We are a shoe-string operation. Unfortunately no BigOilfunding! Help expose the hoax.

email: info@australianclimatesceptics.com

Donations: Contact above email address.

All Scientists are Sceptics ~Professor Bob Carter

“Climate is and always has been variable. The only constant about climate is change; it changes continually.” ~Professor Tim Patterson

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the science of climate change is the lack of any real substance in attempts to justify the hypothesis ~Professor Stewart Franks

Saturday 4 August 2018

Human CO2 emissions not responsible for increase in atmospheric CO2. Therefore climate change is natural.

By Dr Ed Berry Ph.D., Physics


“The simple model shows how inflow affects level, how level affects outflow, and how balance occurs when outflow equals inflow. Nothing in the world outside the atmosphere changes these conclusions. But these conclusions change entirely the dominant worldview of how human emissions change the level of CO2 in our atmosphere.”
This post expands upon my last post. If you don’t understand the math, just skip the math and read the text. For scientific details, see my preprint. – Ed

According to the scientific method, it is impossible to prove a theory is right. But climate alarmists ignore the scientific method and simply BELIEVE their theory is right. They don’t have time for any stinkin’ proof they are wrong.
This post is “stinkin’ proof” they are wrong. Yes, Virginia, it IS possible to prove a theory is wrong. Read to see how it is done.
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claims human emissions have caused ALL the increase in CO2 since 1750. They say it was 280 ppm in 1750 and human emissions caused it to rise to 410 ppm today.
IPCC claims human CO2 emissions have clogged the carbon cycle and thereby extended CO2 residence time in the atmosphere. IPCC (2007) wrote,
“The fraction of anthropogenic CO2 that is taken up by the ocean declines with increasing CO2 concentration, due to reduced buffer capacity of the carbonate system.”
The IPCC claims the outflow of CO2 from the atmosphere decreases with the level (concentration) of CO2 in the atmosphere, or
Outflow = constant / Level                                                     (1)
IPCC has inserted its claim into its climate models. IPCC’s Bern model is a curve-fit to the output of its climate models. The Bern model predicts 15 percent of human CO2 emissions remain in the atmosphere forever and 85 percent remains in the atmosphere much longer than IPCC’s natural residence time of 4 years.
These invalid IPCC claims are the basis of ALL the hype that human emissions cause climate change. These IPCC claims have cost taxpayers and our economy about a trillion dollars. Plus, the climate alarmists have lowered the level of America’s education and intelligence.
Data prove the IPCC claims are wrong.
The 14C (that is an abbreviation of a carbon atom with 6 protons and 8 neutrons) data from the atomic bomb tests in the 1960’s contradicts the IPCC climate change theory and its claims. The 14C in the atmosphere is in the form of 14CO2 (that is an abbreviation of a CO2 molecule with a 14C carbon atom). The bomb tests increased the level of 14CO2 by over 80 percent.
After the termination of the tests in 1963, the 14C level decreased smoothly toward its former equilibrium level of 100 percent. Specifically, the 14C level decreased by one-half its level above 100 percent every ten years from 1965 to 1995.
The following chart shows the 14C data and the half-life levels.

A simple model matches the 14C data.
Here is a very simple model that reproduces how 14C decreased with time. It begins with the reliable continuity equation,
dL/dt = Inflow – Outflow                                                         (2)
where
L = the level (concentration) of CO2 in the atmosphere
t = time in years
Then it adds the assumption that the outflow of 14CO2 equals the level divided by the 1/e residence time, Te, or
Outflow = L / Te                                                                         (3)
Equation (3) is the inverse of the IPCC claim shown in Eq. (1). Inserting Eq. (3) into Eq. (2) gives,
dL/dt = Inflow – L / Te                                                              (4)
To find Inflow, let dL/dt equal zero. Then L will equal its equilibrium level, Le, and Inflow becomes,
Inflow = Le / Te                                                                          (5)
So, the final model equation is
dL/dt = (Le – L) / Te                                                                 (6)
where
Le = the equilibrium level when Outflow equals Inflow
Equation (6) has the analytic solution,
L = Le + (Lo – Le) exp(- t / Te)                                                  (7)
The 14CO2 molecules trace the same carbon path as the more abundant 12CO2 molecules, although 14CO2 will react slower than 12CO2 because it is heavier.
The simple model proves the IPCC is wrong.
Equations (6) and (7) exactly reproduce the 14C data. This proves 14CO2 molecules exit the atmosphere according to model Eq. (3) and not according to IPCC’s Eq. (1). So, the 14C data prove outflow is proportional to level and not proportional to the inverse of level as IPCC claims. Since the IPCC theory does not predict the 14C data, the IPCC theory of climate change is wrong.
Furthermore, the model proves human emissions have not reduced the “buffer capacity of the carbonate system” as the IPCC claims. IPCC’s Bern model is wrong. Therefore, IPCC climate models are wrong.
The level of atmospheric CO2 measured at Mauna Loa was 320 ppm in 1965 and 360 ppm in 1995. This increase in the level of CO2 did not affect the transfer of 14CO2 during that period.
The simple model shows CO2 in the atmosphere behaves like water in a lake.
Natural and human CO2 emissions change the level of CO2 in our atmosphere the same way a river that flows into a lake changes the level of the lake. If a river flows into a lake and lake water flows out over a dam, the river inflow simply raises the level of the lake until the outflow over the dam equals the inflow from the river. Then the lake level remains constant so long as inflow remains constant.
Similarly, natural and human CO2 emissions simply raise the level of CO2 in the atmosphere until CO2 outflow equals CO2 inflow. Then the level of CO2 in the atmosphere remains constant so long as inflow remains constant. Equation (6) proves that is the case.
The following figure illustrates what the simple model tells us. Inflow sets the equilibrium level of CO2 in the atmosphere, according to Eq. (5). The level sets the outflow, according to Eq. (3). And level moves toward its equilibrium level until outflow equals inflow, according to Eqs. (6) and (7). Then the level stays constant until inflow changes.

The simple model and the above figure apply to human and natural CO2 inflows both independently and in total. The inflows create their own equilibrium levels, which add together.
The simple model shows the ratio of human to natural equilibrium levels is equal to the ratio of their inflows. This means natural CO2 emissions cause 392 ppm of today’s CO2 level and human CO2 emissions cause only 18 ppm, for a total of 410 ppm today. If all human emissions were totally stopped and natural emissions remained constant, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere would fall by only 18 ppm in about 20 years.
Therefore, Eq. (6), supported by the 14C data, proves IPCC’s fundamental claim that human emissions have caused all the increase in CO2 since 1750, is wrong.
The Bern model contradicts data.
The following plot shows how the Bern model, which simulates climate models that use IPCC assumption of Eq. (1), produces a very different future CO2 scenario than Eq. (6) which reproduces the 14C data.
  • In blue: Equation (6) exactly reproduces the 14C data. The 14CO2 curve falls from 80 to 40 in 10 years, a half-life that equals the 1/e residence time of 14.4 years.
  • In green: Equation (6) predicts the curve for 12CO2. The 12CO2 curve falls from 80 to 40 in 2.8 years, a half-life that equals the 1/e residence time of 4 years.
  • In red: The Bern model curve initially follows the 12CO2 curve but then flattens out because it assumes human emissions remain in the atmosphere.
Discussion
Some scientists argue that the simple model cannot be accurate because it neglects chemical reactions outside the atmosphere. These scientists do not understand how to use systems.
The simple system for the atmosphere includes external effects through inflow and outflow. Think about it rationally. The only way an external process can affect the level of CO2 in the atmosphere is by affecting inflow or outflow. The model does not need to include the specifics of external processes. It only needs to include the ways external processes can change the level which is by inflow or outflow.
In the philosophy of science, Occam’s Razor says the simplest explanation of anything is more likely to be the accurate explanation.
The simple model shows how inflow affects level, how level affects outflow, and how balance occurs when outflow equals inflow. Nothing in the world outside the atmosphere changes these conclusions. But these conclusions change entirely the dominant worldview of how human emissions change the level of CO2 in our atmosphere.
Conclusions
IPCC’s claim that human emissions caused all the rise in atmospheric CO2 since 1750 is, without question, the most costly deception in the history of mankind. People think they can save the world if they can stop human emissions of CO2, but data and simple physics prove them wrong.
Climate alarmists have money, critical government jobs, control of scientific organizations and journals, influential university positions, and well-funded environmental organizations.
The truth will prevail … when we get money to support the dissemination of the truth.

--------


See also:
                          

                  Climate change emperors have no clothes

                          Australian Climate Sceptics blogspot

Wednesday 1 August 2018

Lauren Southern find's Sydney's No Go Zone

Anthony Cox


I went to the Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern talk at Darling Harbour on the 28th July.

No protestors and a large, no doubt well-paid police and private security presence were in attendance. 


Lauren Southern in Movie Farmlands
We took in the film Farmlands first. This was a bit overwrought even though the subject deserved it but was interesting in that it showed white ghettos and camps developing plus white and black only settlements which were offered as the solution to the racial disharmony in SA.

I was a bit worried because we estimated there were only about 200 people in the large auditorium during the film. After the break however the auditorium filled up and we did a rough count of between 1900 - 2200 people. The audience was mainly young, a few weirdos with antennas sticking out of their collars but predominantly young and very interactive and supporting during the talks. Only one person was removed: a beta male who looked like Justin Beiber was thrown out; he looked very startled but my mate said he had an Antifa scarf around his scrawny neck.

Molyneux kicked off the evening. He was dynamic, one of the best speakers I've seen. He was unscripted and paced the stage during his talk which lasted about an hour. His theme was based on a scathing critique of aboriginal culture, an oxymoron since they lived in bands. For Molyneux aboriginal culture was a dead end based as it was and still is on certainties. It was a culture which was not only barbaric, cruel but also did not tolerate any dissent or questioning which for Molyneux is the hallmark of a great society and why Western society is the best. Molyneux raised an interesting point as to why aboriginal culture was so stagnant: it killed off its best and brightest, those who would have questioned its primitive totemism. Aboriginals did not deviate from the spiritual certainty it was based on and remained dependant on nature. Molyneux was fiercely critical with the reverence for nature which underpins modern leftism and concluded by saying the support by leftism for aboriginal culture was because of those shared qualities of certainly, intolerance and nature.

Molyneux was a hard act to follow but Miss Southern matched him. It is extraordinary that she is only 23. She is poised, intelligent and passionate. Like Molyneux, she is a fierce supporter of Western society and its Christian heritage. She based her talk on multiculturalism and how it is the agent of subverting Western society.

Most readers here will be familiar with the arguments that multiculturalism is not about diversity but division and destroying the host culture and replacing it with other cultures so enclaving and balkanisation occurs within the host society. But to hear such a charismatic figure as Miss Southern espouse these obvious aspects of the mass immigration policies being pursued in so many Western nations was invigorating. She had many examples not least her confrontation with the wallopers in Lakemba. It's interesting that in the auditorium were about a dozen uniformed police who were nodding in agreement during her talk.

Both Molyneux and Miss Southern spoke bluntly about the media and were obvious supporters of Trump. They both spoke about the role the MSM plays in suppressing free speech.

It was a great show with both speakers urging support for Western values and for people to fight back against the elites.

Lauren Southern in Lakemba.
As a footnote, it’s interesting that most of the MSM including the pusillanimous John Laws have been castigating Lauren Southern for trying to go into Lakemba to have a look around. She was stopped because a senior policeman said her presence was likely to cause a breach of the peace. This action by the police seems to have no legal substance as described in the Police powers and Responsibilities Act NSW 2002. It is plain that any breach of peace would not be caused by Miss Southern but would be done by Muslims. This was the case in Melbourne where Miss Southern was charged $67k by Vicpol because Antifa thugs were violent. Here in Lakemba Miss Southern is being punished because Muslims are violent and opposed to free speech.

This youtube video contains Ms Southern's warning from NSW Police (starting at 15:55):