Is AGW Religion, Politics or Science

I have developed a theoretical model of climate change against which I will attempt to quantify the reactions of others.

The greenhouse effect is sound science and has a measured effect on temperature approximately equal to 0.8 deg C for a doubling of CO2 concentration. AGW proponents then try to equate additional warming of up to 5 deg C to CO2, attributed to accumulative effects, this is both anti-scientific and analogous to an article of faith. Politicans and business then use these hysterical projections to obtain either huge profit, Global domination or both, all sane men should be suspicious of all but the science.

My model suggests that large reactions to parametric changes are only driven by ice induced negative incursions, where positive feedbacks will amplify the negative Insolation lobes or CO2 reductions such that a halving of CO2 from current levels is the only forcing which will be amplified by the system. If CO2 falls to a level below 200 ppm a ´tipping point´may occur, such a tipping point if reached will lead to the next glacial cycle. This is because the O degC parameter associated with H2O solidification will both decrease GW forcing and increase negative Albedo forcing.

For global temperatures in excess of 0 degC reactions to CO2 doubling are linear. The primary reason for this is that H2O forcing and cloud albedo rapidly stabilise to the new temperature ´long term average´ and oppose further forcing. Insolation changes over the next solar MILANKOVITCH cycle then dominate the temperature record. Temperature changes (long term ave)  then stabalise to a approx sinousoidal P-P 2 deg C cycle averaged about the current CO2 level. i.e. 0 deg to +2 deg C at @280 ppm, +1 deg to +3 deg C at @ 60o ppm and +2 deg to +4 deg C at 1300 ppm. This theoretical trend is then attenuated by system feedbacks to a lower cyclical level by H2O/cloud balance conditioned by the rising temperature.

Finally the long term paleoclimate record is disturbed by extra or intra terrestrial perturbations which are ammeliorated by the CO2 and H2O cycles.

Global Warming is good science, AGW disaster scenarios are either Religious Rants or Cynical Political Manoevering

Mike Davies



About madmikedavies

Retired Communications Engineer, living in Portugal. Interests are Cosmology, Earth Sciences, Organic farming, Climatology, Football, Golf, Birdwatching, and Dogs
This entry was posted in Climate change and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Is AGW Religion, Politics or Science

  1. NitroFlashGamer says:

    Hi, my friend, are you able to give more post like this !! As I was very pleased to find this post on this site. I wanted to thank you for this great read. I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have bookmarked you to check out new stuff you post. It sounds, like to share in your more post now and in future.


  2. reversephonelookupcellnumbers says:

    I went over this website and I think you have many superb info,
    bookmarked .


  3. pletcherceq says:

    Do you like here?So wonderful!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s