Mathematical Proof: IPCC’s Computer Models Wrongly Programmed, No Climate Crisis


UPDATE: 50,000 physicists of the American Physical Society deny global warming! (Note: Argument going on in the society on what their stance really is.) NASA scientist backs up Monckton, APS members warned not to debate global warming.

Einstein proved his Theory of Relativity with mathematics long before actual experiments were carried out to verify its truth. Similarly, various advanced physics concepts such as black holes, quantum mechanics and string theory are all proved by pure mathematical solving.

Now, despite being stubbornly obtuse to exposure of blatant lies, plain to see mistakes and murder of common sense, global warming hysterians have finally been refuted by that most logical and undebatable of sciences.

Via Moonbattery, from Science & Public Policy Institute:

———————————

WASHINGTON (7-15-08.) — Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 10,000-strong American Physical Society, SPPI reports.

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered demonstrates that later this century a doubling of the concentration of CO2 compared with pre-industrial levels will increase global mean surface temperature not by the 6 °F predicted by the IPCC but, harmlessly, by little more than 1 °F.

• The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000 %

• CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100

• Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly

• The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500

• The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated

• “Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years

• Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling

• The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%

• It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible

• Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed

• In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years

——————————————

Full PDF available by clicking this link.

See this post for an illustration of what climate change psychotic alarmists blame for those tens of thousands of years of temperature fluctuations.

It took long enough – the global warming hoaxers may finally be exposed as the very same un-scientific, paid-off, biased charlatans they’ve always accused us skeptics of being.

But if 32,000 scientists disputing global warming still don’t count as ‘no consensus on global warming’ to the misleading and dishonest IPCC, I wonder if another 10,000 accredited physicists will make any difference against the Infallible Grand Inquisition of Global Warming.


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

9 Responses to “Mathematical Proof: IPCC’s Computer Models Wrongly Programmed, No Climate Crisis”

  1. HoosierArmyMom Says:

    Scott, I stole some of this post, giving you and Van credit of course. I will also be posting on Mac Thornberry’s legislation called “No More Excuses” this evening. He’s a Congressman from Texas who needs everyone’s support.
    Thanks for tracking me to this. I simply have had no time to do much blogging this week and this just “adds more the pile” of evidence I have blogged on previously. Simply marvelous dude! 🙂 I also added a tease and link to Van’s post on T. Boone Pickens aka T. Boone Pickpocket! Hope you don’t get any of my nasty trolls coming here, but I will warn you in advance, I do have some really crappy ones.

  2. Scott Thong Says:

    Oh yeah, trolls man… Mm-mmm, long time since my Blade of Argumentation last tasted their rotting, putrid flesh and spilled their ignorant blood for comment aftr comment…

  3. bow Says:

    Global warming has been blown out of proportion to suit certain political agenda. it shouldn’t be a political issue in the first place, let alone been exaggerated to a point where every natural disaster happen in the world today is blamed on carbon emmision caused global warming. It is a way to simplify a very complex global climate pattern changes into a simple explaination.

  4. bow Says:

    correction – Global warming caused by carbon emmission.

  5. jeff Says:

    Since when Al Gore become climate expert or scientist to talked n wrote conclusively about the root cause of global climate changing pattern? Much of it are not proven scientifically and “global warming” is a convenient term to name a few degree of temperature hike in a century without further scientific research and study.

  6. hutchrun Says:

    “Livestock’s Long Shadow” estimates that livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of carbon dioxide, 65 percent of nitrous oxide, and 37 percent of methane produced from human-related activities. Both methane (23 times) and nitrous oxide (296 times) are considerably more potent greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide. Livestock also generates 64 percent of human-related ammonia, which contributes to acid rain.
    http://news.mongabay.com/2006/1130-un.html

    Looking at Al Gore`s size, he alone contributes the equivalent of 2.5 cows.

  7. dennis ward Says:

    It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible

    If Scott can’t even understand the difference between climate and weather then there is no point in taking the rest of his blog seriously.

  8. Bobby Hawk Says:

    What most people are not aware of is that global warming or “climate change” is based on Karl Marx theory of metabolic rift. The actual name is biospheric rift. Karl Marx has been proven wrong multiple times concerning this theory and those who support the silly notion of biospheric rift have been proven wrong as well.
    Don’t misunderstand me, I think controlling our environment to a point is a noble cause and one certainly assigned by the God of Israel. However those of the theory of biospheric rift have stepped to far over the line in their supposition and application of theory.

    Before we commit any real assets to solving a problem, there should be repeatable, measurable, irrefutable evidence, as to its causation. We just don’t have that type of evidence for the claims of global warming, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Biospheric rift remains a theory and should be treated as such adequately proven.

  9. Adifferentview Says:

    I wonder whether I understand the difference between climate and weather. You could perhaps explain, dennis ward?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: