Weather

Physics PhD Dr Ed Berry rips UN IPCC ‘climate novel’ – Explained ‘why IPCC is wrong’ – Whispering about it?


Repost from Climate Depot

Via: administratorsTotal climate inventory December 24, 2021 9:33 am

Specially for Climate Warehouse

Climate science prevails over politics

This is my reply to an opinion letter of Monica Tranel, Montana Democratic Party candidate for Congress, in Montana’s Daily Inter Lake. This is my attempt to make the argument as simple as possible in 570 words for the general public to read.

This letter does not criticize Monica Tranel, but focuses on her December 19, 2021 letter, on climate change. Magazine The science of climate change published my landmark paper on the subject on December 14, 2021.

Ms. Tranel’s letter makes the following invalid assumptions.

First, her letter assumes the definition of “climate change” is man-made. However, “climate change” means that the climate simply changes regardless of the cause.

Second, her letter incorrectly assumed events that proved their cause, writing “The effects of climate change are hitting hard… We’ve seen its effects in Montana. ” My book Climate miracles shows why this assumption is not valid even in legal trials.

Third, her letter assumes that we should believe COP26 attendees saying, “The climate crisis will never be averted without international agreements and concerted action. ”

United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientific definition of climate change. But the IPCC draws its conclusion based on one big invalid assumption, that is natural CO2 unchanged since 1750 and human CO2 cause all CO2 increase. All climate laws, regulations, treaties and taxes are based on this invalid assumption.

My paper uses IPCC’s own data to prove this assumption wrong and shows natural CO2, not human CO2, dominate CO2 increase. Other scientists checked my calculations and proved them correct.

Here are some simple reasons to help you understand why IPCC is wrong.

IPCC admits natural CO2 Emissions 20 times more than human CO2 emissions. So for the first approximation, because CO2 flows into the atmosphere outflow, like water flowing through a lake, humans CO2 just 5% of the CO in the atmosphere today2, not 30 percent as IPCC incorrectly assumed.

More precisely, my paper calculates human CO flow2 back into the atmosphere, showing human CO2 is 8 percent while natural CO2 is 92 percent.

IPCC opposes that human CO2 stay in the atmosphere longer than natural CO2 making the human part 30 percent. Therefore, the IPCC dug its own grave. This IPCC claim is absurd because of human and natural CO2 the molecules are identical, so they flow out of the atmosphere at the same rate.

The IPCC story will require a magical demon in the atmosphere to separate humans from natural CO2 molecules, and then confine human molecules. The IPCC’s climate fiction is so absurd that it proves that the IPCC is not only erroneous, but is committing fraud of the global rate.

Even the 2021 emission reductions due to COVID won’t stop the inevitable CO2 increase caused by natural CO2, further demonstrating that climate and green energy treaties are useless because they ignore that unstoppable nature is the dominant cause of CO2 increase. Carbon-14 data independently prove nature dominates CO2 increase.

My paper shows that if human CO2 emissions have stopped, small anthropogenic increases will quickly subside, meaning there is no scientific basis to claim there is a climate emergency or worry about our grandchildren .

My article overturns IPCC climate fraud with clarity that can be won in court of law. Good high school students can understand my paper. Now, we need lawyers willing to overturn climate laws, regulations and taxes.

Honest people from all political parties should accept scientific facts. Renewable energy should compete on a level playing field with other energy sources without worrying about climate change.

To read my scientific paper, visit https://edberry.com and press Button “My Paper”.

Edwin X Berry, Doctor of Physics

Caltech 1957

Dartmouth 1960

Nevada 1965

https://edberry.com

Dr. Berry’s new paper:

Conclude

The IPCC’s basic climate change assumption is natural CO2 unchanged after 1750 as human CO2 cause all (or dominate) the increase in atmospheric CO2.

To support its basic assumption, the IPCC states “Human-emission of CO22from the atmosphere by natural processes would take several hundred thousand years (high confidence). But the human carbon electron time must be equal to the natural carbon electron time because CO is natural and human2 identical molecules.

The 14HAVE2 e-time, derived from14Data C, which is 10.0 years, makes twelfthHAVE2 electronic period less than 10 years. IPCC said twelfthHAVE2 e-time is about 4 years and the IPCC carbon cycle uses 3.5 years.

After the bomb test,14C returns to its initial balance of zero even if twelfthHAVE2 increase. This suggests adding twelfthHAVE2 come from a natural source.

Computational, inferential, physical modeling of IPCC natural carbon cycle data. The first physical model to reproduce the IPCC’s natural carbon cycle. Then, using the same IPCC data, it calculates that human carbon adds only 33 [24-48] ppmv into the atmosphere as of 2020, which means that natural carbon has added 100 ppmv. Physical model calculates more if human CO2 emissions stopped by the end of 2020, human CO khí2 33 ppmv will drop to 10 ppmv by 2100.

The IPCC argues that absent ice core data – may show natural CO2 levels greater than 280 ppmv prior to 1750 – supporting its underlying assumption. But the physical model shows that the underlying IPCC assumption, and thus the IPCC ice core assumption, contradicts the IPCC natural carbon cycle data.



Source link

news7g

News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button