview with Prof. Bolz, TU Berlin

20

It must be understood: the Earth is a living planet and life always had, must have, and will have an impact on the Earth climate climate change is a natural phenomenon and is there forever Apart from factors on Earth itself, that is, the internal heat that is released by the core of the Earth into the oceans and the atmosphere, the climate on our planet is mainly driven by the Sun’s external power, which is, despite the name of the solar constant, not constant but does vary with time, and the deep solar minima seem to change the ocean currents, while the magnetic field of the Sun is changing the cosmic ray flux (and thus the low cloud cover) based on the Be 10 data, whereas the positions of the four large planets are changing the eccentricity of the orbit of the Earth, leading, for instance, to observed periods of about, 30, 84, and 164 years. While the CO2 concentration has been increasing from about 0.03% to 0.04% (or from 300 to 400 CO2 molecules per 1,000,000 molecules of air (N2 and O2) this increase may have led to a small increase in global temperature as will be discussed, but this increase alone cannot account for any dramatic effect, like the melting of the North pole or a sea level rise of 7 m within the next hundred years, as claimed by politicians or pseudoscientists. In this presentation these and other claims will be discussed, but

experiments, observations, and measured data. 21

solely based on

H O T N E W S : A R C T I C A N D A N TA R C T I C ICE SHEETS Most amazing, in Nov. 2017 NASA identified a major geothermal heat source under the Arctic ice sheet (see slide 95), producing the first temperature map. There is also a geothermal heat source under Westantarctica (JPL, Nov. 2017, explanation see slide 94). In addition, Edinburgh university researchers (Geological Society’s special publications series), August 2017, have identified 91 volcanoes under Westantarctica stretching over 3,500 km. The question is: how active are these volcanoes?

22

Welcome to Absurdistan I

The warnings by Prof. Bolz (previous slide) are referring to the video released by the IPCC in 2009 shortly before the Copenhagen climate summit. In this video a 6 or 7 year old girl is fervently trying to escape the flood caused by the man made (western countries) climate change, and, while running for her life, the soil opens, threatening to devour her. To heighten the tragedy, she eventually looses her teddy bear. Finally, she saves herself by clinging to a high branch of a tree while the flood is rushing on under her feet. Her fate is representative for all the children on Earth, and her final message to the public is: please help the world. Other activist groups have put children in polar bear costumes asking to sign petitions to save this endangered species (however, this has become more difficult as it is now widely known that the number of polar bears has more than quintupled since the 1950s). But there is no shortage of other weird campaigns. The viewer is led to believe that we, the industrial countries, are jeopardizing the future and even the lives of the young generation on Earth by our greedy and irresponsible behavior. It is us who are destroying the planet and are causing all kinds of biblical plagues on the other continents, foremost the African continent. No scientific facts or data are presented - emotions are stirred to a high level and rational thinking is disabled. This is the strategy of the producers of this video. Nothing could be farther from scientific reality as will be shown in this presentation, which is based exclusively on empirical data and their rational analysis. The goal of those responsible for this scientifically baseless video, without any shred of experimental evidence, was to create emotions and to disable reason. The aim of this type of propaganda is to produce totally uncritical followers that are easy to manipulate, ready to do and to believe things that are irrational. That is, ultimately creating a sect of true climate believers whose faith cannot be shattered by facts anymore. 23

Welcome to Absurdistan II

Thus, for these groups the scientific truth backed by data is no longer of interest, because it is replaced by blind belief - and this is happening before our very eyes in the 21st century. This is the severe warning by Prof. Bolz, namely that the new religion of climate change eventually will harm humanity, except of course those groups profiting from this belief: scrupulous businessmen, self advocated prophets, NGOs, ruthless politicians (both from western and developing countries), and also scientists pursuing fame or funding. We are facing an unholy alliance, so Prof. Bolz, and therefore need to uncover these false claims and reject any demands that are derived from these pressure groups. The people need to fight back and get rid of those political forces that want to restrict freedom because of a higher cause. This is the old mantra of all totalitarian governments (e.g., communists or religious fanatics) trying to set up an Orwellian state that leads us into submission and the destruction of our society, finally completely ruining our lives. The 21st century is the century of starkly advancing science and not the century of blind belief. In this context it is right to say: in reason we trust! There is no need for blind believers! In the following the empirical climate data will be evaluated without (hopefully) any bias, and conclusions as well as necessary actions will be identified in order to curb any negative effects that might have been caused by man’s activity. 24

Life in the Universe and on Earth Planet Earth was created about 4.6 billion years ago and took about 20 million years to be formed. At that time, the planet was subject to heavy asteroid bombardment. Life is relatively old and dates back about 3.8 billion years, starting with single-celled prokaryotic cells, such as bacteria, the oldest life form on Earth. Nevertheless, life was fairly primitive. Concerning the origin of life, the Urey-Miller experiment of 1952 showed that a mixture of water H2O, methane CH4 , and hydrogen H2 (all inorganic constituents) when subjected to electric discharges produced organic molecules. Also, ultraviolet radiation, hv, led to the same result. The younger Sun radiated much stronger in the UV and X - ray spectrum, about 100 to 1,000 times more intensive than today, while Earth had not yet produced its protective ozone layer (O2 + hv —> O + O, O2 + O —> O3). The chemical reaction that is sustaining all life on Earth and also on any exoplanet is:

photosynthesis

6 CO2 + 6 H2O + hv —> C6H12O6 + 6 O2 That is, plants are using carbon dioxide, water and sunlight to produce sugar and oxygen. More CO2 leads to more plant growth that in turn consumes more CO2, i.e., a feedback mechanism exists. Probably photosynthesis dominates life in the Universe too, because the carbon reactivity results in the most versatile chemical compounds. Other life forms based on sulphur or silicon may also be possible. What is learned from photosynthesis is that water and carbon dioxide are the main ingredients for life on planets or moons. Whether the CO2 content is 0.3 % or 0.4% most likely is not that important, as we will see in later slides. But CO2 must be around in sufficient quantity along with large percentages of oxygen and nitrogen, at least for higher life forms to develop. CO2 is also warming the planet, in that respect it can be considered a so called green house gas (a green house, however, has no convection), but it is dominated by water vapor. From the above reaction it is directly visible that living organisms, since their very inception, have affected the climate on Earth, otherwise there would be no oxygen in the atmosphere (today about 20%), and life would not exist! Therefore, life itself has been a disturbing agent of Nature, and must continue to be so in order to exist. But man needs to be thoughtful utilizing the resources of the planet, in particular, drinking water. Too many of a good thing, that is, too many human beings on the surface of the Earth, will eventually lead to its destruction !!

25

Fundamental Features of Science

Science is not democratic but elite Remember: Deutsche Physik: One hundred authors against Einstein, 1938

If you thought that science was certain – well, that is just an error on your part. It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong. ― Richard P. Feynman, Physics Nobel Prize, Caltech the man with the O-ring and the ice water, Space Shuttle Challenger accident 1986 26

Climate History: NYT in 1974 NEW ICE AGE Imminent

27

Climate History: difficult temperature reconstruction

What is the real climate? Variations in temperature reconstruction, source IPCC report 2007 28

Temperature History 11,000 Years (ref. 6)

It is important to note that for about 11,000 years the climate exhibits an oscillatory behavior, i.e., there are no tipping points, but feedback mechanisms exist in Nature that are restoring the average T of about 15 C. 29

From 2005 to 2017 about 400 billion tons (400,000 million) of CO2 were released anthropogenically into the Earth atmosphere which is about 3.5 % of the total amount of CO2, i.e., the major part of CO2 is naturally produced. The global temperature remained unchanged, that is, the water vapor feedback hypothesis is wrong! If it were correct, we should have seen a substantial increase in global T during this 12 years (see the calculations on slide 144).

30

Video showing Prof. Patzelt, Univ. of Innbruck, Austria on glacier sensitivity with respect to climate change. In the medieval age tree line was higher than today, that is, it must have been warmer than today. Prof. Patzelt found about 150 trees to support his claims.

31

Simplified Earth Irradiation Energy balance where does the Earth get its energy from and what is happening to it, ref.

32

(credit Prof. J. E. Solheim, Oslo Univ., climate4you.com) 33

Some Climate History German translation (2009) of a report from a Norwegian artic expedition: Die Arktis scheint sich zu erwärmen. Berichte von Fischern, Robbenjägern und Forschern welche das Meer um Spitzbergen und den östlichen Teil der Arktis befahren, zeigen alle auf eine radikale Änderung der klimatischen Bedingungen und bis dato gänzlich unbekannten hohen Temperaturen in diesem Teil der Welt. Viele Landschaften haben sich so verändert, sie sind nicht mehr erkennbar. Wo sich vorher grosse Eismassen befanden, sind jetzt oft Moränen, Ansammlungen von Erde und Steinen. An vielen Orten wo früher Gletscher weit ins Meer ragten, sind sie komplett verschwunden. Die Temperaturveränderung, sagt Kapitän Ingebrigtsen, hat auch die Flora und Fauna in der Arktis verändert. Diesen Sommer suchte er nach Weissfisch in den Gewässern um Spitzbergen. Früher gab es grosse Schwärme davon. Dieses Jahr sah er keine, obwohl er alle seine alten Fischgründe absuchte. Es gab wenige Robben in den Gewässern um Spitzbergen dieses Jahr und der Fang war weit unter dem Durchschnitt. Das hat aber den Kapitän nicht überrascht. Er wies daraufhin, daß das Wasser um Spitzbergen normalerweise eine gleichbleibende Temperatur im Sommer von 3°C hat. Dieses Jahr wurden Temperaturen von bis zu 15°C gemessen und letzten Winter ist das Meer nicht mal an der Nordküste von Spitzbergen zugefroren. Sounds Terrible Enough ??? 34

Climate History

Here is the original English report describing the fi n d i n g s o f t h e N o r w e g i a n expedition that took place in 1922, almost 100 years ago. I did not show i t fi r s t , b e c a u s e everyone would have seen that it is not a current report, though it sounds like one of the current most alarming reports.

35

Current Climate Situation too many polar bears compared to 1950 (5,000) : 26,000 in 2016

Polar bears an endangered species? Listen to the video of … 36

Prof. J. Reichholf, Munich: Biodiversity video

37

Video: Prof. J. Reichholf on Global Warming and Al Gore

38

Doomsday Predictions are not Science

The false prophet Al Gore: In his 2006 documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” he famously predicted increasing temperatures would cause Earth’s oceans to rise by 7 m, a claim scientists say is utterly without rational basis. His latest movie An Inconvenient Sequel is pure propaganda, fabricated by Hollywood (or Bollywood), that has NO resemblance to current climate observations. A self-named prophet predicts the end of the world. Sierra Club Canada also said in 2013 that the Arctic sea ice would vanish that year. There is still a total of more than > 12 sqkm covered with ice. One leading expert, in 2013, Peter Wadhams, a professor of ocean physics at the University of Cambridge, says the Arctic Ocean could be completely free of ice in summer as soon as 2015. An overheated Arctic in turn threatens catastrophic knock-on effects for the rest of the globe. The ocean decided otherwise. Astrologers seem to be far more serious scientists! Faster sea level rise…. and more climate refugees. The warmer Arctic has dramatically accelerated the melting of the Greenland ice sheet. “We are now losing 300 cubic kilometer of ice a year in Greenland,” said Wadhams. “That in itself will double the rate of sea level rise globally — but this has not been observed. Is it the eskimos who are now asking for asylum!? Climate science misused for political goals ! No people from Fiji or the Maldives ! Higher risk of “runaway” global warming. The warmer Arctic has begun unleashing substances—specifically, permafrost and underwater methane—that could sharply accelerate global warming- methane is 23 times more effective than CO2 . Nothing is running — global temperature remains practically stagnant since more than 18 years — despite the release of additional 550 billion tons of CO2 during this period !!!. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/report-on-arctic-sea-ice-unleashes-shock-waves/ 39 #Yr3iXi6xZ4WIxFF4.99

Numerous newspaper reports on climate change are without logic, e.g. NYT: ” I think the findings that the heat is going into the Atlantic and Southern Ocean’s is probably pretty robust. However, I will defer to people like Josh Willis who know the data better than I do.”-says Andrew Dessler. Debunked by Josh Willis, who Dessler “knows the data better than I do,” says in the very same NYT article that “it is not clear to me, actually, that an accelerated warming of some…layer of the ocean … is robustly supported by the data itself” – Josh Willis

40

Global temperature variation from 1870 -1970 Eventually, in 1975 a consensus was reached, and a new ice age was predicted by almost all scientists In the 2000s NASA removed this plot from their website http://realclimatescience.com/nasa-hidingthe-decline-in-sea-level-and-temperature/

41

Temperature increase from 1997- 2016 about 0.1 C about 550 billion tons of CO2 were released during this period! (credit Dr. R. Spencer)

The zero temperature line is from 1978 which is at the same T level as 1895. The ordinate is highly stretched !

zero line shows temperature of 1895 or 1978

42

Scientific Misconduct I

Climategate, Politics, and Political Correctness in Science Climategate e-mails as of November 2009, wrong statements, stupid popular TV shows

— hiding the decline (of the global temperature despite record CO2 levels) — prevent publication of papers that are considered skeptical — introducing fudge factors into climate models — temperature hockey stick curve (falsification by “Prof.” M. Mann, Univ. of Pennsylvania) — countless modifications of recorded temperature surface data by NOAA, latest scandal 2015, and NASA — disappearance of original measured data from NOAA and NASA websites — pressure on PhD students (PIK, Politisch Ideologischer Klimawandel) — IPCC report 2007: falsification of Himalaya glacier meltdown date by 2035, instead of 2350, which is, most likely incorrect too, but worse, this false date was confirmed in German TV by ‘a physicist’ “Prof. Schellenhuber”, PIK and also by IPCC President Paychauri (the Josef Blattner, FIFA, of IPCC) who accused Indian scientists, denouncing his prediction of the vanishing Himalayan glaciers, of doing voodoo science

— we must get rid of H. von Storch, HZG (Mist-Wissenschaft, i.e., bullshit science) — constructing plots how to run scientific journals (latest scandal see Scientific Misconduct II) that is, suppressing the publication of undesirable opinions. — the total nonsense climate science of Prof. H. Lesch, on German TV: shame on him Example e-mail: Prof. Phil Jones to Michael Mann: I can’t see either of these papers being in 43 the next IPCC report, Kevin and I will keep them out somehow.

Example for Irrational Behavior

Beware of the warning of Prof. N. Bolz, TU Berlin: climate change as a replacement for religion. Here it is: Even a nobel prize does not seem to prevent one from insane predictions!

Appeals to religion and the afterlife have been showered on us. Whether it be comments from the pope, or from Nobel Prize winning ‘economist’ Paul Krugman, who says: You can deny global warming and may you be punished in the afterlife for doing so – this kind of denial for petty personal or political reasons is an almost inconceivable sin. I add: this is an almost inconceivable nonsense. There is not much difference to the medieval inquisition or other current religious maniacs. Don’t worry these fools are not right! Just remember Emanuel Kant, Koenigsberg, Prussia, 18th century philosopher: Use your own mind without the guidance of anyone else. In the following, we will analyze the facts (all kinds of measurements) and draw conclusions based on the rational laws of44Nature. There is nothing to be afraid of!

PEOPLE POLITICIANS MONEY Prof. S. Rahmsdorf, PIK, in Klimawandel und CO2, 2004:

Wir danken Eduardo Zorita, Helmholtz Zentrum Gessthacht, für die Erläuterung der falschen Darstellung seiner Ergebnisse!

I am not sure that S. Rahmsdorf would have thanked Dr. E. Zorita if he had known this 2009 public letter coming! As a consequence of Dr. Zorita’s letter, I do not use any data from institutions that were actively involved in the Climategate incident! 45

Climategate on NSIDC Website: artic ice week 41, 2015 left picture replaced by right picture, that is, all artic ice pictures were tampered showing thinned ice

Arctic ice 5m thick

Arctic Ice 5m disappeared

all of the original ice sheet data from 1984 to week 36 of 2015 was deleted from their website without notification

46

N A S A M O D I F I E D M E A S U R E D T E M P E R AT U R E S The original measured data were deleted from the NASA website

47

T H E S E N A S A O R I G I N A L T E M P E R AT U R E D ATA DISAPPEARED

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1941 10 24 -4 7 10 16 37 8 -19 11 -1 11 1942 27 1 1 2 7 7 9 5 3 0 14 9 1943 -20 8 -15 4 -5 -12 13 -25 -2 29 9 23 1944 35 12 7 -4 -5 -10 7 8 18 23 3 -13 1945 5 -11 0 22 -21 -24 -14 27 5 5 -3 -28 1946 7 3 -10 12 10 -11 12 -7 3 -14 -3 -22 1947 -2 11 24 18 7 2 12 8 4 27 27 -7 1948 25 -10 -22 -8 7 12 -9 -18 -8 -1 -16 -14 1949 7 -29 -10 -26 -11 -17 -2 -13 -6 3 -8 -9 1950 -24 -27 -3 -16 -19 -7 -5 -28 -12 -13 -32 -12 1951 -37 -44 -13 -2 10 -7 -5 15 3 12 9 21 1952 15 16 -9 -1 -7 -2 12 15 16 2 -15 1 1953 15 12 21 21 8 9 3 17 13 10 7 23 1954 -23 -1 -4 -10 -14 -15 -21 -17 -17 5 24 -7 1955 26 -6 -33 -13 -12 -14 -8 3 -10 5 -20 -24 1956 -15 -26 -25 -20 -23 -5 -6 -31 -6 -19 -17 -14 1957 -11 0 0 15 10 18 -7 15 14 0 17 22 1958 42 24 19 13 8 -17 12 -9 -8 10 10 -6 1959 4 6 24 14 -1 9 9 0 -15 -5 -8 9 1960 4 24 -45 -23 -14 -6 -11 10 5 12 -9 19 48

J-D D-N DJF MAM JJA SON Year 9 11 21 4 20 -3 1941 7 7 13 3 7 5 1942 1 -1 -1 -5 -8 12 1943 7 10 23 -1 2 15 1944 -3 -2 -6 0 -4 2 1945 -2 -2 -6 4 -2 -5 1946 11 10 -4 16 7 19 1947 -5 -4 3 -8 -5 -8 1948 -10 -11 -12 -16 -11 -4 1949 -17 -16 -20 -13 -13 -19 1950 -3 -6 -31 -2 1 8 1951 4 5 17 -6 8 1 1952 13 11 9 16 10 10 1953 -8 -6 -1 -9 -18 4 1954 -9 -8 4 -19 -7 -8 1955 -17 -18 -22 -22 -14 -14 1956 8 5 -8 8 9 11 1957 8 11 29 14 -5 4 1958 4 3 1 12 6 -9 1959 -3 -4 13 -27 -2 3 1960

Political Correctness in Science

Resignation: Prof. Dr. Judith Curry, Georgia Tech., U.S.A., explained: "the deeper reasons have to do with my growing disenchantment with universities, the academic field of climate science and scientists... I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment — funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc." "How young scientists are to navigate all this is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide.” This is all too true as shown by the scientific misconduct both on the individual and organizational level, see Scientific Misconduct slides. 49

Politicians, Politics, and Climate Climate change is already disrupting our agriculture and ecosystems, our water and food supplies,” Obama inveighed. “If we do nothing, Alaskan temperatures are projected to rise between six and twelve degrees by the end of the century.” So naturally, President Obama, and also Pope Francis, the notorious European Commission, the radical United Nations, and many poor countries are obsessed with – climate change!, that is, these nations have found a bonanza, foremost the German taxpayer. Following Obama’s GLACIER conference in Anchorage, China, India, and Russia (three of the four biggest CO2- emitting nations) refused to sign a nonbinding declaration seeking greater international action to combat Arctic melting and climate change. The Trump administration pulled the plug. Former secretary of state John Kerry stated, we must act quickly “to avoid the catastrophe we will inevitably see if we allow carbon emissions to go up, and up, and up.” Moreover, he added, “We need to speed it up dramatically because we are in a race against time.” ...“What we do right now, today, matters,” Kerry told the audience. “We don’t get a second chance on this one.” But Kerry did not get a second chance!

Politicians, Politics, and Climate Prof. L. Bengtson, former MPI director, HH, 2013, in the blog

Klimazwiebel of Prof. H. von Storch, HFG Geesthacht:

For some parts of the industry as well as for different NGOs such as Greenpeace and WWF a threatening climate warming have become a necessity and a source of extra income as it provides continued subventions for wind and solar energy. In the almost hysterical climate hype of today a less dramatic warming is not very well received as all political correct members of the public would prefer to hide this uncomfortable fact.

Politics in Germany: Renewable Energy Production for January 2017

The picture shows that the energy production by solar and wind energy (yellow and blue curves) is totally unreliable, it is not even a niche technology because it is available only for a few hours per day and most of the time you would have a complete blackout with regard to the total power consumption in Germany (red curve). Despite the humongous cost of renewable energy, it cannot contribute significantly to energy production in a useful way. The energy turn is a failed approach, based on political ideology, but not on science, and will never work. The German taxpayer is subsidizing this failure with 22 billion Euros each year. It seems to be the declared goal of the four political parties represented in the German Parliament to eventually ruining the German economy and destroying jobs on a large scale !!

The result of this irresponsible policy is that the produced renewable energy sells at most at 6 cent per kWh, or must be sent to neighboring countries for free (if possible), while the actual cost is about 40 cent per kWh. When renewable energy is available, the price for electric energy is dropping dramatically. If electric energy is needed, the market for energy may reply by an up to seven fold increase in price compared to normal situations. Renewable energy has led to a complete destabilization of the electric energy market. During the winter season, e.g. January 2017, the situation became dramatic, because only 2-4 % of the installed renewable peak power of 26 GW was available.

Here comes the proof: cost is going through the roof So called renewable energy has been a disaster for our society

52

PHYSICS

53

Climate Models and Experimental Data Diverge

Computer models are incapable of exact quantitative predictions, hence only experimental data should be utilized, but computer models can be used for parameter studies that show the impact of the individual sources (credit Dr. Roy Spencer)

Climate Models and H. von Storch

no increase in global temperature observed as of January 2017

Prof. Hans von Storch, 2013, Inst. of Coastal Science, HFZ Geesthacht and MPI Hamburg, Germany

55

Errors in CO2 Ice Core Samples the upper curve shows the correct CO2 concentrations from plant pollen (ref. 6)

Criticism by the late Dr. Z. Jaworowski validated correct CO2 values from plant pollen

Ice core measurements producing the wrong CO2 concentrations

56

A recent MIT model bears no proximity to climate reality in CA: In 1862 the state of CA went bankrupt, because of a period of rain for three months, floods destroyed one quarter of all homes in CA at a CO2 concentration of about 260 ppm. The next major catastrophes were in 1907, 1912, and 1969. No major flood since 50 years while CO2 concentration climbed to 407 ppm.

The catastrophe comes out of the computer!

57

Statistical research of the Gießener Physicist Prof. Dr. Armin Bunde (my former classmate) and colleagues have shown: Trends wie die globale Erwärmung werden in Klimamodellen offenbar überschätzt published in Physical Review Letters Die gute Nachricht zuerst: Die globale

Erwärmung ist offenbar nicht ganz so gravierend wie vielfach befürchtet. Dies bedeutet zwar keine Entwarnung von wissenschaftlicher Seite, zeigt aber, dass kein Anlass zu Panikreaktionen und übertriebener Hektik bei politischen Entscheidungen besteht. Und nun die schlechte Nachricht: Klimamodelle sind weit schlechter als ihr Ruf. Sie reproduzieren die Gesetzmäßigkeiten des Wetters längst nicht so wie erhofft und s p i e g e l n s o m i t d i e t a t s ä c h l i c h e n E n t w i c k l u n g e n n u r u n z u l ä n g l i c h w i d e r. Conclusion by Prof. Bunde:

Climate Models must not be considered for decision making! Remember also the video of Prof. Patzelt, Univ. of Innsbruck on climate glacier data

As an example of the disconnect between reality and climate models which are being relied upon to guide energy policy, here are the yearly growing season average temperatures in the U.S. 12-state corn belt (official NOAA data), compared to the average of the climate model projections used by the IPCC: 58

Climate Models versus Observations

From Dr. Roy Spencer, Jan. 2017

difference

59

Global sea level measurements: no future flooding In dieser Hinsicht sieht der Vizepräsident des Alfred-Wegener-Instituts Prof. Dr. Miller [6] auch für die Zukunft kein Überflutungsproblem, indem er feststellt, daß "...Grönland zwar sehr wahrscheinlich an Masse verlieren wird, aber dieser Massenverlust durch verstärktes Abschmelzen in Grönland wird kompensiert durch eine Eiszunahme in der Antarktis" und weiter "... nach den von uns berechneten Szenarien kommen wir zu dem Schluss, daß Veränderungen der großen Eismassen keinen Beitrag zu einem Meeresspiegelanstieg leisten werden” The same result has been obtained by a comprehensive study conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers, WES, Vicksburg analyzing thousands of gauges worldwide.

60

Physical mechanism: Temperature comes first then CO2 CO2 Level Rise (credit ESA) the CO2 level increases about 3 ppm/year

forcing and feedback mechanisms: radiation flux S = s T4 , s = 5.67 x 10-8 W m-2 K-4 dT = dS x T x (4 S)-1 formula for doubling of CO2 concentration, IPCC data dS = 3.7 W m-2 , T = 255 K, S = 235 W m-2 dT = 5.35 x ln (C/C0) W m-2 where C0 denotes, for instance, the concentration in 1960 (270 ppm), logarithmic law leads to saturation, i.e., eventually temperature is insensitive to CO2

positive and negative feedbacks T/T0 = (1-f) -1 61

In climate models a positive feedback is assumed, that is, f = + 1/2 is employed, and thus any increase in T is amplified by a factor of 2. However, measurements by Lindzen et al., MIT as well as Paltridge et al. have resulted in f = -1 , that is, a negative feedback was found experimentally, acting against T increase. A value of f = -1 was suggested. However, immediately arguments were raised against the validity of these measurements. Regardless of these arguments, recent temperature measurements from 1999 - 2017 have settled the question: despite the emission of more than 550 billion tons of CO2 the temperature remained almost constant. A positive feedback of f = 1/2 is completely incompatible with these measurements. The same is true for the logarithmic law. Even a negative feedback of -1 still leads to unrealistic temperature increase, see next slide !

Result: a functional relationship between anthropogenic CO2 and temperature increase T cannot be established! The same holds true if one tries to relate CO2 and T for the years 1900 - 2017. 62

Temperature Increase According to Logarithmic CO2 Law —————————————————————————————————————

From 1979 or 1980 to 2016 the CO2 concentration increased from about C0 = 306 ppm to C = 407 ppm. Applying the logarithmic law from the previous slide should then have resulted in a temperature increase of 1.52 C (Totally WRONG: 3 C from model): Measured, however, was a value of 0.52 C or 0.24 C (the temperature change from 1979 to 1980 was ALREADY about 0.3 C !) ———————————————————————————————————————————— From 1998 to 2016 the CO2 concentration increased from about C0 = 350 ppm to C = 407 ppm. Applying the logarithmic law should then have resulted in a temperature increase of 0.81 C. Totally WRONG: Model prediction with f = 1/2: + 1.62 C Measured, however, was a value of maximal 0.1 C ! WRONG even with f = -1 : + 0.4 C ———————————————————————————————————————————— What would happen if the current CO2 concentration is doubled? This has been investigated in ref. 15, with a totally unforeseen result! It should be noted that, in order to reach this level, every organic material on Earth would have to be burned, that is, all the trees and coal etc. A totally scorched planet would be the case. This is a completely unrealistic scenario, because humanity would be wiped out long before such a state can be reached. But even then, the logarithmic law gives an (unrealistic) temperature increase of only 3.7 C. Hence, claims of temperature increases of 6 C or even 12 C are totally WRONG and baseless (Obama administration) for they are a scientific impossibility. ———————————————————————————————————————————— The first two examples show that the logarithmic law does not reflect climate reality and cannot be used alone to predict the global temperature. Only measured data should be used ! 63

Sun-Cosmic Rays Impact on Terrestrial Climate (credit Prof N. Shaviv)

64

Cosmic Rays of High Energy Bombarding Earth

as known form the recent Ice cube experiment extremely energetic neutrinos (100 Tera eV) are hitting Earth as well as charged particles from cosmic particle accelerators and also gamma rays are constantly bombarding Earth at unprecedented energy and in numbers (credit DESY, Hamburg) high energetic particles creating more low cloud cover that is cooling the Earth, according to Profs. Svensmark, Veizer, Shaviv et al. the physical mechanism is shown in the subsequent slides

65

Physical mechanism: Cosmic rays and solar radiation (theory and experiments after Svensmark & Friis-Christensen 1997) there is no observed correlation between temperature and CO2

66

Veizer, Svensmark, and Shaviv Solar-Cosmic Theory Physical mechanism: Impact of the sun on global temperature: SKY and CLOUD experiments: (credit Prof. Jan Veizer)

Magnetic field of the Sun deflects cosmic radiation that causes ionization, and ionized particles are forming aerosols in the lower atmosphere that are the seed for cloud formation that, in turn, is shielding solar radiation. A proxy should be the 10 Be concentration, but NOT necessarily the number of sun spots that are only reflecting the number of closed magnetic field lines, but not the number of open field lines that go into outer space.

67

From the website of Prof. N. Shaviv, 2017: Solar physicist Dr. Leif Svalgaard has revised his reconstruction of sunspot observations over the past 400 years from 1611-2013. Plotting the “time integral” of sunspot numbers from Dr. Svalgaard’s data shows a significant increase in accumulated solar energy beginning during the 1700’s and continuing through and after the end of the Little Ice Age in ~1850. After a ~30 year hiatus, accumulated solar energy resumes a “hockey stick” rise for the remainder of the 20th century, followed by a decline beginning in 2004, all of which show remarkable correspondence to the HADCRU3 global temperature record:

68

Determining the Sun’s activity by the Number of Sun Spots and the Problem of Closed Magnetic Field Lines (credit NASA)

Determining the Sun’s activity by the number of sun spots may be using the wrong proxy, because of the problem of closed magnetic field lines, see the picture to the left and the next one. In spite of this, there are, however, publications that are nevertheless doing this and, unsurprisingly, fail to detect a correlation between temperature and the number of sunspots. They consequently, but falsely claim, (e.g. www.realclimate.org, if these are scientists they should know better) that the solar magnetic field has no impact on the climate on Earth. The correct proxy is to measure the Be10 concentration.

Determining the Sun’s activity by the Number of Sun Spots and the Problem of Closed Magnetic Field Lines (credit NASA)

The picture clearly shows that the number of sun spots is not a reliable proxy for the magnitude of the Sun’s magnetic field, i.e., the activity of the Sun, because of the closed magnetic field lines that curve back onto the Sun’s surface and do not reach out far enough into space. Thus they cannot deflect the cosmic radiation (that comprises electrically charged particles) that is en route to the Earth. In other words, only those magnetic field lines that close in at infinity will be able to deflect the cosmic particles so they cannot reach Earth. Thus, the amount of ionization in the lower atmosphere of the Earth decreases. In that way, the formation of aerosol particles in the lower atmosphere is reduced, and cloud formation is hampered. As a consequence, the surface of our planet will experience a higher solar energy flux, T rises. Hence, instead, the concentration of the Be 10 isotope should be measured that is generated by the incoming cosmic radiation.

70

Be 10 Ice Core data, Cosmic Ray Flux, and Climate Change

the content of Be 10 (beryllium) isotope is strongly correlated to the cosmic ray flux, supporting the theory of Prof. Svensmark et al. (credit WattsUp March 17, 2009) see also the paper by Pedro, J.B. et al., Clim. Past, 7, 707–721, 2011, 
 www.clim-past.net/7/707/2011/


71

Latest results from the CLOUD experiment at CERN: May 2016 Unexpected experimental result May 2016:

aerosol formation (key to cloud formation) may occur naturally from trees, i.e., trees can cause cooling: CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, have left the issue even more confusing after discovering, while creating a fake cloud, that trees could have been putting these aerosols into the atmosphere since they first grew at the time of the dinosaurs, providing an additional time-varying source for low cloud formation, in addtion to the cosmic ray hypothesis of Svensmark, Veizer, Shaviv et al. CERN scientists have also discovered that projected temperature increases over the next century may have been over estimated. Science clearly was not settled!

72

Impact of the sun on global temperature: CLOUD experiment at CERN, Geneva

From journal Science, 25 May 2016:

Cosmic Ray Physical Mechanism Vindicated

Clouds need to condense around small particles called aerosols to form, and human aerosol pollution— primarily in the form of sulfuric acid—has made for cloudier skies. That’s why scientists have generally assumed Earth’s ancient skies were much sunnier than they are now. But today, three new studies show how naturally emitted gases from trees can also form the seed particles for clouds. The results not only point to a cloudier past, but they also indicate a potentially cooler future: If Earth’s climate is less sensitive to rising carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, as the study suggests, future temperatures may not rise as quickly as predicted. "It's been long thought that sulfuric acid is really the key player in cloud

formation," says atmospheric chemist Chris Cappa of the University of California, Davis, who was not involved in the research. The studies “show pretty convincingly that we do not need sulfuric acid around to allow new particles to grow.” To simulate ancient atmospheric conditions, one research group used CLOUD (Cosmics Leaving OUtdoor Droplets), a controlled chamber at CERN, Europe’s particle physics facility near Geneva, Switzerland. Nearly as big as a bus, the chamber was filled with synthetically produced air, allowing precisely controlled chemical conditions. Jasper Kirkby, a CERN particle physicist, and his colleagues introduced a mixture of natural oxidants present in the air and an organic hydrocarbon released by coniferous plants. The hydrocarbon was rapidly oxidized. The only other ingredient allowed in the chamber was cosmic rays, high energy radiation from outer space, which made the molecules clump together into aerosols. Sulfuric acid was not required. In fact, even when the researchers introduced low concentrations of sulfuric acid to the chamber such as might be found in unpolluted air, the aerosol formation rate was unaffected. In a second CLOUD experiment published simultaneously in Nature, researchers showed these same oxidized molecules could rapidly grow the particles to sizes big enough to seed cloud droplets, providing essential experimental for the hypothesis of cosmic ray impact on the Earth temperature of Svensmark & Veizer & Shaviv et al.

Gravity and Climate Change The understanding of the deterministic properties of the TSI variability is critical for understanding the cause of irradiation variability and how the TSI irradiation will contribute to the natural climate variation on the Earth (ref. 12). Their study of long solar variable data series (1,000 years) has shown that the four large planets are the source of the

Solar position variability, the TSI variability, and the sunspot variability, and thus also may have an impact on the Earth’s climate ! Remark: this supports the claims bei David Dilley, slide 7, that the position variability of Earth, Sun, and Moon may have a gravitational tug large enough to reposition the core of the Earth. The magnitude of the effect needs to be checked.

74

S O L A R P L A N E TA R Y S Y S T E M (CREDIT NASA)

75

Sea Water Acidification Prof. Rahmstorf, PIK, (falsely) informed the State Parliament of Lower Saxony in 2004 that our anthropogenic CO2 was causing an acidification of the oceans, which has increased 30%, and as a result the coral reefs are in danger.

Geologist Prof. F. K. Ewert dismisses S. Rahmstorf’s alarmist claims of man-made ocean acidification. Are we really seeing the alleged acidity? No. This is because with a pH = 8.1 they are still very much alkaline. Foremost ocean researcher and climate agitator Rahmstorf apparently does not know about the chemistry of the ocean, let alone the coral reefs. Yet he sees himself qualified to judge this. It is a fact that atmospheric CO2 concentration over the course of the earth’s history was far greater than it is today. And if that is the case, then so were the oceans. It is a fact that the pH value of the oceans has dropped from 8.18 to 8.1. This is nothing more then a small drop in alkalinity because water does not become acidic until the pH drops under 7.0. Whether the current pH change from 8.18 to 8.1 is new and unique, or can also be greater and how it was in former times, is unknown because no long-term measurements are available. CO2 and H2O don’t want anything to do with each other and so they separate immediately after their first connection to carbonic acid. Only 1% of carbonic acid reacts and bonds with the plentiful amounts of calcium found in water to form calcium carbonate, which in water is only 0.0114 g/l soluble. While constantly new calcium carbonate forms, as lime slurry it has to settle and form limestone. Moreover CO2 is the building block of coral reefs. Their growth begins with algae that live in the corals, and they need CO2 in order to live and grow, and thus provide for the growth of calcium carbonate skeletons that eventually lead to the formation of the reefs.

T H A N K S T O C A L C I U M C A R B O N AT E W E H AV E T H E A L P S . 76

FA C T S 77

Temperature Distribution in the Atmosphere (credit Journal of European Physics, June 2016)

weather phenomena mainly take place in the troposphere and the tropopause if we ever got a scramjet flying it would be in the stratosphere

78

Rising CO2 Levels: Country Overview 2014

there is only one number that is believed correct: Germany (source Wikipedia) in 2017 the 40,000,000 emission level should be reached

79

CO2 Plus and Minus

80

Latest Global Temperatures as of December 2016, Satellites

Dr. R. Spencer, UAH

81

Latest Global Average Tropospheric Temperatures (Dr. R. Spencer, UAH) Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The intensity of the signals these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies is directly proportional to the temperature of different, deep layers of the atmosphere. Every month, John Christy and I update global temperature datasets that represent the piecing together of the temperature data from a total of fourteen instruments flying on different satellites over the years. A discussion of the latest version (6.0) of the dataset is located here. The graph above represents the latest update; updates are usually made within the first week of every month. Contrary to some reports, the satellite measurements are not calibrated in any way with the global surface-based thermometer records of temperature. They instead use their own on-board precision redundant platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) calibrated to a laboratory reference standard before launch. 82

Global Temperature Hiatus since 1998 no global temperature increase since 1998

climate models versus reality

no correlation with anthropogenic CO2 billion tons of CO2 per year

unstoppable CO2 emissions 83

Temperatures: Example Germany Temps 1900-2010, credit H. von Storch

84

Droughts

Example: Germany Rainfall 1900-2010, credit H. von Storch

85

Political Correctness in science:

Deutsche Klimaphysik

Tichys Einblick, a journal from a former journalist of the newspaper Welt, on 16 Dec. 2016 about an incident at the Universität Leipzig, Germany that happened to geology chair Prof. Dr. Kirstein: Die Dissertation (PhD thesis) des Doktoranden Limburg zur Messung globaler Temperaturen wird boykottiert, der Genderkritische Vortrag des Professors wird abgesagt (talk is not permitted), der Paläoklimatologe soll forschen und seine Erkenntnisse für sich behalten, alles weil politisch nicht erwünscht — which is a well known formulation. In particular, regarding recent incidents at Leipzig University during November 2017, one gets the impression that the university administration by their public statements is encouraging extremists of the far left that are terrorizing a professor deemed to be politically incorrect — back to the roots. Das Land der Dichter und Denker da und dort nicht dicht (insane). I.e., the Germans are back to their early history, at least, many politicians and journalists as well as some obedient professors — sounds familiar?

86

December 2016: Cold Climate starting around 2020

Forecast (which is in line with the forecast by David Dilley, slide 7) by Professor Valentina Zharkova, Northumbria University: After studying full-disc images of the sun’s magnetic field, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University and her colleagues, discovered that the sun’s dynamo is actually made of two components – coming from different depths inside the sun. The interaction between these two magnetic waves either amplifies solar activity or damps it down. Professor Zharkova’s observations suggest we are due for a prolonged period of low solar activity. We will see it from 2020 to 2053, when the three next cycles will produce a very reduced magnetic field of the sun. Basically what happens is that these two waves separate into the opposite hemispheres and they will not be interacting with each other, which means, that the resulting magnetic field will drop dramatically nearly to zero. And this will be a similar condition like the Maunder Minimum. It may get cold !? 87

Sea Ice Extent: Arctic and Antarctic According to CFACT: Status end of 2014, newer sources are shown in the following slides: Arctic sea ice: some Alaskan glaciers have been retreating for decades, but Hubbard is growing while Glacier Bay’s ice retreat began around 1750. Arctic sea ice has increased some 26% (400,000 square miles) since 2012, in a cycle that’s continued for millennia. The sea ice “was thick in the 1920s, thin in the 1930s and 1940s, thick again in the 1960s and 1970s, and thinner in recent decades,” according to oceanographer Igor Polyakov, 2004. Antarctic sea ice: set another record in May, the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center reports, climbing 12% above the long-term 1981-2010 average, to reach 12.1 million square kilometers – the gain is almost as much as Alaska and Texas combined! However, there is a long term downtrend in Artic sea ice since the 1980s, which, however, may be compensated by the gain in the Antarctic ice (Prof. Miller, AWI) as will be quantified in the following slides. 88

Glacier Lengths since 1850

Taken from ref. 1, same results as Prof. G. Patzelt, Univ. of Innsbruck, Austria, see ref.

no correlation with anthropogenic CO2

89

Antarctic and Artic Ice Sheets

The Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets contain more than 99 percent of the freshwater ice on Earth. The Antarctic Ice Sheet extends almost 14 million square kilometers, roughly the area of the contiguous United States and Mexico combined. The Antarctic Ice Sheet contains 30 million cubic kilometers of ice. The Greenland Ice Sheet extends about 1.7 million square kilometers, covering most of the island of Greenland, three times the size of Texas.

90

Artic and Antarctic Sea Ice Level Predictions In 2007, Prof. Wadhams predicted that sea ice would be lost by 2013 after levels fell 27 per cent in a single year. However, by 2013, ice levels were actually 25 per cent higher than they had been six years before. In 2012, following another record low, Prof. Wadhams changed his prediction to 2016 - wrong again. Comment: astrology seems to be a far more serious science. The view was supported by Prof. Maslowski, who in 2013 published a paper in the Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences also claiming that the Arctic would be ice-free by 2016, plus or minus three years. In an otherwise excellent astronomy textbook, Perspectives of Astrononmy, 6th ed., 2010, the four authors are presenting forecasts obviously taken from Al Gores movie.

These pseudoscience predictions are meant to influence politicians and the public. Interesting enough, the rate of Sea Level Rise has remained unchanged for decades, nothing else has been observed.However, far from record lows, the Arctic (Nov. 2014) has seen the quickest refreeze ever recorded with the extent of sea ice growing 405,000 square miles (1.05 million square kilometres) in just three weeks since the September 10 minimum. The Danish Meteorological Institute said that refreezing is happening at the fastest rate since its daily records began in 1987.

91

Discrepancy between satellite data and field measurements: this may be due to a well known phenomenon, namely a lack of insufficient calibration of satellite sensors against field data

Copyright Prof.

N.-A. Mörner, presented at Climate Conf. 8-9 Nov., 2017 Düsseldorf, Germany 92

Antarctic

some real temperatures

Artic

Temperatures on 14 -15 Jan 2017, credit NASA and NOAA

93

Danish Meteorological Institute: Arctic Sea Ice Level as of 2 and 3 January 2017

The plots show maps with sea ice thickness, and seasonal cycles of the calculated total arctic sea ice volume. The mean sea ice volume and standard deviation for the period 2004-2013 are shown with gray. The figures are based on calculations using DMI's operational ocean and sea ice model HYCOM-CICE.

94

95

A N TA R C T I C S E A I C E C O V E R left: April 2009

copyright NSIDC

right: September 2014

very strong increase in sea ice cover over 5 years

96

Arctic Sea Ice Level 2002-2016 Downtrend

97

ARTIC Sea Ice compared to average 1979-2000

98

A N TA R C T I C S E A I C E A N O M A LY these variations cannot be explained at present but it is absolutely clear that there is NO correlation with the CO2 content of the atmosphere

explanation cf. slides 115

sudden strong decrease in sea ice cover

this value is still higher than the value of 1974

99

Sea Ice Cover Data Rigged by NOAA

If the previous figures would be related to the sea ice cover of 1974 instead of 1981, a dramatic increase in the antarctic sea ice cover would be seen, whereas the d o w n t re n d i n t h e arctic would be much smaller. Obviously, NOAA and NDIC do not want this to happen, hence the period 1979-1981 was selected for comparison.

A clear case of scientific falsehood aiming at misleading the public.

100

Arctic Ice Disappears within Four Days German Newspaper’s Data Rigging: Northpole arctic ice melted within four years. However: white: ice cover, red is molten ice (surface water of a few millimeters, the ice beneath is, of course, still there.

In reality all the ice is still there. The thin surface layer of water is seen as red by the satellite, hence the white ice cover disappeared. The German newspaper (RNZ) changed the four days into four years and wanted to make their readers believe that the North pole virtually has become ice free (taken from ref. 8).

101

M I S R E P R E S E N TAT I O N O F M E A S U R E D D ATA

500 billion tons of CO2 from 2000-2017 no correlation with anthropogenic CO2

First, the word anomaly suggests to the reader that something is going wrong. Second, the selected period 2000-to Dec 2017 strongly suggests that something went wrong during this period, i.e., quite recently, i.e., an anthropogenic cause. This triggers the thought in the reader’s mind that immediate 102 action is needed. Totally wrong as the next slide reveals!

C O R R E C T R E P R E S E N TAT I O N O F M E A S U R E D D ATA

In 1944 the Arctic was warmer than in 2017 no correlation with anthropogenic CO2

Still the word anomaly is used, but at least the reader can see that anomaly is meant as a deviation from a mean value and, furthermore, this anomaly was already present about 100 years ago, i.e., there cannot be a recent anthropogenic cause. Second, the temperature deviation at the North pole has not changed since the last 100 years, critical information that is missing form the previous slide. 103 even be detrimental. Human countermeasures are not necessary, and may

Mission Eternal Ice

published in the German newspaper the Welt, 27 January 2017 an example of a grossly

misleading article employing pseudoscience arguments

This report conveys the impression that the ice has been at the North pole forever. This is wrong, the North pole has been covered with ice for only about 8 million years, which is a relatively short period in the Earth’s climate history. There is nothing eternal here. As is known from the temperature history of Greenland (see next slide) about 1,000 years ago the mean temperature was substantially higher on the island. There was no ice cover and the Vikings settled there for almost 400 years. Then, they had to repeat, because of falling temperature. Moreover, it should be understood that the melting of sea ice cannot lead to an increase in the sea level. Fill your whiskey glass with ice cubes and watch their melting. Glaciers are retreating for more than 150 years (see previous slide), and not just since the industrial revolution. Their ice volume is negligible compared to the Arctic and Antarctic shelf ice. Sea ice is volatile because of prevailing currents and wind. 104

North Pole is melting, but already did so in 1922. Had the author of the Welt article cared to check newspaper reports that appeared almost 100 years ago, he could have simply copied the text. However, in 1945 things changed completely, and in 1975 a future ice age with most dire consequences for humanity was predicted (see previous slide). Next, there has been a warming period from about 1976 - 1998, leading to most catastrophic predictions of a too warm climate. For instance, the same institutions NOAA and NASA turned around 180 degrees and now are claiming the opposite to be true (compared to 1975). However, since about 1999 to 2016 almost no global warming took place, despite an ever increasing CO2 level. According to a large number of scientists, CO2 only plays a minor role, but oceanic oscillations, for instance, a 60 year cycle, see recent refs. 17, 18, may have a much more prominent role along with the combination of cosmic rays and the magnetic field of the Sun for low altitude cloud cover (as previously discussed). These topics simply are not addressed at all in the Welt article. NASA 2016: Heat from the Earth below Greenland ! Accurate information was not the goal, instead a fictitious catastrophe was alluded to, that is, a soap opera was constructed (many journalists in Germany no longer try to report the facts, instead their articles are written to fit their ideology). Now the penguins are disappearing (see slide below).

North Pole is melting again

105

Welcome to Absurdistan III New Arctic Sea Ice Cover Plan

Save the Arctic sea ice with $ 5 trillion of floating, wind-powered ice machines, recommended by the latest research of S. J. Desch et al., ASU, U.S.A. on 16 February 2017 journalist T. Hopper from Mail on Sunday newspaper, reported on a proposal by a team (the term scientist does NOT apply to these people) from Arizona State University to save Earth’s Arctic Sea Ice We, the taxpayers, should

Install 100 million (!) wind turbines over the Atlantic Sea Ice region that are driving pumps that then are spraying water on the sea ice to keep it from melting NO IDEA SEEMS TO BE CRAZY ENOUGH to wast the taxpayer’s money a straightforward search on the internet would have revealed, however, that . . . 106

Mission Eternal Ice?

that : Greenland Temperature History shows higher temperatures in the past (credit Prof. J. E. Solheim, Astrophysical Dept., Univ. of Oslo, climate4you.com)

107

that : a linear extrapolation does not make any sense as done in Fig. 2 of this paper compared to the data of Prof. Solheim, Oslo Univ., and the green curve calculated by him appears to be substantially more realistic based on real data

108

Artic Sea Ice Cover that : a severe cooling trend is on the way not considered or discussed in this paper

Since 2006 (independently claimed by David Dilley, slide 7) a strange trend has been observed (Prof. J. E. Solheim): the North Atlantic Ocean is cooling rapidly from the bottom, the exact physical reason is not known also, according to the history over the last 4,000 years, and, in particular, in accordance with the long term downtrend since the Roman times (GISP2 temperature reconstruction), the Greenland surface air temperature is supposed to fall further significantly in the 22nd century

109

that :

in 1769 the sea ice extent was LESS farther south than in 2015 (credit Prof. J. E. Solheim, Astrophysical Dept., Univ. of Oslo, climate4you.com)

Sea Ice cover has shown to follow the TSI (see figure below) and moves very rapidly. During the D(alton) minimum the sea ice extent moved 500 km south from 1800-1820 The picture above shows the year 1995, but this is also true for the year 2015

110

Arctic Sea Ice Extent (credit WattsUp website February 2017) note that there is no polar cap at the North Pole that can melt, only sea ice that is moving rapidly north or south depending on temperature but this IS correlated to TSI (Prof. Solheim) who determined cycles of 22, 84 or 164 years. Note that Prof. Solheim is predicting another solar minimum starting around 2025 and thus during that time sea may move south as it did during the Dalton or Maunder minima (cf. previous slides)

111

Scientific Misconduct II A quick look at the paper by

Desch S. J. et al: Arctic ice management, AGU Publications, Wiley & Sons, online 24 Jan. 2017, reveals:

Abstract: As the Earth’s climate has changed, Arctic sea ice extent has decreased drastically. It is likely that the late-summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as the 2030s. This loss of sea ice represents one of the most severe positive feedbacks in the climate system, as sunlight that would otherwise be reflected by sea ice is absorbed by open ocean . . . The paper starts with a dramatic appeal as if the small increase in global temperature of about 0.8 k pm 0.1 K from 1900-1998 and about 0-0.1 K from 1999 - Jan. 2017 could be the cause of the observed change in the Artic Sea ice over the last 18 years. In particular, the global temperature practically remained constant during the claimed sea ice loss period. Their dire prediction is simply based on linear extrapolation which has shown to be wrong by Prof. Solheim (previous slide). The paper states that Global average temperatures have been observed to rise linearly with cumulative CO2 emissions and are predicted to continue to do so, resulting in temperature increases of perhaps 3∘C or more by the end of the century. This is entirely wrong, contradicting all observations. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The proposed technical solution is utter nonsense etc. etc. The reviewer(s) are as bad as the authors. I propose instead: sending a fleet of container ships with the ice gained in the Antarctic (Prof. Miller, AWI Bremerhaven) to the Arctic, which only would cost $ 2 trillion, saving the taxpayer $ 3 trillion! An even cheaper solution would be to provide about 10 million ice floes with sails to make them drift from the Antarctic to the Arctic. I leave it to the reader to calculate the savings.

This is crackpot science. It also shows that the peer review process, at least for this journal, has been corrupted.

This is not right. It is not even wrong. W. Pauli, nobel prize physics. 112

Antarctic Ice Cover for 31,000 years

The Antarctic contribution to sea level is a balance between ice loss along the margin and accumulation in the interior. Accumulation records for the past few decades are noisy and show inconsistent relationships with temperature. Relationship between accumulation and temperature for the past 31 ka using high-resolution records from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Divide ice core in West Antarctica. The results suggest that variations in atmospheric circulation are an important driver of Antarctic accumulation but they are not adequately captured in model simulations. Model-based projections of future Antarctic accumulation, and its impact on sea level, should be treated with caution. Despite much warmer periods during the last 10,000 years the Antarctic ice never melted. It exists since 15 million years. The Antarctic Ice Shield is not melting, but increasing. In order to melt the Antarctic Ice the average temperature needs to increase by 50 K ! 113

Contrary to the report in the newspaper Welt, the sea ice cover does not exhibit a dramatic reduction, the year 2015 showed the highest sea ice cover since the beginning of the global measurements. Of course, one could claim that sea ice cover reduced by 114 1.5 m sq. km in 2016, and call this a major collapse which, as is obvious, is pseudo-science in order to mislead the public.

History of Antarctic Sea Ice Extent: a highly dynamic quantity

The picture shows the deviation plus or minus from the average sea ice extent constructed from the measured values for the period 1979-2008. The deviation from the mean (or average) value is termed anomaly. The denotation is not particularly meaningful, because the fluctuations about the mean are a totally natural phenomenon and not anomalous. Just by looking at the picture it is obvious that there exists a slight upward trend, that is, an increase in sea ice extent over time is to be noticed, as was pointed out by Prof. Miller, AWI, Bremerhaven, Germany.

The chart allows all kinds of comparisons. If you wish to sound an alarm, then the message can b sent out that just within one from 1986-1987 the Antarctic sea ice extent was reduced by 2 million sqkm and if this trend continued, the Antarctic sea will have disappeared within 8 years, which is nonsense.

115

If the years 1980 and 2015 are compared, a dramatic increase of the Antarctic sea ice extent by almost 4 million sqkm can be reported, and a new ice age can be predicted based on this correct observation, which clearly is pure propaganda.

Heat from the Depths of the Earth Arctic and Antarctica

116

Arctic Ice Implications this may explain why Greenland was green from 900 - 1350 and then the Vikings had to leave because the ice came back and is still there today

Antarctic Ice Implications as well as the high variability of the antarctic sea ice as observed in 2016

NASA: GREENLAND ICE SHEET

THAWING BY UNDERGROUND

GEOTHERMAL ENERGY First map by NASA 2016 how accurate its is remains to be seen but most likely the trend will prevail it appears that the Greenland ice may be thawing in the near future ? red thawed blue frozen

Greenland’s thick ice sheet insulates the bedrock below from the cold temperatures at the surface, so the bottom of the ice is often tens of degrees warmer than at the top, because the ice bottom is slowly warmed by geothermal energy from below !!! copyright: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/ 2016/nasa-first-map-of-thawed-areas-under-greenland-ice-sheet

S T U D Y S U P P O R T S T H E O R Y O F G E O T H E R M A L H E AT S O U R C E U N D E R W E S T A N TA R C T I C A , N O V E M B E R 2 0 1 7 J P L H O T N E W S F R O M T H E A N TA R C T I C U N D E R G R O U N D A surprising recent NASA study, dated 7 November 2017, adds evidence that a geothermal heat source called a mantle plume lies deep below Antarctica’s Marie Byrd Land, explaining some of the melting that creates lakes and rivers under the ice sheet. Although the heat source is not a new threat to the West Antarctic ice sheet, it may help explain why the ice sheet collapsed rapidly in an earlier era of rapid climate change, and why it is so unstable today. This is a source of geothermal energy, similar to Greenland, but this time the ice volume affected is about ten times larger.

Clearly, CO2, i.e., the small T increase cannot be the cause of the extreme variation in the antarctic ice sheet cover. Remarkably, in spite of the geothermal heat released, the antarctic ice sheet has been growing over the last 30 years In addition, in Oct. 2017 the Univ. of Edinburg announced the finding of 91 volcanoes under the antarctic continent. The geothermal energy flux is comparable to Yellowstone Park, about 150 mwatt/ sqm.

120

JPL NOVEMBER 2017: HOT NEWS F R O M T H E A N TA R C T I C UNDERGROUND A surprising recent NASA study, dated 7 November 2017, adds evidence that a geothermal heat source called a mantle plume lies deep below Antarctica’s Marie Byrd Land, explaining some of the melting that creates lakes and rivers under the ice sheet. Although the heat source is not a new threat to the West Antarctic ice sheet, it may help explain why the ice sheet collapsed rapidly in an earlier era of rapid climate change, and why it is so unstable today. This is a source of geothermal energy, similar to Greenland, but this time the ice volume affected is about ten times larger.

Clearly, the small T increase cannot be the cause of the extreme variation in the antarctic ice sheet cover. Most remarkably, in spite of the geothermal heat

released, the antarctic ice sheet has been growing over the last 30 years

In addition, in Aug. 2017 the Univ. of Edinburg announced the finding of 91 volcanoes under the antarctic continent. The geothermal energy flux is comparable to Yellowstone Park, about 150 mwatt/sqm. 121

The ice sheet on Antarctica is between 2,000 and 4,000 m thick. Therefore, the small temperature increase cannot have any impact on the volcanic activity. It is scientific nonsense to claim that the ice sheet in Westantarctica has been melting and weakened so much as to cause volcanic activity. However, the opposite may became true, if volcanic activity does start on a major scale, ice in the Antarctica could be melting to some extent. One must not forget, that the covering of both poles with ice is the exception in the Earth climate history.

122

Flora and Fauna: Penguins, climate change and Pseudoscience (June 2016) UD scientists report projected response of Adélie penguins to Antarctic climate change
 It’s a big question: how is climate change in Antarctica affecting Adélie penguins? Climate has influenced the distribution patterns of Adélie penguins across Antarctica for millions of years. The geologic record tells us that as glaciers expanded and covered Adélie breeding habitats with ice, penguin colonies were abandoned. When the glaciers melted during warming periods, this warming positively affected the Adélie penguins, allowing them to return to their rocky breeding grounds. But now, University of Delaware scientists and colleagues report that this beneficial warming may have reached its tipping point. In a paper published today in Scientific Reports, the researchers project that approximately 30 percent of current Adélie colonies may be in decline by 2060 and a p p ro x i m a t e l y 6 0 p e rc e n t m a y b e i n d e c l i n e b y 2 0 9 9 . ” J u s t a n o t h e r n o n s e n s e t h re a t : This prediction is not right, it is not even wrong, citing W. Pauli. More than half of the penguins will be dead by 2099. In earlier times they benefitted from climate warming, but today heat is threatening to wipe them out. How has this come to be? The press release continues: It is only in recent decades that we know Adélie penguins population declines are associated with warming, which suggests that many regions of Antarctica have warmed too much and that further warming is no longer positive for the species,” said the paper’s lead author Megan Cimino, who earned her doctoral degree at UD in May.” Antarctica has warmed unusually over the past decades? This is pseudoscience and is completely

wrong. A climate model that notoriously predicts (false) extreme temperatures was used by the PhD students to make their case!!! Precisely on this subject a new paper by Jones et al. 2016 in Nature

Climate Change tells us: Observed trends are not unusual when compared with Antarctic paleoclimate records of

the past two centuries. Climate model simulations that include anthropogenic forcing are not compatible with the observed trends. This suggests that natural variability likely overwhelms the forced response in the 123 observations.

NASA Report: Sea Level Rise 1880-1980

124

NASA Reconstructed Sea Level Rise 1870-2016

The same data, after 34 years, were re-interpreted by new NASA staff, and are now leading to substantially higher sea level rise - without any scientific basis

125

• A posting at Real Climate Science shows that the Arctic sea ice today is about the

same thickness as it was 75 years ago. However, other sources report a decline of the Artic sea ice of about 3.4 % per decade, which is compensated by the gain in the Antarctic (Prof. Miller, AWI Bremen).

• In the 1940 Townsville Daily Bulletin “ice measurements are reported having an

average of only 6 ½ feet,” according to a just-returned expedition of Soviet explorers.

• Then, alongside a posting of a New York Times image stating the ice was “only about

seven feet thick” in 1958, it was written that sea ice was “about two meters thick” then.

• Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/report-on-arctic-sea-ice-unleashes-shock-

waves/#FluZtix40DhUEE5f.99

• Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/01/report-on-arctic-sea-ice-unleashes-shock-

waves/#ChXbilgYbZs1MjKv.99

126

Sea Level Rise 1950-2100 Prof. Nils-Axel Mörner is the field expert, see refs. 7-10

scenario for temperature increase in the 21st century black curve observed

scenario for sea level increase in the 21st century

model predictions

expected from measurements

NASA

Mörner: perhaps 1 mm/year

Real data: Observed from satellites: about 3.2-3.3 mm/year (may be somewhat too high) , Measured in situ values (gauges) from Pof. Mörner and Army Corps of Engineers WES, Vicksburg, MS. are lower than satellite data 127

Sea Level Rise satellite measurements Dec 2016

With imagery and data from Landsat 8, a joint mission of NASA and the U.S. Geological Survey is providing a near-real-time view of every large glacier and ice sheet on Earth. The NASA-funded Global Land Ice Velocity Extraction project (https://nsidc.org/data/ golive) called GoLIVE, is a collaboration between scientists from the University of Colorado, the University of Alaska, and NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, website should be available in spring 2017.

128

Sea Level Rise from 1800-2007, ref. 1

about 20 cm in 150 years which is not significant

129

Sea level rise by satellite measurements: 1993-2016 about 3.3 mm/year, that is, roughly 30 cm per 100 years

these values are higher than the in situ field measurements worldwide, recalibration may be needed

130

Tornado and Hurricane frequency unchanged credit H. von Storch, Helmholtz Research Center, Geesthacht, Germany

131

Tornados and Hurricanes from 1900-2007, ref. 1 agreement with the data by H. von Storch

132

T H E G R E AT B A R R I E R R E E F, A U S T R A L I A copyright Prof. P. Ridd, Chap. 1 in ref.

Based on the left figure the media reported the sad story(former President Obama) of the dying Great Barrier Reef (extension 2,000 km). As found by Ridd et al. and confirmed in 2017, the left figure is based on incorrect measurements and is to be replaced by the right figure. Apart from being wrong, the scale used in the left figure is meant to deceive the reader. 133

P O L I T I C A L LY C O R R E C T B U T T O TA L LY U N I N F O R M E D 
 ESA EARTH OBSERVER IN CHIEF J O S E F A S C H E N B A C H E R AT E S A E S R I N , R O M E I N A E R O S PA C E A M E R I C A , A P R I L 2 0 1 7

Here I quote a colleague from ESA about his problem of CO2. He simply is parroting the politically correct statements you find in the German and Austrian media, that are, as we have seen from the previous slides NOT at all justified by any experimental or measured data. Of course, there is substantial pressure forwhatscientists publicly funded, especially if the CO is the number one priority. We are starting now studies to see exactly this could mean that in terms are of satellites, measurements, user requirements, which missions will befunding required. This is work which is ongoing now. There is an international task force which is looking into this. We actually have some U.S. and Japanese members on this task force, as well as Europeans, to source is the EU, not to alienate your patrons. However, there is a red line, when you have to really see what such a CO architecture could look like. compromise science. And this is exactly what happened here. 2

2

“CO2 is the number one priority. We are starting now studies to see exactly what this could mean in terms of satellites, measurements, user requirements, which missions will be required. This is work which is ongoing now. There is an international task force which is looking into this. We actually have some U.S. and Japanese members on this task force, as well as Europeans, to really see what such a CO2 architecture could look like. “ Interpreting all measured data up to now (May 2017) CO2 is not a priority at all from a climatic or environmental point of view. The major problem is the deforestation by the immensely growing population that is changing the local climate and ruins once fertile soil. Overgrazing by too much live stock is turing one fertile grassland into deserts. Here, data needs to be collected to inform the respective governments, but this appears to be politically incorrect. Civil Courage is not a 134 Germanic trademark.

Scientific Misconduct III

Dr. Bates, NOAA, reveals that the influential paper by T. Karl, NOAA, termed the pausebuster paper, is based on reconstructed (that is FALSE) data, with the result that sea water warming trend tripled against the actually measured data, 4 Feb 2017

The pausebuster paper by T. Karl et al. (ref. 21), NOAA, published in Science in 2015, just before the climate summit in Paris, that had a major impact on the (as usually ignorant politicians) WRONGLY states, while the rate of global warming from 1950 to 1999 was 0.113C per decade, the rate from 2000 to 2014 was actually higher, at 0.116C per decade. The IPCC’s claim about the pause, it concluded, is no longer valid. A segment that, as it turns out now, is baseless. Immediately the news media, e.g. BBC and politicians (acting as climate experts) claimed the measured halt in global warming since 1998 was an illusion caused by inaccurate data. The paper was also described as a science bomb dropped on sceptics. One of the foremost climate experts in the U.K., Prince Charles stated: There isn’t a pause… it is hard to reject the facts on the basis of the evidence — provided, of course, that measured temperature data are tampered appropriately to render the oceans sufficiently warm enough.

The Paris climate decisions were strongly influenced on the false claims by T. Karl et al. The sea dataset used by Thomas Karl and his colleagues – known as Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperatures version 4, or ERSSTv4, tripled the warming trend over the sea during the years 2000 to 2014 from just 0.036C per decade – as stated in version 3 – to 0.099C per decade, simply based on individual measurements in some parts of the Earth which increased by about 0.1C and consequently caused the dramatic increase of the overall global temperature trend published by this paper. But Dr. Bates, also from NOAA, said this increase in temperatures was achieved by dubious means. Its key error was an upward adjustment of readings from fixed and floating buoys, which are generally reliable, to bring them into line with readings from a much more doubtful source – water taken in by ships. This, Dr. Bates explained, has long been known to be highly questionable: ships are themselves sources of heat, readings will vary from ship to ship, and the depth of water intake will vary according to how heavily a ship is laden – thus affecting temperature readings.

The new U.S. administration (Feb. 2017) should rectify these false claims, taking the necessary measures to restore the lost scientific integrity of NASA and NOAA, and consider modifying/canceling the Paris climate agreement. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4192182/World-leaders-duped-manipulated-global-warmingdata.html#ixzz4Y1rebgM9

135

Scientific Misconduct III (contd.) Neither was the paper by T. Karl et al. subject to the usual NOAA review standard according to Dr. Bates. Moreover, in cooperation with editorial board of the journal Science , the paper was published just in time before the Paris climate summit in 2015, to serve as THE reference for the (as now evident) FALSE climate decisions by the heads of state present at this meeting. There is no doubt that this was another concerted action by certain politicians and pressure groups to deceive the public. This was not an error, but must be considered scientific fraud.

Despite this fact, the same false curves temperature curves, constructed by T. Karl and coauthors against outspoken warnings from other NOAA scientists, are reproduced in the French magazine Sciences et Avenir under the topic Climatoligie, February 2017 by L. Chauveau, under the provocative title: Le rechauffement climatique n’a pas fait une pause. Obviously, the article is meant to deceive French speaking readers, utilizing data known to be incorrect and proposing conclusions that are in opposition to the observed and measured temperature data. There seems to be an alliance of journals worldwide that are trying to misinform their readers about climate change by favoring a certain climate ideology in order to serve their clientele in politics and business, not hesitating to publish dubious data when necessary by compromising the peer review process. Remember also the infamous hockey stick curve of M. Mann, still a professor at Pennsylvania State Univ., that made headlines in the IPCC final report of 2001. In 2007, the false claims of the Himalaya glaciers meltdown made it into the final IPCC report; also, scientifically proved by Schellenhuber, still a professor at PIK in Germany. In 2009, climategate become known, that showed that a network of scientific institutions existed, responsible for the IPCC scientific coordination, with the outspoken goal to suppress unwanted scientific evidence, and, in particular, to hide the so called global temperature hiatus. Hence, it is no surprise that a team of NOAA scientists, led by T. Karl, in 2015, while this hiatus still existed (as it does today February 2017), published incorrect temperature data before the Paris climate summit took place, in order to scientifically prove the observations of a quasi constant global temperature since 1998 to be false. It is hard for me to believe that this high level fraud could be de done without the consent of the Obama administration, which, admittedly, is speculation from my side.

As a result, formerly respected institutions NASA and NOAA as well as numerous scientific journals now have a major credibility problem. But it is also clear that scientists have been dishonest. 136

COUNTERMEASURES

137

Guaranteed to be meaningless: UN treaties for the climate, but devastating to the western taxpayers whose money is transferred to foreign countries : On the 22nd of April 2016, representatives from about 170 nations officially signed the Paris Climate Convention (December 2015) for global decarbonization at the United Nations in New York. It simply is a document of the scientifically ignorant; ideology replaces measured data and scientific facts. Ineffectiveness is guaranteed!

From Paris-based Société de Calcul Mathématique SA - in a paper published September 2015 “There is not a single fact, figure...[or] observation that leads us to conclude the world’s climate is in any way ‘disturbed,” the paper states. “It is variable, as it has always been. ... Modern methods are far from being able to accurately measure the planet’s overall temperature even today, so measurements made 50 or 100 years ago are even less reliable.” 138

GREENING OF THE EARTH

139

Measured Plant Growth versus CO2 level up to 800 ppm

statement by Prof. Reichholf, Munich

warmer times are good times for humanity (ref.1)

confirmed more recently paper

by Liu + Liu + Liu 2010

140

GREENING EARTH FROM NASA 2015 The greening of the planet also serves as a counter-feedback mechanism for the additional CO2 , that is more leaves absorb more CO2. The benefit for mankind has been estimated to $3,000 billion according to Prof. T. Gervais, Univ. Troyes, France, refs. 17, 18. Idea of a greening Earth also: Shilong Piao of the College of Urban and Environmental Sciences at Peking University

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth 141

GREENING EARTH FROM NASA 2016

The biosphere is thriving: the composite image showing the global distribution of photosynthesis, including both oceanic phytoplankton and terrestrial vegetation. Dark red and bluegreen indicate regions of high photosynthetic activity both in the ocean and on land. copyright: NASA SEAWIFS

Last warning from Union of Concerned Scientists:

State of the Earth worse than we thought. Nature decided otherwise: biosphere is growing with CO2 increase

This warning is as baseless as the scientific nonsense published by so called scientists of the Club of Rome in the 1970s about the future of our planet. 142

Beneficial Effects of Global Warming Earth is growing greener while carbon dioxide increased from 0.03 % to 0.04 % since the beginning of the industrial era about 1880. Green foliage, plankton, nutritive plants, and crops yields have been increasing ever since. Biodiversity is highest in cities that are already 2 C higher than the surrounding area. 1. Environmental greening, ref. 17: because of rising CO2 content, global greening

occurs, e.g. the

Sahara has gained about 300,000 sqkm of green land.

2. More species, ref. 20 as well as the books by Prof. Reichholf: global experiment: urban heat island effect in megacities: 2 °C warmer: biodiversity is thriving! Warmer times are better for both flora and fauna. His credo: Cold times are bad times, whereas warm times are good times for humanity and the planet. 3. Record harvests, refs. 1 and 17: Plant efficiency increases with increasing CO2 level. etc. etc . see the discussion in the numerous publications by Prof. T. Gervais, e.g. refs 1, 17. 143

CONCLUSIONS OUTLOOK

144

Any countermeasures to curb CO2 emissions are totally useless! This is guaranteed! CO2 output will increase further! BRD promised 1% reduction, i.e., 8 million tons per year from 2005-2020

resulting change in T < 5 x 10-4 C (five tenthousandth !) NONSENSE! 1. Global temperature has risen MODERATELY from 1900 - 2016 by about 0.8 C plus/minus 0.1 C.

Based on measured data the my current best estimate (most probable value) is: 0.25-0.30 C may be anthropogenic 0.50-0.55 C is supposed to come from (natural) sources, that is, Sun’s activity (magnetic field, TSI, planets) + cosmic radiation, and also from ocean oscillations

Higher temperatures also have been observed on both Mars and one of the moons of Saturn. 2. CO2 level has risen from about 270 ppm and is now at 407 ppm (2017)-no effect The breathing humanity produces about 3 billion tons of CO2 per year, twice as much as all cars on Earth!

HUMANITY PERFORMED A MAJOR LONGTERM EXPERIMENT 1999-2016 about 550 billion tons of CO2 were released to the atmosphere: but

global T = constant !!! System Earth T did NOT respond to this amount of CO2 emission.

Hence the envisaged CO2 reductions 145 cannot have any measurable effect!

Climate and Society One topic was not discussed in detail, because it is not directly a scientific issue, namely the extremely adverse effects of the population dynamics on Earth, or the so called population explosion. There is substantial evidence that this phenomenon might be the most threatening issue, but as politics is involved, this delicate subject has not been discussed on a global scale like, for instance, within the Kyoto treaty. However, it might well be that, without stopping population increase, all efforts concerning climate and environmental protection might well prove to be completely futile. The second dangerous trend that we are facing on the global scale is the deforestation of large areas, in particular in South America, but also in India and Africa. There seems to the tendency to simply blame climate change for the adverse effects caused by local destruction of the environment. Moreover, it seems to be U.N. policy to hold developed countries accountable for these local effects. For instance, Brazil and other countries should receive about 110 billion Euros for stopping burning their forests and joining the fight of reducing carbon dioxide. Similar requirements come from many African governments. This gives a new twist to the climate discussion, since it simply becomes a means of huge transfers of money to the less developed nations. Given the fate of the well intended but ill-conceived developing aid, there is a high probability that this enormous amount of money will be wasted, creating a negative effect on the society of the receiving countries, apart from the fact that it also would be ruining the developed countries. 146

Sea Level Rise and Global Climate Change 3. Sea level rise (high sea) is about 2.5 - 3.3 mm per year or about 25-33 cm per 100 years and has been constant for more than 150 years. Field measurements see values < 1mm per year. Rise at coastlines most likely is smaller (about 10 cm) as moored buoys measurements are revealing, ref. 19. There is no observed increase in sea level because of anthropogenic CO2 . As was shown, the Fijis and Maldives are NOT going under. 4. Acidification of sea water does not occur, ph = 8.1 down from 8.18 — no effect. Even daily and seasonal variations are higher, apart form large spatial variations. Great Barrier Reef is not impacted by global warming, see corrections Prof. Ridd 2017, ref. 23.

5. No increase in hurricanes or tornados has been observed. 6. Instead, a decrease of the average wind speed over the Atlantic has been observed. 7. Glaciers lengths are shortening since 1850, and during medieval and Roman warm periods glaciers were virtually nonexistent. As of November 2017 there exist NO measured or observed long term data that can 147 justify the scenario of a global climate catastrophe! Quite the contrary, see next slides…

Mission Impossible: Unstoppable CO2 Level 2016: Breathing humanity alone now generates 3 billion or 3,000 million tons of CO2 / year. Compare this to the total CO2 emission of all cars on Earth which is about 1.5 billion tons/year or 1,500 million tons/year. Car emissions of CO2 are not important, but promise to be good business, ripping off automotive customers. In order to survive, every human generates about (minimum) 4 tons of CO2 /year, that is, the population increase since 1950 causes additional 22 billion or 22,000 million tons of CO2/year.

Each year: population explosion is adding 300 - 400 million tons /year of CO2 What does this mean for the CO2 output: UNSTOPPABLE

CO2

CO2 is NOT the climate killer but the life gas for planet Earth and for the whole Universe! As of 2017 western countries are only minor contributors to CO2 emissions. Developing countries are now emitting about 75% of worldwide anthropogenic CO2! 148

No to the Non Functioning Paris Treaty of 2015 The Paris treaty was signed by 195 countries, but is paid for only by a few, in particular by Germany. It is guaranteed to be useless to curb CO2 emission. Once again, the worst examples are the European politicians. The French president Macron, a former Rothschild banker, simply parroted the meaningless statements on climate change uttered by former U.S. president Obama, a lawyer. Other experts like Di Caprio and Al Gore, who made a fortune from climate certificates, are repeating their nonsensical warning of an imminent catastrophe together with politicized scientists. The Christian Church has fallen back to the times of Galileo, 17th century, and once again is interfering with science.

The Paris treaty, decided by irresponsible and misinformed politicians, demands the transfer of hundreds of billions of euros, to be paid by the Western taxpayer — in particular the German taxpayer — to those countries that are actually the cause of current overpopulation with dire consequences for their local environment. In particular, these are the Muslim countries, Africa, and India, whereas China implemented a population control program. It can be done! It is not CO2 , but overpopulation that eventually may ruin our planet. Because of the political correctness of Western politicians this problem is not addressed except

U.S. president Donald Trump who is correct to say NO to this Paris accord! 149

C L I M AT E A L A R M S

There are now thousands of climate scientists employed whatever this may mean), because during the last two decades funding multiplied. These people are paid by their governments or are working in universities. Each research center requires a research plan for the planned near term scientific activities. In order to get tenure or funding it is therefore essential that your research plan impresses your peers and superiors, and that the significance of your research is convincingly demonstrated. This can be achieved only if you sound an alarm about novel anomalous phenomena or, at least, a major concern must be raised to justify the need for additional research. Consequently, all major professional associations are issuing comprehensive reports with dozens or hundreds of authors trying to convince the reader about the severity of the anthropogenic climate problem. However, as we have shown there are no global data with regard to temperature or sea level rise that could support any of these claims. Even the notorious IPC had to revise their exaggerated numbers in each new report. Disappearing populations of polar bears and wolves proved to be entirely fictitious. The acidification of the oceans is totally preposterous. The bleaching of the coral reef is definitely not a new phenomenon, the many local environmental disasters must be attributed to mismanagement by the local population and overpopulation etc. It is, of course, difficult for scientists and engineers working in the field of climate science (in a very broad sense) to justify their existence, as I know well from own personal experience. In particular, for the large number of younger scientists employed at universities striving to get tenure or at least a tenure track position is a major challenge. Hence, though this behavior is understandable, it is, nevertheless, nonscientific. A good (or maybe bad) example is the recent report by the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 98, No. 12, supplement 2017 with the title EXPLAINING EXTREME EVENTS OF 2016 From A Climate Perspective, where the latter part of the title clearly is meant to ensure funding. 150

C L I M AT E V A R I A B I LT Y 2 0 0 0 - 2 0 1 6 These two recent article explain the physics behind the hiatus in the global temperature and proves that global simulation models are not correct.

Nicola Scaffeta et al: Natural climate variability, part 1: Observations versus the modeled predictions, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND TECHNOLOGY ISSN: 0392-8764, Vol. 35, Special Issue 1, September 2017, pp. S9-S17. Nicola Scaffeta et al: Natural climate variability, part 2: Interpretation of the post 2000 temperature standstill, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND TECHNOLOGY ISSN: 0392-8764, Vol. 35, Special Issue 1, September 2017, pp. S9-S17.

151

A REAL C ATA S T R O P H E

152

World Population Explosion:The Real Danger 1950: 2.5 Billion or 2,556 million people on Earth (U.S: Census Bureau): 1950: 550 million Chinese, 1947 350 million Indians, 1950 Africa 254 million, 1950 Pakistan 39 million

2016: 7.5 Billion or 7,500 million people on Earth: + 80-90 million more in 2017 Main source of population growth: 2016: 1,415 million Chinese, 1,280 million Indians, Africa 1,234 million, 197 million Pakistan (muslim countries 1,700 million), western countries NO increase (notation: 1,700 means seventeen hundred)

About 80 - 90 million additional people per year, from Africa about 30 million/year. It is not poverty, but poverty is the result

In 15 years, Africa alone produces the population of all European countries! 153

World Population Explosion (some very dire ) Consequences: lack of drinking water The population growth of 5.0 billion people since the 1950s causes (as of 2017) causes the additional emission of approximately (at least) 20 billion tons of CO2 per year, the yearly population growth on Earth by far exceeds all possible CO2 savings, it puts an enormous pressure on the land and changes the local climate that, in turn, must have an effect on global climate change, but instead CO2 increase is used for unsubstantiated claims to be recompensed by the industrial countries, it also destroys the local flora and fauna, exhausts drinking water (deeper wells), and causes large scale erosion of the farmland etc. etc.

Because of political correctness these severe problems are not

addressed! Across Africa, fires typically burn an area about half the size of the continental United States every year, said Niels Andela, a research scientist at Goddard and lead author of a paper. In traditional savanna cultures with common lands, people often set fires to keep grazing lands productive and free of shrubs. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/nasa-detects-drop-in-global-fires 154

REFERENCES

155

Books and articles that are not right - they are not even wrong As the first example a book is presented, that, strange enough, was published by the well respected John Hopkins University Press. The author begins as follows: The Carbon Code How You Can Become a Climate Change Hero by BRETT FAVARO, April 2017 Our world is getting hotter, and it’s our fault. The title alone and the claim that the world gets hotter (remember 0.8 K pm 0.1 K global temperature increase during the period from 1900-2016 and no global temperature increase since the year 2000 in spite of 550 billion tons of CO2) because we are there are totally unqualified statements, demonstrating the pseudo-scientific approach by this biologist - who obviously turned into a thoughtless political activist. Numerous other journalists and book writers are following a similar approach: presenting statements that are considered (presently) politically correct, but are unsubstantiated by any scientific facts, that is, they couldn’t care less. Most likely the aim is to increase circulation, but at the cost of scientific truth. The reader is presented with ideology instead of verifiable scientific facts. The 20th century, unfortunately, was the century of ideology with most dramatic results — as we all remember. There must be no place for any ideology (neither political nor religious!) in this century. Away with it !!!

156

As a second example, showing how the major daily newspapers in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe) are working, I cite from an article published in the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in March 2017 A so-called journalist started his article on climate change as follows: How do I tell my kid about climate skeptics who are a minority, but unfortunately still are being heard — obviously we are back to the thinking of the late1930s. In the article the culprit was the mining of soft coal in Germany that was considered a climate killer. An accompanying picture showed enormous clouds of white smoke in order to underline the pollution extent of this energy source.

This is journalism at its worst: First, the author implies that people who are supporting this kind of

energy are more or less criminals. Second, because maximizing their own profit, they are willing to ruin the future of our kids. Moreover, being a small minority, they are ruthlessly implementing their business model, against the will of the overwhelming majority. Third, the picture implies that these people are accepting major pollution — however, and here the stupidity of the author becomes obvious, the smokestacks turn out to be cooling towers and the clouds are comprised of water vapor (a similar picture appeared in the NYT). The article presents accusations instead of scientific facts. This is not a single case: the German newspaper Welt has equally lowered its journalistic standard. Most of the newspapers apply a strict censorship on their readers comments or, if too many negative comments are received, the web site is simply shut down or disabled for a certain period of time.

Censorship and fake news are ubiquitous in the German and many European media these days.

It is necessary to stand up and fight this detrimental attitude.

Note: Publications from people involved in the Climategate affair and activities such as data tampering, mobbing scientists of different opinions, pressuring PhD students etc. are not cited, because these people are not scientists anymore, that is, they fall in the category of Deutsche Klimaphysik. Al Gore is not worthy to be noted. His film An Inconvenient Truth simply is the convenient lie of a failed politician. He and his Hollywood pals do no neither care about scientific truth, nor are they interested in facts. Their entirely fictitious claims are only meant to create fear by misleading the public, and to subsequently cash in on the resulting climate business, i.e., harvesting the taxpayer’s money. Al Gore’s recent An Inconvenient Sequel is just a continuation — the truth content is exactly zero.

Also, beware of the presentations in the public media. For instance, Bill Nye of CNN, claims to be a science guy. He is not, his science facts often are incorrect or distorted by bias. Same: Germany’s mainstream press! See also the earlier slides citing the statements of Dr. E. Zorita, Institute of Costal Science, HFG, D and Prof. J. Curry, Georgia Tech., U.S.A. Most prominent victims that were mobbed are Prof. N. Shaviv, Israel, Prof. J. Veizer, former Univ. of Bochum (now Univ. of Ottawa), and, in particular, Prof. H. Svensmark, DK. Most recently Prof. Kirstein, Univ. of Leipzig, D became a victim. However, there are many more cases. This is only very small list of the extreme number of climate publications (no climategate publications). 1. A. B. Robinson, Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide, Oregon Inst, of Science and Medicine, 2007. Ten years later, in 2016, the beneficial effects of CO2 on worldwide plant growth were confirmed by NASA. 2. Assessment Report: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA) 2011, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment; 3. Programme (AMAP) relationship between accumulation and temperature in West Antarctica for the T. J. Fudge et al., Geophysical Research Letters, 28 April 2016

past 31,000 years, by

4. Scientific American: is deteriorating fast toward Unscientifc American and cannot be recommended for climate articles.

158

Recommended literature: 5. Wikipedia does not seem to be a reliable scientific source anymore with regard to Climate Change, because it is dominated by climate activists. For instance, I checked the entry about the polish scientist, Dr. Z. Jaworowski, an outspoken opponent of what he called the global warming fraud. Wikipedia lists him as a physician (medical doctor) and thus conveys the impression of an amateur doing science. However, he held three advanced degrees, Doctor of Medicine, a Ph.D., and Doctor of Science in the natural sciences, and was a specialist on measuring CO2 concentrations all over the world, the Arctic, Antarctic, Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas, the Ruwenzori Mountains in Uganda, and the Peruvian Andes for about 20 years. Dr. Jaworowski was a member of the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) from 1973 to 2010 etc. His criticism on the correctness of the ice core samples is portrayed as totally outlandish, rejected by the scientific community. The opposite is true. First, ice core samples are averages over about1,000 years, hence CO2 peaks with respect to climate cycles of several hundred years or less remain invisible. Second, as shown on slide 53, CO2 concentrates from ice cores contradict concentrations obtained from plant pollen that are substantially higher and also show a high variability. Meanwhile, Dr. Jaworowski’s objections were validated and the reasons are known for these discrepancies. Global warming issues on Wikipedia have very low credibility, because climate activists have taken over, presenting a melange of half truths, in order to fit a certain ideology. 6. Lüdecke, H.-J: CO2 und Klimaschutz, Bouvier, Bonn, 2010 (highly recommended). 7. Muller, R. A.: Energy for FuturePresidents, W. W. Norton, 2012. 8. Lüdecke, H.-J: Energie und Klima, expert verlag, 2016 (highly recommended). 9. Website Dr. R. Spencer, UAH. 10. Scaffetta, N., B. West: Physics Today, 2009 and many other papers. 11. Scaffetta, N., A. Mazzarella: Coherence between climate oscillations and the M ‡ 7 earthquake historical worldwide record between climate oscillations and the M ‡ 7 earthquake historical worldwide record , J. Natural Hazards, Springer 2015, 76:1807–1829. 12. Yndestada,H., J.-E. Solheim: Influence of solar system oscillation on the variability of the total solar irradiance, New Astronomy, Volume 51, February 2017, Elsevier. 13. EIKE for German and English speaking people provides a comprehensive list of topics with many links. 14. The blog by N. Shaviv http://www.sciencebits.com/ contains most valuable information, containing many explanations on the Sun’s impact on the climate on Earth.

159

Recommended literature: 15. G. Shaviv, N. J. Shaviv and R. Wehrse: Doubling the CO2 cools or heats? S.A.It. Vol. 81, 494 c SAIt 2010. 16. Website of Prof. Ole Homlum, Norway: climate4you.com, contains an enormous amount of climate information about a large number of topics and provides explanations. 17. Gervais, F.: Tiny warming of residual anthropogenic CO2, International Journal of Modern Physics B, Volume 28, Issue 13, 20 May 2014. 18. Gervais, F.: Tiny CO2 warming challenged by Earth greening, Scholar’s Press, 2016, (see also his book from 2013 in French at Amazon.fr). 19. Carter, M. et al.: Commentary and Analysis on the Whitehead & Associates 2014 NSW Sea-Level Report, NIPCC, Sept 2014 20. Idso, C. D. et al: CO2, Global Warming and Species Extinctions: Prospects for the Future, 2009 (see amazon.com).

160

Shown below is a very bad example of misusing data to obtain a politically convenient result or, how to produce a convenient lie, produced by Dr. Karl, NOAA:

21. Karl, T. et al: Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus, Science, June 2015.

The paper was written to influence the policy makers at the 2015 Paris climate summit. As the measured data could not be used to substantiate the claims of the authors they had to be adjusted — a euphemism for an unscientific and improper practice. Consequently, as was recently found (Dr. Bates, see slide in text), the data cited in this paper were starkly manipulated, and so the authors results are baseless! Another sign of political science and improper journal practice!! for further details check for Dr. Bates, NOAA.

The same misinformation policy of the public under the guidance of and financial help with the German government took place in the media before the November 2017 climate UN conference held in Bonn. 161

22. website: www.realclimate.org: claims to have real climate science, but this is NOT the case. They refer to an old paper of 2012. This paper, erroneously, uses the number of sun spots as a proxy for the impact of the solar magnetic field on the climate of the Earth (see the two slides depicting the closed magnetic field lines for sun spots). Of course, no sufficient correlation could be detected.

Instead, the Be 10 concentration has to be correlated with website also does not report on the CLOUD experimental incorrectly claims that there is no impact on low level cloud This website also shows a completely wrong picture about the temperature, contradicting observations.

the global temperature. This data published in 2016 and cover from cosmic radiation. correlation of CO2 and global

Real climate science is different, and hence, this site is not a reliable scientific source.

162

2 3 . M O S T R E C E N T F A C T S O N C L I M AT E CHANGE WRITTEN BY 18 AUTHORS

163

VIDEOS

164

Climate Videos There is an enormous number of videos on youtube and elsewhere on climate change. Here I have selected five videos that I found to be eyeopeners 1. Houghton, Sir John (former long-term IPCC Chairman): The Current State of Climate Change, uploaded by Cambridge Univ. Press. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlWs_mzFRkw. The author is a well known scientist and textbook author (Cambridge Univ. Press). As Sir John is an influential figure in climate change policy, being responsible for the IPCC summary report written for decision makers, I carefully analyzed his talk.

My summary is given below:

Listening to his one hour presentation, I found, surprisingly, numerous incorrect graphs and misleading statements: For instance, the claim that computer models and measured data are in good agreement is totally unfounded. The opposite is true (see the respective slide in this presentation). Next, the claim that CO2 is the most important greenhouse gas is not correct. Water vapor (see video 6 by Prof. Easterbrook) is much more important. Therefore, all climate models have a built in feedback mechanism, i.e.,more CO2 causes more H2O. This, however, is contrary to observations. In addition, the picture presenting the CO2 history is, at best, misleading, because it shows CO2 to be constant for thousands of years — which is incorrect, see the respective slides in this presentation, and for the last hundred years a hockey stick like CO2 curve is shown, depicting the increase by industrial activity, as if CO2 were a major part of the Earth atmosphere. This is completely misleading, because we are talking about a minute increase from 0.0273 % to 0.0407 % . As Prof. Easterbrook (video 6) states: doubling 0 still gives 0, that is, going from 300 to 400 molecules of CO2 for 1,000,000 molecules of the atmosphere only can have a very small effect on global temperature. Furthermore, the author, while talking about CO2, is presenting a picture of cooling towers emitting large white clouds — but CO2 is an invisible gas. The picture is showing (harmless) water vapor, but not CO2. A further picture shows the temperature increase since 1950 for the northern hemisphere mostly in yellow and red, intended to trigger a false alarm, as if the relatively small global temperature increase of 0.8 K pm 0.1 K since 1900 would indicate a severe danger for our planet. Though the talk was presented on 29 July 2015, the temperature picture only shows the period between 1950 and 2000, not mentioning the hiatus of the global temperature since 1999 up to today, Feb. 2017. Another picture shows the sea ice cover in the arctic, comparing the sea ice extent of the years 2000 and 2012. As is immediately obvious from the slide of the east siberian sea ice extent (credit WattsUp), the author is comparing the recent maximum sea ice extent of the year 2000 with the minimum of the sea ice extent over the last 20 years that is of 2012. He deliberately did not choose the year 2015 (which is a local maxium). If instead, the comparison would have been made between the years 1990 and 2016 (see the respective slide in this presentation), the situation would be entirely reversed. Also, as we have seen the sea ice extent in the arctic was lower in 1769 than in 2015 (cf. slides Prof. Solheim), but this was not mentioned by the author. Sea ice is very dynamic , e.g. moving 500 km north-south in only 20 years and follows TSI (cf. Prof. Solheim) that also was not mentioned by Sir John. 165

contnd. evaluation of the talk by : Houghton, Sir John (former IPCC Chairman): The Current State of Climate Change.

Moreover, in the talk a map of the temperature distribution of the planet for the year 2050 is shown and almost all of the globe is red, showing severe global warming — based on computer modeling. The catastrophe is coming out of the computer. At the same time the author is citing the accuracy of the satellites. The measurements of Dr. R. Spencer (see the respective slides in this presentation) tell a completely different story. Climate models did not predict that global temperature would remain constant for more than 18 years, since 1999, which is almost as long as the warming period from 1976 to 1998. As the talk was presented in 2015, the author must have known this fact. Moreover, since 2001, the IPCC was forced to continuously lower its temperature predictions in each IPCC summary report, despite the claimed model prediction capability, at least as believed by Sir John. Land temperatures, so Sir John, will go up by 4 K. Nothing could be farther from the observed reality. The consequence would be a strong rising sea level. As we have shown by presenting several slides, no change in the sea level rise has been observed for decades. Again his catastrophic predictions come out of the computer without any empirical basis. As we have seen sea level rise will be about 30 cm per century, which will hardly be noticeable for us. Next, the coming plague of heat waves is mentioned — again, without data. This is entirely fictitious, just look again, for instance, at the long term temperature slide for Germany, due to Prof. H. von Storch. Sir John also cites that the death of about 20,000 people in Europe in 2003 owing to such a heat wave — this is a fake number. Heat waves (whatever the definition may be) are part of the summer weather and are known for hundreds of years. And then the melting of the ice caps is cited (that is, the author refers to the Antarctic, because there is no shelf ice at the North pole). As we have seen from the measured data presented in this talk this is clearly not the case. See also the statements by Prof. Easterbrook in video 6. Interesting enough, there are no data presented by Sir John that could substantiate his claims. Finally he predicts that part of the UK will vanish. The next doomsday prediction is that 10 million people in Bangladesh will be threatened by the rising sea level. Actually the coast of Bangladesh is not disappearing, but growing. Not enough, hundreds of millions of refugees will be created. It is most astonishing to see these accusations being presented without scientific basis by the long term IPCC chairman. Obviously, this is the style of the political arm of the IPCC — creating fear. IPCC credibility is zero. Different, of course, are the actual scientific reports by the large number of serious scientists in the various IPCC working groups, whose scientific results are only considered if politically correct. See the open letter (slide) by Dr. Zorita, Institute of 166 Coastal Research, HZG.

Houghton, Sir John (final) : The talk then continues with lengthy polemics against the so called skeptics that are paid by big oil or by fossil companies. The talk continues to cite the existence of increased water vapor levels in the atmosphere that changes cloud cover, which will result in catastrophic modifications of worldwide rainfall patterns. Fact is, that this increase of water vapor has not been measured. As a consequence, millions of species will be killed. This statement has nothing to do with reality. Again and and again the strong correlation between temperature and CO2 is cited by Sir John. However, looking at the actual temperature curves and the CO2 distribution for the last 150 years (see the slides in this presentation) it is clear that there is no correlation between these two quantities at all. It is (un)usual to see such a distorted scientific picture presented by a former IPCC chairman. For me, it is highly remarkable to see a scientist turned prophet, preaching that we, the humans, are destroying our planet and will be punished for our sins by the great flood, once again — if we do not repent immediately. IPCC as a religious sect or business entity? Remember Prof. Bolz, TU Berlin on climate change as a replacement for religion? Then, Sir John suggests to take costly measures against global warming, immediately, to curb CO2 emissions, which, as we discussed, are guaranteed to be totally ineffective, but may ruin the economy of the western countries. His appeal for solar energy is at best naive. His description of the features of electric cars is far removed from the current state of technology. The next unreasonable suggestion is to base the UK economy on tidal energy and wind energy, fantasizing about the upcoming energy revolution. I demonstrated (see the respective slides) that solar and wind energy miserably failed in the winter of 2016 in Germany, and will continue to do so. These are niche technologies. The presentation is finished claiming the (nonexistent) scientific consensus about the cause of climate change and that we will kill our children and grandchildren. Finally, there is a statement of the dangerous gases from cattle. Statements that are both irresponsible and unscientific. The ensuing nonsensical discussion (in particular on vegetarism — I am one —) of his talk is not what one expects to see at Cambridge University, where this talk was given.

This talk is embarrassing — lacking real science data. In conclusion, it is a sobering lesson to see how far the IPCC political body is removed from reality and how scientific facts are twisted, ignoring measured data, but, instead relying on computer models for their doomsday predictions without presenting any shred of empirical evidence to support their claims. It is to be hoped that the new US administration steers a much more realistic course, no longer supporting the activities of the IPCC, that eventually should be dissolved, because it has done more harm than good. Nevertheless, the excellent scientific work from many of the contributing institutions should continue.

2. Bolz, N., TU Berlin: Climate Change and Religion, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG6_eXqgbqo&t=20s (in German, but the pictures speak are clear language), commenting the propaganda movie of the IPCC produced that was shown at the opening of the Copenhagen climate meeting: A child is crying : please help the world, creating tremendous fear: western countries are destroying our planet and killing our children. 3. Patzelt, G., Prof. Univ. Innsbruck, Austria: Gletscher- und Waldentwicklung in Alpinen Hochlagen in den letzten 10,000 Jahren (in German), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glplSyZM7uE, some of the diagrams are in English. The Alps were ice free in the medieval warm periods.

4. Reichholf, J.H., Munich, biologist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEgDntk1svU (in German), there are many youtube videos and books by Prof. Reichholf. Discussion of the impact of climate change on species variety, denouncing claims as baseless that species will be extinguished by temperatures changes in the range of a few tenth of a degree as experienced over the last hundred years. 5. Easterbrook, D., Prof., geologist: Climate presentation before the US Senate, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w98S2xs-qs4 (in English). Lucid and easy to follow. 6. The movie Climate Hustle (2016) can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ekNjKQl5-2c. It presents numerous interviews with leading scientists, a large number of them former IPCC lead authors. In addition, the catastrophe statements regarding the role of CO2, sea level rise, hurricane and tornado frequency, sea ice extent etc. by Gore, Hansen, Mann et al. are shown to be scientifically unsubstantiated — baseless. 168

Prof. Axel-Nils Mörner is an internationally renowned authority on climate change and sea level rise and was the former IPCC lead author for this topic. He became a critic of the IPCC when he saw the discrepancy between scientific facts and IPCC policy. 7. Mörner N-A, Matlack Klein P (2017) The Fiji New Sea Level Project. Posted on ResearchGate March 22, 2017. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315490083 8. Mörner N-A, Matlack Klein P (2017) The Fiji tide-gauge stations. Interna,onal Journal of Geoscience, 8: 536-544.

9. Mörner N-A (2017) Coastal morphology and sea level changes in Goa, India, during the last 500 years. Journal of Coastal Research, 33: 421-434. 10. Mörner N-A (2017) Our Oceans – Our Future: New evidence-based records from the Fiji Islands for the last 500 years indicating rotational eustasy and absence of a present rise in sea level. Interna,onal Journal of Earth & Environmental Sciences, 2: 137. https://doi.org/10.15344/2456-351X/2017/137.

169