THE WINTER this year was unusually long and harsh. What possibly
could explain the occurrence of unusual cold wave conditions
this year throughout the globe when environmentalists voicing
their concerns about the human-led global warming had predicted
that the rise in carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere would
result in shorter winters with no significant dip in the mercury?
Was this winter an exception to the rule or is it simply following
a trend? After all, studies conducted by a small group of
‘sceptic’ scientists reveal that global warming
has been waning since 2001. Latest studies supported by satellite
data cast doubt on the climate fears propounded by environmentalists
supported by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC).
Satellite measurements available since 1979 show no warming
in the southern hemisphere and the trend in the northern hemisphere
appears to have waned since 2001. In August 2007, the UK Met
Office acknowledged that obvious global warming had stopped.
Paleo-climate scientist Bob Carter testifying before the US
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has noted
that the accepted global average temperature statistics used
by IPCC show no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.
A research led by David Bromwich, Professor of Atmospheric
Science in the Department of Geography at Ohio State University
and researchers with the Byrd Polar Research Centre at Ohio
State University shows that during the late 20th century,
the temperature in Antarctica did not rise to the level predicted
by many global warming models. According to UN scientist Madhav
L. Khandekar, a retired Environment Canada scientist and an
expert IPCC reviewer in 2007, the recent worldwide analysis
of ocean surface temperatures shows that sea surface temperatures
over world oceans are slowly declining since mid-1998.
(Article continues below)
While the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is steadily
rising from 280 ppm and might reach 560 ppm by 2100 as predicted
by IPCC, the world’s average temperature, instead of
following a steep upward gradient, is actually plunging after
a period of upward trend. However, the IPCC is not coming
out publicly with the truth surrounding the correlation between
rise in carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere and its possible
consequence on global warming, if any. A study by researchers
of the Atmospheric Science Group, Department of Mathematical
Science, at the University of Wisconsin, found that global
warming in the last century was linked to natural causes.
The Royal Meteorological Institute at Brussels in its report
last year said that not carbon dioxide but the most important
greenhouse gas was water vapour; it was responsible for 75
per cent of the greenhouse effect. According to Belgian climate
scientist Lu Debontridder, the warm winters of the last few
years in Belgium are simply due to the North-Atlantic oscillation
that has absolutely nothing to do with carbon dioxide. A study
published in Science last September found that contrary to
past inferences from ice core records, carbon dioxide did
not cause the end of the last ice age. According to the same
study, deep-sea temperatures warmed about 1,300 years before
the tropical surface ocean and well before the rise in atmospheric
carbon dioxide. USC geologist Lowell Scot, the lead author
of the study, said that the climate dynamics are much more
complex than simply saying that carbon dioxide rises and the
temperature warms.
The IPCC climate model is based on the assumption that increased
warming would cause more rainfall that would produce more
clouds on the higher reaches of the atmosphere. Since high
clouds have a net warming effect this would cause more warming,
more rainfall and the cycle will continue. It is this positive
feedback that causes the UN climate models to predict a temperature
rise in the range of 2.5 degree Celsius to 4.7 degree Celsius
due to rise in the level of carbon dioxide to 560 ppm. Dr
Roy Spencer along with researchers at the University of Alabama
Huntsville and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, California,
after observing the temperatures, clouds and rainfall reported
that warming is actually associated with fewer high clouds.
There is no data to support the theory that more rainfall
will produce more high-altitude clouds.
The mainstream media seems to be purposely ignoring the bulk
of the findings by renowned researchers throughout the globe
that the current global warming fear attributed solely to
carbon dioxide rise is utterly unfounded. Why is the IPCC,
which has been blamed for relying on climate models based
on wrong assumptions, continuing with its false prophecy?
Is there more to it than what meets the eye? Has the politics
of carbon trade got anything to do with it? Critics say that
carbon trading as propounded by IPCC, as a mean to combat
global warming is a smokescreen. It will allow corporate polluters
in rich countries to evade their emission reduction obligations
at home by buying up and trading carbon emission quotas and
credits from other countries, projects or industries. It is
meant to create further global economic disparities by robbing
the poor of their rights while the rich will manage to extract
maximum benefit from the mechanism.