IPCC MODEL IS FLAWED
by Brian Bloom
beyondneanderthal.com
October 17, 2007

In the past week, the following occurred:

• Al Gore and the IPCC were awarded the Nobel Prize �for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change.�

• A High Court judge in the UK highlighted "nine scientific errors" in Al Gore's documentary.

• Doug Bancroft, director of the Canadian Ice Service, made the following statement: "If you look at what happened in the last three years, it closely resembles the absolutely worst-case scenario, but about 20, 25 years ahead of schedule," He was referring to models created by international teams of scientists to predict the impact of global warming on the north. They had forecast the Arctic could be free of summer ice as early as 2050.

There is no question that Mr. Gore�s efforts have alerted the world to the existence of Climate Change. There is also increasing evidence to support the conclusion that Climate Change is not �man-made�, and that the IPCC computer model is flawed � just as Professor Edward Wegman of George Mason University said it was. (See bio at http://www.galaxy.gmu.edu/stats/faculty/wegman.html

By a simple application of common sense: If the IPCC computer model on global warming (which links CO₂ to Global Warming, and treats CO₂ as the independent causation variable) was accurate, then the �worst case� scenario that it was forecasting to occur in 2032 would have occurred in 2032. The hard fact is that the model got it wrong by 25 years.

This is not a �trivial� mistake. It is a mistake that is so serious that it challenges the credibility of the model at its very core.

The most significant flaw in the logic of the climate scientists, as far as this layman has been able to ascertain, is that the importance of water vapour as a greenhouse gas has been seriously underestimated. There is no question now that the world's atmosphere is more humid than it was (say) 30 years ago. However, whilst the scientists have determined �before and after� levels of other atmospheric components (see table below reproduced from the Sydney Sun Herald Newspaper, on Sunday July 15, 2007.) they have failed to focus on the water vapour levels until very recently.

Measurement of Gases in 1770 and 1990
	1770	1990
Halocarbons	0ppm	0.28ppm
Methane	800 ppm	1700 ppm
Carbon Dioxide	280 ppm	350 ppm
Nitrous Oxide	285 ppm	310 ppm

Glaringly absent from this table are the �before and after� numbers relating to atmospheric humidity � i.e. Water vapour. It happens that water vapour is a far more potent a Greenhouse Gas than CO₂. (Something like two to three times as potent)

Climatologists now appear to be arguing that the increase in water vapour in our atmosphere over the past couple of decades was the result of rising CO₂ levels. In layman�s language, the warming atmosphere, warmed by rising CO₂ levels, warmed the oceans and caused the ocean�s surfaces to evaporate at a faster rate.

For the sake of discussion, let's ignore the fact that we don't seem to have any idea what the water vapour levels in the Earth�s atmosphere were in the year 1770. Let�s just focus on the past 20-30 years where we can agree that the level of water vapour has increased. What really caused this to happen?

It needs to be borne in mind that a given volume of sea water requires 3,512 X as much heat energy to be warmed by one degree Celsius, than is required to warm the same volume of air by the same amount. To argue that the warming ambient temperature of our atmosphere caused our oceans to evaporate is nothing short of facile.

Furthermore, under normal circumstances, increased humidity in the atmosphere would give rise to increased precipitation. There would be higher levels of rainfall.

But the rainfall has not been increasing, as can be seen from the following quote from a report published on October 11^th 2007:

The latest U.S. Drought Monitor survey released today shows the drought is getting worse. Basically, the eastern half of Alabama remains under the worst drought conditions on the scale -- that's approximately 58 percent of the state under D-4 condition. All the state is under D-1 status or worse.

61 percent of Tennessee is under D-4 or exceptional condition. In Georgia, 27 percent of that state is under the worse category. Other states under D-4 classification includes parts of Kentucky, North and South Carolina and Virginia. (Source: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/14320447/detail.html)

As far as this layman has been able to ascertain, the reason that the higher levels of humidity have not given rise to higher levels of precipitation (rainfall) is that the formation of cloud cover has been inhibited by increased solar flare activity. This increase in sunspot activity has had a twofold impact:

1. It has heated the earth�s surface (which heating has been exacerbated � as opposed to �caused� - by greenhouse gases) and has added to the rate at which our oceans have been evaporating at their surfaces
2. The increased level of sunspot activity has blocked the arrival of cosmic irradiation of specific wavelengths to the Earth�s outer atmosphere. This cosmic irradiation is required to give rise to cloud formation. Its absence has inhibited cloud formation. (This explanation is my understanding of the work of Henrik Svensmark � see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrik_Svensmark )

Conclusions

• Both CO2 levels and Water Vapour are Greenhouse Gases
• The ultimate cause of Global Warming has been increased sunspot activity
• This warming has been exacerbated by, amongst other things, raised levels of greenhouse gases. (Note: It appears to have been further exacerbated by the increasing albedo effect, as the reflective ice surfaces have been shrinking)
• Raised levels of greenhouse gases have not been the cause of global warming.

Discussion

Why is this level of pedantry so important? If our climate is warming then it’s warming. So what?

The answer lies in our reaction to the cause of global warming. If the cause of global warming is the fact that sunspot activity has been on the rise, then this begs the questions, �Why?� and �What might we do about it?�. Further, will this raised level of sunspot activity continue unabated, or will it wane over time? If it wanes over time, what will be the impact of this waning?

The work of Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov needs to be taken very seriously. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khabibullo_Abdusamatov ).The work of the National Centre for Atmospheric Research needs to be taken very seriously. Both conclude that the unusual sunspot activity will continue unabated until 2012, following which it will begin to abate.

Abdusamatov believes that we are headed for a mini Ice Age similar to the Little Ice Age of the Middle Ages.

Overall Conclusion

If Abdusamatov is correct then it is becoming critically important to humanity�s survival that we become less dependent on fossil fuels. Apart from the fact that demand for heating will rise exponentially � thereby placing extraordinary demands on the overhead power line grid structure � the likelihood that these power grids will become dysfunctional will be extraordinarily high, if ambient temperatures fall by up to 10 degrees C.

The reader�s attention is drawn to the attached Internet Activity map, which demonstrates visually that 88% - 90% of the world's population is located between 30 degrees and 60 degrees N latitude. If overhead power grids become dysfunctional in the Northern Hemisphere, 88% - 90% of the world's population will be at high risk.

http://www.flapdoodle.org/chrish/worlddotblack.jpg

© 2007 Brian Bloom
Bio & Book Information | Editorial Archive

Alternative energy technologies do exist that will facilitate production of energy at point of consumption. It happens that, as a bonus, embracing these technologies will likely result in up to 25% reduction of CO₂ levels within a decade.

The technologies are discussed in detail in my forthcoming novel, Beyond Neanderthal. These technologies need to be commercialized as a matter of priority, and one of the primary purposes of the novel is to bring them to the world's attention � in an impartial manner and in context.

The primary reason they have not yet been embraced seems to be the existence of a phenomenon which might be labeled �Not Invented Here�. Most people have never heard of them, therefore there must be something wrong with them. Another reason relates to political cronyism and the fact that this cronyism is favoring certain technologies above others. In my judgment, to discuss them out of context will have the effect of trivializing them.

It is my view that we do not have the luxury of taking such a cavalier attitude to such an important subject.

Contact Information
Brian Bloom
Beyond Neanderthal
Sydney, NSW, Australia
Email | Website