Take the Politics out of Climate Change

by Dr. Ed Berry, also in Daily Inter Lake, March 22, Page D2

Eric Grimsrud (Inter Lake Mar 17) wrote correctly, Earth’s climate is controlled by three variables: solar radiation, Earth’s reflection (albedo) of solar radiation, and atmospheric greenhouse gases. Everything else Grimsrud wrote you should forget.

Grimsrud claimed it is easier to predict long-term climate change than weekly weather. But meteorologists regularly make useful 1 to 6 day weather predictions, while our $100-billion climate models have not made a valid prediction, over-predict temperature, and do not agree with each other.

According to the rules of science, the climate models’ failure to make valid predictions requires we reject the alarmist climate-change hypothesis. That’s right, Obama’s changing America over a delusion.

A recent scientific paper found climate models’ representation of incoming solar-radiation contain spurious numerical errors up to 30 Watts per square meter for constant latitudes, while actual solar radiation is constant for each latitude. These numerical errors are 18 times greater than the calculated 1.68 Watts per square meter of warming (before feedbacks) due to all human carbon-dioxide emissions since 1750.

Rather than being concerned about climate change, alarmists should be concerned about the errors in their climate models.

Grimsrud claims atmospheric carbon dioxide is “out of control” implying we humans have caused a problem but he has no evidence to prove his case. On the contrary, evidence shows our atmosphere compensates for increases in carbon dioxide by reducing water vapor, a much more powerful greenhouse gas, to maintain a constant greenhouse effect.

A recent scientific paper compares radiation and cloud cover in the northern and southern hemispheres. The northern hemisphere has more land and therefore reflects more solar radiation. But our atmosphere mysteriously adds more reflective cloud cover in the southern hemisphere to equalize the reflection of solar radiation in each hemisphere.

Another recent scientific paper shows cosmic ray intensity and not atmospheric carbon dioxide correlates with temperature over the last 500 million years. More cosmic rays cool the Earth by forming more clouds.

To understand why climate changes, we must remove climate physics from politics and put it back in science where it belongs. Climate physics tells us we should not be alarmed about our carbon dioxide emissions because carbon dioxide does not control climate.

3 thoughts on “Take the Politics out of Climate Change”

  1. You won't get politics out of climate change until congress is educated on true facts such as as you note. Obama does not care for facts. Congress has to bankrupt his programs in order to cure this ailment. And most of or congressmen are cowards. The supreme court is on cloud 9 most of the time. It's a sad, sad situation. Each and every one of us needs to Just give our congressmen (all three) Hell on this subject whenever we can. Do not mince words. Just the facts. Ange.

  2. I have, after some experience with Eric Grimsrud and his blog, found that from that exposure he is basically wrong about almost everything. He surprisingly does think that nuclear power is OK and I assume from that he does realize that humanity does need some method to generate electricity and perhaps is astute enough to realize that wind and solar will never replace coal to do that very important job for humanity.

    Even though, at every opportunity, Eric Grimsrud tries to make people believe that he is a scientist but fails in putting forth what he maintains about CO2 and the earth's climate to ever come close to proving that he is capable of using the scientific method to deal with the question of his assertion that CO2 drives the climate. I have asked him to provide an experiment that provides empirical proof that CO2 has anything to do with the earth's climate and he still has not done so and that is because none exist; but, he is not honest enough to say so but tries to fabricate evidence and that is for sure worse than just saying what is the truth; that there has never been an experiment conducted that shows that the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere influences the climate.

    “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

  3. Eric Grimsrud needs to pay attention to what Richard P. Feynman had to say as far as mixing politics with science and that is exactly what Obama, Holdren and the IPCC have done and the reason is obviously for control and revenue gained from that control over energy and that is immoral, in my estimation.

    “No government has the right to decide on the truth of scientific principles, nor to prescribe in any way the character of the questions investigated. Neither may a government determine the aesthetic value of artistic creations, nor limit the forms of literacy or artistic expression. Nor should it pronounce on the validity of economic, historic, religious, or philosophical doctrines. Instead it has a duty to its citizens to maintain the freedom, to let those citizens contribute to the further adventure and the development of the human race.” 

    ― Richard P. Feynman

    What Timothy Wirth & Christine Stewart had to say about this leaves no question about how this AGW issue is political and not of a scientific nature:

    “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” – Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

    “No matter if the science of global w arming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment

    “The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.” – emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

    This is a very current view of what the UN has in mind for the unwashed masses of the earth:

    "However the official, Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC, warns that the fight against climate change is a process and that the necessary transformation of the world economy will not be decided at one conference or in one agreement."

    "This is  probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history", Ms Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels.


    "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 – you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation."


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.