Ending the Climate Debate, Learning to Live in the Real World

The climate change debate is rapidly reaching its end among scientists. New scientific evidence demonstrates a very strong correlation between variations in incident solar radiation and variability of the Earth’s orbit, and climate change. Better understanding of climate history, trends, and rates of change, and more accurate correlation of proxy information with natural processes provide a much clearer picture of natural climate change than has been available heretofore.
The emerging scientific picture establishes that orbital and solar variations are primary drivers of Earth’s climate on both long and short time scales, ranging from 11 years to 100,000 years, with possible greenhouse gas overprint, although no greenhouse overprint has yet been measured.
Despite these advances, political rhetoric continues to champion the human climate control hypothesis.
The debate has been fueled by the fundamental disagreement between observations and measurements (data) and computer models (mathematical constructs). Mathematical models are approximations derived from assumptions. Even the most sophisticated mathematical model is primitive when compared to the natural systems they purport to replicate.
Any mathematical model must be able to explain, or at a minimum not conflict with, all of the scientific data. The politically correct, current climate models cannot explain much of the scientific data from observation and measurement.
The popular greenhouse model that led to the Kyoto Protocol requires climate change to progress in sequence, with early lower troposphere heating and warming occurring at the poles. However, the National Academy of Science could not find significant warming in the lower troposphere. The latest measurements of Antarctic climate show that the main part of the continent is cooling, not warming, and has been cooling for some time. The changes occurring in Antarctic ice shelves are the expected post-glacial natural phenomena. These problems alone should have suggested to climate modelers that there are serious problems with the assumptions in their models, and that there might be alternative explanations that actually fit data and observations.
Recorded human history has documented huge global climate change over the last several thousand years. Perhaps the most apparent and best known is the coupled Medieval Climate Optimum (MCO) and the following Little Ice Age (LIA), ending about 1850. Tree ring data correlate with human historical data. Arguments that global warming is causing greater severe storm frequency abound, but new studies show that there are fewer severe weather phenomena.
Scientific evidence does not support the theory that carbon dioxide levels drive climate over human history. Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration lags climate change by 300-600 years throughout the last three glacial terminations, thus de-linking carbon dioxide concentration from climate change. Longer-term synthesis of geological history shows natural variability in temperature well in excess of any projected human changes. The popular and politically correct computer models have failed to replicate past climates over historical time spans during which both warming and cooling have occurred.
The more scientifically acceptable alternative hypothesis that accounts for the present state of global warming is that orbital and solar variability are the most significant drivers of climate, and that greenhouse gases, while important for maintaining the stability of climate and moderating external forcings, are not responsible for most climate variability. This hypothesis encompasses all climate change data.
The correlation of climate change with solar variability (inextricably linked to orbital variations) ‚ has been clearly demonstrated by extensive scientific analysis. In addition the predictability of solar variability has led to better prediction of La Nina and El Nino events, and validates statistical projections for climate.
What does it mean? It means that climate is changing, as it always does, in both directions and at all time scales, and that humans must adapt to the changes. While global warming may accentuate sea level rise, there is no solution for the problem, only mitigation. If climate turns cold, as it surely will, effects on agriculture will be significant. Feeding the growing global population may become a major problem, just as rising sea levels will inexorably inundate low-lying land.
The human greenhouse theory of climate control claims that by changing human lifestyles that generate greenhouse-gases, climate change can be stopped, yet no proposal now before the public, especially the Kyoto protocol, will accomplish that feat.
There is no doubt that natural climate change is occurring. In the context of a rapidly expanding global population clustered along the shorelines of the world, substantial damage will occur during warming phases if we don’t plan appropriate mitigation. Because climate change is natural, we must adapt to the changes as they take place. We must worry now how we will feed the burgeoning global population during a future cold period.
The solar/orbital variations can not be made to go away by the United States transferring its wealth to third world countries. Social agendas can no longer hide behind inaccurate computer models of climate. The task before us is not how to fix the climate, but how to manage population growth and mitigate the effects of natural climate change on people.
Climate changes naturally, all the time, warmer or colder, at all time scales, and at varying amplitudes. We cannot control global climate, but we can start helping people adapt to natural variability.
Some Suggested Readings:
Bluemle, John P., Joseph Sable, and Wibjorn Karlen, 2001, Rate and Magnitude of Past Global Climate Changes: in, Gerhard, Lee C., William E. Harrison, and Bernold M. Hanson, eds., 2001, Geological Perspectives of Global Climate Change: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Studies in Geology #47, Tulsa, OK, p. 193-212.
Bond, Gerard, Bernd Kromer, Juerg Beer, Raimund Muscheler, Michael N. Evans, William Showers, Sharon Hoffmann, RustyLotti-Bond, Irka Hajdas, Georges Bonani, 2001, Persistent Solar Influence on North Atlantic Climate During the Holocene: Science, Vol. 294, Issue 5549, 2130-2136, December 7, 2001
Davis, John C., and Geoffrey Bohling, 2001, The Search for Patterns in Ice-Core Temperature Curves: in Gerhard, Lee C., William E. Harrison, and Bernold M. Hanson, eds.,2001, Geological Perspectives of Global Climate Change: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Studies in Geology #47, Tulsa, OK, p. 213-230.
Doran, Peter T., John C. Priscu, W. Berry Lyons, John E. Walsh, Andrew G. Fountain, Diane M. McKnight, Daryl L. Moorhead, Ross A. Virginia, Diana H. Wall, Gary D. Clow, Christian H. Fritsen, Christopher P. McKay, and Andrew N. Parsons, 2002, Antarctic climate cooling and terrestrial ecosystem response: Nature, v. 415, p. 517-520, 31 Jan 2002.
Esper, Jan, Edward R. Cook, Fritz h. Schweingruber, 2002, Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability:Science, v. 295, p. 2250-2253. (See also: Mann and Hughes’ critique and Cook and Esper’s response, Science, v. 296, p. 848-849.)
Fischer, H., M. Wahlen, J. Smith, D. Mastoianni, and B. Deck, 1999, Ice Core Records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations: Science, v. 283, p.1712-1714.
Hoyt, D. V., and K.H. Schatten, 1997, The Role of the Sun in Climate Change: Oxford University Press, New York, 279 p.
Lamb, H. H., 1995, Climate, History, and the Modern World: 2nd Ed., Routledge, NY, 433 p.
Mann, M. E., R. S. Bradley, and M. K. Hughes, 1999, Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations: Geophysical Re