The science behind the theory that CO2 is driving so-called anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a sham. It cannot be scientifically proven.
Let us pretend that the UN's central estimate of equilibrium "global warming" caused by CO2, allowing for all temperature feedbacks, is correct. In that case, temperature change, in Celsius degrees, is equal to 4.7 times the logarithm of the proportionate increase in CO2 concentration.
First, check that this equation is correct by working out how much warming would occur if we doubled CO2 concentration. The warming would be 4.7 ln 2 = 3.26 Celsius degrees, exactly the central estimate given by the UN's climate panel in its 2007 assessment report.
For the past 10 years, according to the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, global atmospheric CO2 concentration has risen at just two parts per million by volume per year, reaching 388 ppmv this year.
Now, let us assume that we do nothing at all about cutting CO2 emissions for 25 years. Let us also assume that CO2 concentration continues to rise at 2 ppmv/year. Then the warming after 25 years would be 4.7 ln [(388 + 50) / 388] = 0.6 C.
Is a warming of little more than half a Celsius degree a problem? No. So, despite all the environmental groups telling us we must act at once or we are doomed, using the UN's own formula we can see that even if we wait 25 years before taking any action to cut CO2 emissions we will do the planet no harm at all.
Therefore, it is sensible to wait at least 10 years, not wasting any money on this nonsense in the meantime. Then we can see whether or not "global warming" is going to be a real problem. In the last 10 years, there was no "global warming" at all. None. Global mean surface temperature in 2009 is the same as it was in 1999.
Why spend trillions of dollars now -- money that could otherwise have been spent on freeing the world's poor people from poverty when, in 10 years' time, global temperatures might be no higher than now? We can afford to wait, and it is irresponsible not to wait.
We know from the "Climategate" e-mails, recently released by a whistleblower at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in the U.K., that the international clique of climate scientists who manufactured and are spreading the "global warming" scare have been saying privately that it is a "travesty" that they are unable to explain why there has been no " global warming" for 10 years. A "travesty" no less, because the real data doesn't comply with the manipulated data used by the CRU to create the computer climate models that were ultimately used by the IPCC.
Ask anyone who claims to support the AGW theory to explain it to you. The chances are they will not be able to. They just simply "believe" that it must be true.
By the way, Antarctic sea ice levels are the same as they were in 1979 (National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado).
It is also commonly understood that the recent melting of Arctic ice was caused by warm Pacific Ocean water flowing into the Arctic Ocean in combination with strong Arctic winds which pushed the sea ice into the open ocean.
Doesn't fit either the computer models or the environmental hysteria, does it?
A. Robert Timms, Edmonton