“Climate change has increasingly become an issue where parties are being held accountable because of assumed causation by human greenhouse gas emissions. At the international level, the United Nations COP21 led to the Paris agreement in 2015, a legally binding international treaty on climate change, adopted by 196 parties. Subsequently in 2021 at COP26 in Glasgow, loss and damage was a key issue.
“Attempts to seek financial compensation or enforce restrictions on activities relating to fossil fuels have occurred at various levels in many different countries. In 2022, the U.N. Human Rights Committee found that Australia had failed to adequately protect indigenous Torres Islanders against adverse impacts of climate change. Other cases relate to Project Approval and Corporate Accountability, but there is generally an absence of questioning the IPCC position that climate change during the industrial era has been predominantly caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases. However, an examination of the scientific literature reveals that the assumption ‘the science is settled’ needs to be carefully reconsidered.
“Using techniques such as AI provides evidence that the sensitivity of climate change to anthropogenic emissions may be significantly lower than currently endorsed by the IPCC, and the contributions of natural factors is under-estimated, thereby reducing climate sensitivity from a mean of 3.7°C to 0.7°C. Trillions of dollars are being claimed worldwide for loss and damage allegedly caused by anthropogenic climate change. These claims could be greatly affected if the dominant cause of climate change are natural.
I am quoting from the summary of a paper recently published by my husband, John Abbot, in the European Journal of Applied Science. The entire paper can be downloaded from https://journals.scholarpublishing.org/index.php/AIVP/article/view/17962
It seems particularly relevant given the deliberations right now by the International Court of Justice, more information here.
The relative contributions from natural and anthropogenic causation need to be better understood, rather than simply assume natural change is unimportant. Of course, the situation will only change when the paradigm changes, when we think about climate change differently.
And the feature photograph is of John Abbot when he was last in the UK, where the King insists he, King Charles III, can affect the climate – the hubris of the ruling class. Who would have thought it would continue to be so relevant to all our lives in modern times.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Looks like he should have named himself Canute 2
Jennifer, you make a lot of sense and it is based on the evidence and not ideology. The IPCC science, despite them saying they “own” the science, should be challenged.
The following introduction is provided by Friends of Science.
Ronan Connolly, Willie Soon, Michael Connolly, Rodolfo Gustavo Cionco, Ana G. Elias, Gregory W. Henry, Nicola Scafetta, and Víctor M. Velasco Herrera (2024). Multiple New or Updated Satellite Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) Composites (1978–2023). The Astrophysical Journal, 975 (1), 102, https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ad7794. (Open access).
The CERES team was invited by the Heritage Foundation to contribute a Special Report on what is known about the causes of global warming since the 1850s. Although we were kindly offered payment for this report, we did it pro bono for the reasons we outline on our website here. [The CERES team is led by Dr. Willie Soon, Dr. Ronan Connolly and Dr. Michael Connolly. We work with many researchers from around the world on multi-disciplinary environmental and Earth science projects.]
If you have been following our work, you will probably be familiar with some of this material already. However, we think this new report offers a good one-stop summary, for a general audience, concerning the problems with the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s pseudoscientific assertions that global warming since 1850 is “mostly human-caused”.
The report demonstrates that the IPCC’s supposedly “settled science” is scientifically weak at best.
It can be viewed and downloaded from the Heritage Foundation’s website at https://report.heritage.org/sr305
Keep going on your research, and on making the point that climate change needs to be assessed scientifically, and not as part of some agenda. As you would be aware, there are many scientists who have reservations about the science. Unfortunately, most of the media are “true believers”, and so are not interested in telling the public.
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-48dcae3a6e6a0825cbae893aa685e206-pjlq
Where the science is settled e.g. the laws of physics, then in situations in which a specific law of physics applies an accurate end result can always be obtained. Climate matters are chaotically complicated and therefore predictions as espoused by the IPCC are always subject to significant error because assumptions about climate behaviour in response to increased carbon dioxide concentrations are based on theories which are patently wrong.
The Frequency and Start Longitudes of the Solar-induced Orbital Dry Cycles, only repeat every 81 Years. The Wet/Normal ‘Default’ Periods between the Terrestrial influence (raised temperatures)invoked by each of these Orbiting Dry Cycles, mean temperatures are constantly fluctuating, depending on whether the various land masses, Oceans and water-bodies,( or part thereof,) are subject to any inflicting Dry Cycle Canopy.
The nature of these Dry Cycle Hierarchies, means surface Temperatures can remain elevated for extended periods over large areas.
The wheels on the bus are wobbling. https://c2cjournal.ca/2024/10/a-planet-that-might-not-emneed-em-saving-can-co2-even-drive-global-temperature/
Henry,
https://www.desmog.com/manning-foundation-for-democratic-education/
Hi Jennifer,
Yes and the lies just keep stacking up so much that most people just believe in this so called climate change catastrophe, but as you say , you need to read more from main stream media , thanks so much for this
Regards
Karl Penna, Mapleton, QLD
It is particularly interesting to follow the track of Cyclone ‘Chido’, which destructively just hit Mayotte, North-west of Madagascar, (on Dec 15, 2024.)
This Cyclone originated East of the 50 degrees E Start Longitude, of the current Regional Dry Cycle affecting Africa and Europe, with the vanguard now moving East to West across the Atlantic towards North and South America.
The Temperature/Precipitation Paradox;
As the expelled Solar Particles interact with and remove/convert Water Vapor Albedo in the Earth’s upper atmosphere – there is a resultant increase in temperature via the commensurate increase in Solar Energy reaching the Earth’s surface. This increase in temperature over the various land masses under the orbiting Dry Cycle Canopy, results in increased evaporation but reduced precipitation,(due to the reduced Water Vapor Albedo) over these areas, with the likely consequence of developing Drought conditions over these affected land masses.
However, the associated increase in temperature over various substantial water-bodies (Oceans/Seas/Lakes,) under the Dry Cycle Canopy, results in increased evaporation and precipitation tendencies over these areas as well. These resultant storm-prone regions, are especially significant near the Dry Cycle vanguard, which is moving East to West at half a degree of Longitude per Day/Night Interval – and confronts the prevailing weather patterns moving West to East (and towards the Poles,) due to the Earth’s Axial Spin. These ‘conflicting’ forces however, do not prevent the overall reduction in precipitation over land and water, that the Solar-induced Orbital Dry Cycle brings.
The Oceans certainly represent key factors in the transfer of temperature and precipitation around the globe – including the mechanisms of heat transfer and convection – though the primary instigator of Temperature and Precipitation control at the Earth’s surface, is the immutable Dry Cycle Frequencies over time, that result in expulsion of charged particles from the Sun, which in turn leads to the alteration/conversion of Water Vapour Albedo,(Reflectivity) in the upper atmosphere – and subsequent Temperature rises under the resultant Orbital Dry Cycle Canopy.
It should be noted that other sources of Albedo,(such as Sea and Land Ice, Ocean reflectivity, wind-blown dust and Volcanism,) also affect Temperature and Precipitation – and remain important factors in the overall ‘cooling’ of the climate.
(see ‘The influence of ‘Albedo’ on the ‘Dry’ Cycles’, p 129).
Extract from ‘Tomorrow’s Weather’ – thirty years on…. 2024 Update. (publication pending.)
Henry you’re on the right track.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/12/24/science-shock-co2-is-good-for-the-planet-peer-reviewed-studies-suggest/