Saturday, December 22nd 2012, 9:46 AM EST
This article is the third in a series that traces the back story of the (non) greenhouse gas theory. Their purpose is to expose the truth that this so-called ‘settled science’ never appeared on any national science academy’s radar until the 1980′s.
Here we show how James Hansen flip-flopped from claiming the greenhouse gas effect (GHE) was due to aerosols to claiming it was due to carbon dioxide. We show how a ‘pre-GHE era’ calculation was re-packaged to provide the key numbers for this cynical and fraudulent revision of science.
Previously, we saw that not only did the greenhouse gas ‘theory’ not concern the best scientific minds of the 20th Century, we showed why: the ‘theory’ was widely accepted as being refuted before 1951. This is confirmed by the prestigious American Meteorological Society (AMS). 
Today’s populist promoters of the greenhouse gas effect (GHE) have sought to denounce these articles by citing papers they claim vindicate their beliefs. However, our previous essay made short work of that delusion. It demonstrated that leading climate researchers prior to the 1980′s either were dismissive of it, or made no mention at all, of any GHE; the vast consensus accepted that once solar energy entered out atmosphere it was the water cycle and convection that ran the show on global temperatures. This pre-1980′s consensus agreed that carbon dioxide (CO2) could not alter the climate because it was discovered that all the long-wave radiation that could be absorbed by CO2 is already absorbed by water vapor (id.). Therefore the effects of latent heat (water) by the process of the hydrological cycle (evaporation, condensation, precipitation, conduction and convection) were proven to dominate instead.
But a growing body of evidence collated by thousands of citizen scientist auditors is pointing to the likelihood that since the 1980′s government climatologists - incentivised by a billion dollar funding stream - employed sophistry and spin to resurrect the long discredited GHE. We know that even alarmists admit that the politics of the day (re: Margaret Thatcher’s speech to the Royal Society) rather than science was a key motivator.  Leading this post-normal era of junk climate science was NASA’s James Hansen. Hansen’s team at NASA cleverly re-branded the hydrological cycle as “the greenhouse effect” despite the fact no national science academies in the pre-1980′s era regarded water vapor as a ‘greenhouse gas.’
This was a major U-turn for Hansen, who in 1967 published a key paper defining the GHE as being caused by dust particles (aerosols). Nowhere in that paper did Hansen attribute any GHE to water vapor. 
What’s in a Name?
In short, this is the ‘nomenclature argument’ presented in Part One and should have put an end to the climate change idiocy right at the start. Our thesis there was simple: settled science should have settled nomenclature. But as the National Academy of Science showed in a key 1979 report the term ‘greenhouse gas theory’ didn’t exist. (id.) Therefore, reason and logic dictates there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas if there is no such thing as a greenhouse gas theory!
But as Canadian climate researcher, Norm Kalmanovitch who has studied this aspect in detail shows, there is clear fraud here. Kalmanovitch reports, “The greenhouse effect as defined even by Hansen back in 1981 is simply the difference between two numbers; one a theoretical calculation that always comes to 255 K and the other the Earth’s actual temperature typically taken as 288 K with the difference of 33 K being the greenhouse effect. (This same calculation on Mars comes to 5.5 K)
Kalmanovitch advises. “ This yields Te ̴ 255 K. The mean surface temperature is T ̴ 288 K. The excess (Ts – Te) and is a pre-Hansen era value but is morphed into being Hansen’s ‘greenhouse effect’ of gases and clouds.” Kalmanovitch and independent scientists at Principia Scientific International (PSI) proved that the term “greenhouse gas” was applied many years after the above calculation was written (and when consensus science rejected any such notion of a GHE).
But the passage of time has been the undoing of this 1980′s scam. We have seen that CO2 emissions have stubbornly refused to correlate with atmospheric temperatures. Since 1997 global CO2 emissions have increased by 39.8% but there has been no change in the Earth’s temperature proving Hansen was wrong to fudge the numbers to make a connection between CO2 and global temperatures. According to Hansen’s own mangled numbers Ts has remained constant since 1997 and Te is calculated as a constant value. As Kalmanovitch describes:
“The excess, Ts – Te, which according to Hansen “is the greenhouse effect” is also constant since 1997; so in Hansen’s own vernacular there has been no change to the “greenhouse effect” from the 39.8% increase in CO2 emissions since 1997! As Dr. Pierre Latour (noted for his work on the Apollo Space program) has shown, there is also a fatal calculating error elsewhere in Hansen’s GHE numbers. 
National Geographic Says ‘Carbon Equals Cooling’
It isn’t just in English-speaking nations this fraud was sold. PSI is constantly receiving reports from around the world enabling us to better trace the back story of how this scam. A jigsaw puzzle is being put together showing the gradual usurpation of accepted climate science by the new Greenhouse Gas Brigade. It was a steady drip fed of dross over decades permeating into the major national academies. From Italy, independent climate researcher, Alberto Miatello, recalls,”the oldest article I could find is a 1976 piece by Samuel W. Matthews, from the National Geographic (November 1976). But it is curious to note that at that time the main fear in the scientific community was NOT of the possibility of global warming, but for a new Ice Age.”
As the evidence shows, this was because scientists before 1980 had understood that adding more CO2 into the atmosphere provided a cooling effect, not warming as shown by the peer-reviewed literature examined in our previous article. 
In the Nat Geo piece above (“The Ice from the Future”), Matthews presents the consensus view of climate experts of the day saying “some” scientists believe CO2 can cause warming, but that “other scientists believe these molecules [CO2] pushed outwards by man could generate an opposite effect, namely cool our Earth by mirroring outward the light from Sun”
Miatello concludes that the Matthews article “was showing clearly that the main concern of the scientific community at that time (middle of ’70) was NOT the possibility of heating, but of cooling.”
From his own studies of how the science has been presented in the literature in Italy Miatello affirms, “Between 1975 – late ’80 any such GHE was being linked to air pollution rather than to global warming. As we recall, back then we still had gasoline with high sulfur content, lots of ‘fossil fuel’ burning and much higher levels a lot of lung diseases due to smog than in today’s cities.” This is the Great Truth being re-discovered to defeat the ‘Big Lie’ of man-made global warming.
As David Whitehouse put it so succinctly (The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 20 December 2012):
“It is the bloggers who are science’s new auditors. Many do not like it and have a cultural difficulty in accepting that the times are a changing. But as the new generations take over, science will become more participatory and more appreciated. All scientific conclusions are open to revision, especially those of climate science.”
As such, anyone who recalls the 1970′s will know the main concern of scientists was to reduce high levels of air pollution created by burning hydrocarbons. The science was thus aerosol-focused as per those peer-reviewed papers of Hansen in the pre-1980′s era. Airborne dust particulates (not the trace gas, CO2) was what was being cited as damaging to the health of people and the planet. The great fear then was not a heating world but for the ozone ‘hole,’ CFC’s, and the acid rain scare as Hansen had well acknowledged. (id.) But because western society had cleaned up its act so well by reducing particulate pollution a new scare story was contrived to subjugate the masses, and Hansen’s team was well-funded, willing and able to launch their counter-consensus assault on long-accepted science.
Click source for more [LINKS & REF]