Forget ‘settled’ science or ‘consensus’ – that is a political construct designed to quash debate in the interests of promoting a command-and-control Net Zero agenda. One of the great drivers of continual changes in the climate is heat exchange within both the atmosphere and the Earth’s surface. Current understanding of the entire picture is limited, and it seems the opportunity has been taken to fill this gap by blaming carbon dioxide almost entirely for the recent gentle warming. A new paper on the so-called ‘greenhouse’ effect highlights the vital role played by oceans and water vapour flows. CO2 is said to have “minimal effect” on the Earth’s temperature and climate.
The paper has been published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) and is written by meteorologist William Kininmonth, a former consultant to the World Meteorological Organisation’s Commission for Climatology and former head of the Australian Government’s National Climate Centre. Kininmonth argues that the oceans are the “vital inertial and thermal flywheels” of the climate system. If one wants to control climate, it will be necessary to control the oceans, he argues. “Efforts to decarbonise in the hope of affecting global temperatures will be in vain,” he adds.
In Kininmonth’s view, the recent warming is “probably simply the result of fluctuations in the ever-changing ocean circulation”. CO2 “must be recognised” as a very minor contributor to the observed warming, and one that is unlikely to prolong the warming trend beyond the peak generated by the natural oceanic oscillations, he notes. He explains that the main driver of global temperature is the movement of energy in water, both in the oceans and the atmosphere after evaporation.
Kininmonth proposes that tropical oceans have warmed recently, not as a result of additional atmospheric CO2, but most likely because of a reduction of heat as ocean currents have slowed. Heat has been exchanged with the tropical atmosphere, and transported by the winds to enhance northern polar warming. It is accepted that warming over the Arctic has been greater in the recent past than elsewhere over the globe. Ocean surface temperature in the tropics has warmed much less than the Arctic. However Arctic warming has occurred predominantly during the cold winter half of the year, when the surface is largely in darkness. For Kininmonth, this implies that it can only be the result of heat transport from warmer latitudes. Kininmonth’s conclusions are of course a subject for scientific argument and debate, but It might be noted that they provide a plausible insight into why temperatures at the South Pole have barely moved for at least 50 years.
Settled science is all in on the predominant role of CO2 acting as the climate control thermostat. As we reported recently in the Daily Sceptic, a bizarre ‘fact check’ by Facebook partner Climate Feedback of one of our previous articles stated: “Natural (non-human) drivers of climate change have been mostly stable since the onset of modern warming and all the available scientific evidence implicates human greenhouse gas emissions as the primary culprit.” As I argued, the claim that the climate has not undergone any natural change for almost 200 years is nonsense. Not a scrap of evidence can be submitted to back up this proposition, and Climate Feedback’s claim is little more than a denial of climate change.
The political narrative, however, seems to demand that like the White Rabbit in Alice in Wonderland, six impossible things must be believed before breakfast. To back up the narrative, imprecise science often ends up being fed into climate models, along with improbable guesses of massive CO2-caused future global warming. But as Dr. John Christie, Professor of Atmospheric and Earth Sciences at the University of Alabama, recently noted: “Models fail to reproduce accurate energy flows, and this is the guts of how the climate system works.”
Despite this, climate models remain exhibit A in the attempt to prove that we are on a path to climate disaster unless humans stop using fossil fuels. But increasingly, their controversial role is being called into question. The recent World Climate Declaration signed by around 250 university professors, and led by a Nobel physics laureate, noted that models had many shortcomings, “and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools”. We must free ourselves from the “naïve belief” in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science, it states.
Of course Kininmonth’s work will be largely ignored in the mainstream. The BBC will bin it, the Guardian might be tempted to run its usual in-house slur that bungs are being paid by BP; anyone publicising its conclusions runs the risk of woke corporations like PayPal suddenly withdrawing financial transactional services, while footling ‘fact checks’ will ensure black marks and warnings across social media. GWPF invited the Royal Society and the Met Office to review the Kininmonth paper, promising any response would be published as an appendix. “No reply was received,” noted the Foundation.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
Stop Press: Watch Chris join Laurence Fox on his opening GB News run with Insulate Britain protester Cameron Ford – you just never know what is going to happen on live TV.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I recently visited Iceland and looking past the anthropogenic created climate change propaganda, I learnt the importance of ocean currents on the climate of Iceland. According to one diagram ocean currents explain why Greenland’s climate is much colder than Iceland’s despite their close proximity. Also, how the appearance of the Panama isthmus led to Iceland being covered in ice due to disruption of ocean currents.
That is a nasty outbreak of “empirical science” and this alarming tendency must be stamped out.
It is endangering the reputation of brand The Science™️ – lawyers have been engaged.
There is also the embarrassing problem of nomenclature. Iceland was discovered and named about a hundred years before the Medieval Warm Period kicked off. Greenland, way to the nor-west, was discovered and colonised as it began. The dairy herds there then provided half of Denmark’s butterfat until The Little Ice Age stuffed things up.
You learn something new every day. I always assumed Greenland was named in order to mislead in a way similar to the naming of the Cape of Good Hope. I guess the naming of the cape was an early example of misinformation. A modern example would be, oh I don’t know, ‘safe and effective vaccine’ perhaps?
It may be why the Donald tried to buy the joint. Two millennia of evidence suggest it is odds on for a bit more heating before nature cools things down again.
It was a nice technique by Lozza to let the rather unsettling Insult Britain guy make a complete fool of himself. I particularly enjoyed his discomfort when asked about his windows.
Quite frankly, the only response to these antiscientific clowns is to laugh at them, particularly when the say it is still an emergency after all the years that have passed since it started being an emergency.
It was good to be able to put a face to Chris Morrison. I have much appreciated his articles.
Agreed, although it’s a shame he had to ‘debate’ with a childish zealot who just kept on repeating his catechism to avoid answering the objections raised against his position.
Has anyone ever wondered why, if mathematical modelling is any predictor of the future, that it has never been applied to the Stockmarket?
Why’s that?
I guess the financial sector is wary of crappy, amateurish software even though it’s considered good enough for climate modelling and pandemic predictions.
Good point. We’ve certainly entered this naive era where the bourgeois liberal brought up on Word Processors and Fax Machines are now in awe of the no-limits IT sector – computers and its software are somehow an advanced intelligence able to predict the most complex of outcomes. As far as I know we haven’t reached the singularity yet. They seem to have forgotten their school teachings to treat the computer as TOM – a Totally Obedient Moron.
The inventors of the famous Black-Scholes-Merton equation for pricing derivatives used it to make a fortune, then lost it in the Asian crash when they blindly followed what the equation was telling them rather than use common sense. The equation is still used today, but not without human supervision.
Not so much the stock market as such, but mathematical modelling was the cause of the financial meltdown in 2008. A famous economist, J K Galbraith said that “There are two types of forecaster, those who are wrong and those who don’t know they are wrong”
Cross my palm with silver dearie…
I think it has – called Ponzi scams which come complete with hockey stick graphs showing sudden, exponential, non-stop, upward trend.
Climate models are perfectly fit for purpose. Their purpose is to generate funding for climate scientists.
You really ought to put “scientists” in inverted commas these days.
Climate scientist is like putting witch before doctor.
True, but adding “Climate” in front has the same meaning. As Richard Feynman said “Any field with ‘science’ in its name is not a science”.
It’s great that Laurence gave Cameron Ford time. It let us all see what an effing dipstick he is.
I’m surprised that Cameron’s Mummy and Daddy allow him to go out without his nanny holding his hand.
We are now being pivoted towards the next big threat… methane (or nitrogen is some ludicrously proclaim)… hoping to do for agriculture and our food supply, what the demonisation of CO2 has done for our fossil fuel industry and our energy supply.
Heinz are in a lot of trouble. And all their methane is the result of beanz- not animal at all. The worst fartz are definitely vegan. Can empty a room in seconds.