Although I don’t endorse Miskolczi’s theory, it remains that he is a serious critic whose work shouldn’t be ignored. What’s more, his theory at least agrees with the evidence, namely, that a modest rise in global temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age cannot be traced to the increased abundance of a ‘greenhouse gas’ as a causative agent. I thus submit that Miskolczi’s interpretation of reality is far more sound than professor Lindzen’s, for instance, wherein the greenhouse effect induces radiative heating on the surface that is five times greater than the sun’s, but is counteracted by non-radiative cooling effects (convection and evaporation) which reduce the average surface temperature from an oppressive 77°C to a comfortable 15°. In the real world, though, an object that's insulated from non-radiative cooling effects and exposed to sunlight reaches a temperature that’s consistent with sunlight alone -- meaning there’s no evidence that the sky is emanating an extra 682 watts per square meter AT ALL.
But this points to the probable reason why Miskolczi is ignored: Because completely absurd theories continue to hold sway. Dianna Cotter writes, "The very complexity of climate science has been used to kick sand into the eyes of the public, blinding us to alternative theories whether they are correct or not." It’s worse than this, though. These theories aren't merely complex; they are scientifically and conceptually incoherent. In other words, both the IPCC-academia faction and experts among the AGW skeptics are peddling literal (i.e., non-empirical) nonsense, and neither side wishes to hear any dissent. THAT is the suffocating orthodoxy Miskolczi is up against. By questioning the whole theory, Miskolczi has placed himself outside the terms of the debate, terms that are irrational on BOTH sides, and has made himself persona non grata.
One detail where I do agree with Miskolczi (or perhaps Cotter): CO2 cannot increase the surface temperature of the Earth independently of incoming energy. In the Alice-in-Wonderland world of greenhouse "science," that's a refreshing tidbit of sanity
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for years has been predicting the greenhouse effect can spin out of control. They claim that there exists a scientific consensus that CO2 is pushing the planet into an unrestrained greenhouse effect, that it’s raising global temperatures and it must be stopped. IPCC was created in the 1980s by the United Nations.
They have released findings that say that carbon-based emissions released into the atmosphere by humans, mostly in wealthy, Western countries, must be reduced, or a catastrophe will result. They have frequently used this scare tactic. It has been easy to frighten people, as the science involved takes some significant and serious study. Most people have relied on expert opinions because they lack their own expert knowledge in the field, a factor the IPCC has relied upon in the past.
Today Hungarian atmospheric physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi
, says he has found and proven that the IPCC and their experts are wrong in their theory about how the greenhouse effect works. In the process, he has shown that changing CO2 concentrations are not the determining factor the IPCC and other scientists claim.
Over the last 20 years Miskolczi achieved several results which prove that the greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere is completely dependent on energy. The IPCC would have the world believe that it is the ingredients of the atmosphere which matter more than the energy, and that it is rising levels of CO2 that are causing global warming.
Greenhouse effect is a balance of energy dependent primarily on the sun
Working with a number of sets of temperature and humidity data from all over the world, Miskolczi has found that the greenhouse effect is a balance of energy dependent primarily on the sun. This is something reasonable people have recognized for some time but haven’t been able to prove without the same sort of heavy science and math the IPCC experts have been using. Those who disagree with the IPCC’s conclusions have needed some form of proof to back their positions. Until now, those proofs have been too few in number to slow Anthropogenic Global Warming’s (AGW) momentum backed with billions of dollars. Solid science which can be verified and recreated has been needed and Miskolczi claims that his research has finally provided just that. New mathematical equations seem to have put the players in this climate game into their proper places.
To put it very simply, Dr. Miskolczi has described previously unknown properties of our atmosphere.
Unfortunately it isn’t as clean and easy as E=mc². The very complexity of climate science has been used to kick sand into the eyes of the public, blinding us to alternative theories whether they are correct or not. The science is so difficult to follow that no one can refute the IPCC without discussing concepts most of the public don’t have the time or desire to learn. So by default the IPCC has owned the conversation and the playing field. What’s more, they have some big allies in supporting positions.
At the time of his original discovery Dr. Miskolczi was a contractor for NASA and had published many times in renowned journals with his colleagues there; he resigned
his position in 2005 when NASA refused to publish work contradicting AGW.
Despite being blacklisted by the scientific community supporting AGW, he has continued his research proving and refining his results. However, this same community is also the one which peer reviews work like this. When a scientist is tossed off this team, they can’t get their work reviewed and pushed to the press as being “peer reviewed.” Despite this handicap Miskolczi has persevered, just this month publishing yet again
, this time proving with observations that the greenhouse effect is actually stable.
CO2 does not and cannot increase the surface temperature of the Earth independently of incoming energy
Miskolczi does not appear to be saying that global warming or cooling doesn’t occur. Instead, he shows that CO2 does not and cannot increase the surface temperature of the Earth independently of incoming energy. In his paper he provides a graph
spanning 61 years from 1948-2008. It shows that the greenhouse effect remains constant while CO2 concentrations have risen. Miskolczi has found physical proof that the greenhouse effect works differently than previously thought and it isn’t affected by changes in carbon dioxide.
Lacking now is an honest scientific community’s review of his work, something hard to get once you have been kicked off the team.
Completely dismantles the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming
The American and international press have also ignored this publication. Though more articles appear daily contradicting the IPCC, this single decisive discovery, if true, completely dismantles the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming. Amazingly it has yet to make the front page.
For more information Dr. Miskloczi’s latest paper can be found here: Ferenc Miskolczi: The stable stationary value of the earth’s global average atmospheric Planck-weighted greenhouse-gas optical thickness
(Energy & Environment Vol. 21 No 4, 2010 August Special Issue: Paradigms in Climate Research), and is available at Multi-Science Publishing Co.
, Great Britain.
Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi can be contacted at: firstname.lastname@example.org .
Dianna Cotter is a Golden Key International Honor Society Member and student at American Military University. She writes for Examiner.com and Family Security Matters. She currently resides in Oregon with her husband and three children. Dianna Cotter can be contacted at email@example.com .