A Null Hypothesis For CO2
I mentioned on 10th that examinations of CO2 as a cause of global warming indicate that the null hypothesis should be accepted (i.e. no effect shown). The paper I referred to at the time is available in full here
The ‘radiative forcing constants’ in the IPCC models are devoid of physical meaning. This approach is empirical pseudoscience that belongs to the realm of climate astrology. The results derived from climate simulations that use the radiative forcing approach may be of limited academic interest in assessing model performance. However, such results are computational science fiction that have no relationship to the reality of the Earth’s climate. Radiative forcing by CO2 is, by definition a self-fulfilling prophesy, since the outcome is pre-ordained with a total disregard of the basic laws of physics. An increase in CO2 concentration must increase surface temperature. No other outcome is allowed and other possible climate effects are by definition excluded.
Based on the arguments presented here, a null hypothesis for CO2 is proposed:
It is impossible to show that changes in CO2 concentration have caused any climate change to the Earth’s climate, at least since the current composition of the atmosphere was set by ocean photosynthesis about one billion years ago.
Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).