CLIMATE HOAX DEBUNKED: Study finds 87% of anthropogenic global warming can be attributed to artificial urban heat and solar activity
A recent study, conducted by 37 scientists and published in the journal Climate, concluded that almost 100 percent of the alleged human activity-related anthropogenic links to climate change can be removed by simply exchanging and/or replacing biased temperature and solar activity data sets.
As per the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “6th Assessment Report” (AR6), much of modern global warming is “overwhelmingly due to human influence,” in particular the increasing concentration of greenhouse gases,” and “simulations that include only natural process, including internal variability related to El Nino and other similar variations, as well as variations in the activity of the sun and emissions from large volcanoes are not able to reproduce the observed warming.”
The body of the world’s leading climate scientists’ recent report also stated that “global surface temperature has increased by 1.09 90.95 to 1.200 degrees Celsius from 1850–1900 to 2011–2020”, and that “the likely range of human-induced warming in global surface temperature is 1.07 90.8 to 1.30 degrees Celsius, encompassing the observed warming, while the change attributable to natural forcing is only –0.1 degree Celsius to +0.1 degrees Celsius.”
AR6’s attribution statement on the causes of global warming was mainly based on a comparison of observed global temperature estimates to modeled retrospective “forecasts” of past climate from the “Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6” (CMIP6) simulations. The model hindcasts using only two natural forcings (solar and volcanic) were unable to simulate any substantial warming, but those using human-caused or anthropogenic forcings matched well with observations.
Using a total solar irradiance (TSI) dataset neglected by the IPCC (Hoyt and Schatten, 1993, updated to present) allowed TSI to explain up to 87 percent of modern warming. The variations in cloud cover, albedo, and natural ocean circulations may also be factors arising from internal climate variability that could explain modern climate changes.
The said analysis looked into the Northern Hemisphere land surface temperatures for the mentioned timeframe to try to identify the main drivers of the observed warming since the mid-19th century. Two different temperature estimates were considered, which are the rural and urban blend and a rural-only estimate. The blend indicated long-term warming of 0.89 degrees Celsius per century since 1850, while the rural-only indicates 0.55 degrees Celsius per century. This result contradicted the common assumption that current thermometer-based global temperature indices are relatively unaffected by urban warming biases.
The scientists recommended the action plan below to be enforced to resolve the causes of climate change since the 19th century more satisfactorily.
- Better quantification of the contribution of urbanization bias to current global temperature estimates.
- Improving temperature homogenization techniques to minimize urban blending and more accurately correct for other non-climatic biases.
- Establishing which (if any) of the current TSI datasets are most reliable. We see this as involving two distinct periods: the satellite era and the pre-satellite era. We propose that further satellite missions could help improve the former, while more sun-like star projects could help improve the latter.
- Consideration of the possibility that current estimates of the anthropogenic contribution to recent climate change might be too high.
- Natural climate change drivers other than TSI and volcanic activity.
No new science in the IPCC AR6 report: The Guardian
According to the Guardian, there is no new science in the latest report, but just a recap of the main findings of the previous publications. Those include warnings that the world was approaching “irreversible” levels of global heating, with catastrophic impacts rapidly becoming inevitable; and that it was “now or never” to take drastic action to avoid disaster.
Its purpose is just to reduce the thousands of pages of science to a shorter format to provide the scientific underpinning for global climate action. The news outlet reported that it was written by scientists but haggled over by representatives of the UN’s nearly 200 governments. This is why critics are worried that it could have been “watered down” by regimes that do not like its messages. (Related: THE GREAT GREEN CON: Bill Gates wants to address “global warming” by chopping down and burying TREES.)
The next IPCC report is not until about 2030 – meaning, AR6 is effectively the last IPCC report while it is still feasible – only just – to stay within 1.5C. Some argue that the reporting cycles should be shortened so that policymakers can receive clearer scientific advice throughout this crucial decade. The IPCC can also be ordered to compile shorter reports on specific subjects, in between its mammoth comprehensive assessments, they suggested.
Visit ClimateScienceNews.com to read more about recent studies related to the “dangerous global warming” narrative.
Sources for this article include: