The Earth’s Climate Is a Truly Wonderful Thing

John Rofe

After 15 years of trying to figure out whether the “Warming Alarmists” or the “Climate Change Deniers” are right, I have concluded that the causes of climate change are almost totally natural…solar variability on the one hand (because the sun provides 99.9% of Earth’s energy) and the water cycle on the other (because 71% of the Earth’s surface is covered by water and its evaporation, condensation and precipitation can be seen to affect the climate everywhere, from place to place and from time to time).  Just elegant natural homeostasis.

1.15 trillion tonnes of surface water is converted into water vapour every day and being lighter than air, it rises to the skies, cooling as it ascends (because the air cools by 6.5^oC with every 1,000 metres of altitude). Then it forms clouds and they mask 60-70% of Earth’s surface. When condensation has completed the cycle, and minute water vapour droplets coalesce into rain drops, hail or snow, precipitation of an approximate 1.15 trillion tonnes descends, leaving between 15-20 trillion tonnes in the atmosphere at any point in time.

So the sun heats the Earth and the water cycle moderates both the day-time heating and discharge of night-time heat into space.  This is easily provable from official published meteorological data, yet no one is interested in fact-checking, because it would end the gravy train for so many overpaid pseudo-scientists.

Over geological time, the Earth’s attitude to and distance from the sun have been the cause of the massive variability in the global temperatures between ice ages and intervening inter-glacial periods.  These “long period” changes are referred to as Milankovich cycles, but they are of no immediate relevance.

For the “Alarmists” to blatantly ignore the 10,000 years history of the current interglacial period (known as the Holocene) and impute a dominant role for humanity’s effects in the changed levels of certain trace gases is at best a gross exaggeration.  There is no evidence that any change in atmospheric carbon dioxide has caused climate change although the reverse has been indicated as possible from Antarctic ice core analysis.

For our leaders to be conned by the protestations of parties benefitting from the deception that it is “settled science” (i.e. UN IPCC) is at best incompetent or at worst malfeasance.  We rightly expected NIWA, the Ministry for the Environment and cabinet ministers to have exercised rigorous oversight of public expenditure.

For our Minister for Climate Change to write a letter in response to my provision of evidence (in 2018) to inform me that good science is never settled, but in this case, he is sure it is, defied all logic.  There is no empirical scientific justification for his actions so this showed that no independent New Zealand due diligence was ever performed before the Zero Carbon legislation was enacted by our Parliament.

It is often argued that the motive for the deception has been the desire of people beyond our shores to tax an element of the periodic table that is the very essence of all life on Earth – carbon.  That was why finding human involvement in climate change was central to the role of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. With an open chequebook from many governments, the OECD’s scientific community was set to work to employ “confirmation bias” and sophistry in order to achieve the required result.

Around the world and in most countries (from the outset) the bogus nature of this hoax has been resisted by scientists. They are in part the heroes of this sorry business even though blatant systemic media bias in favour of the hoax has left them impotent and ignored (even ridiculed) despite no evidence supporting the supposed orthodoxy.  But every serious scientist works in a silo.  In critics’ silos, their expertise is contested, but the overwhelming impossibility of the UN theory disappears into the mist of deliberate sophistry. In 30 years of deliberate malfeasance, science and the scientific method has been corrupted.  Censorship follows.

How did climate science get corrupted when the corrupting process occurred in plain sight?

1. The Vostok ice core experiments were alternately ignored or misinterpreted. 
2. The historical impacts of solar variability were actively suppressed – whether they came from the 11-year regular solar cycles, or the longer term Grand Solar Maximums and Minimums.
3. The volume of human influenced “greenhouse gases” was overstated and their efficacy magnified.
4. The measurement by atomic absorption spectroscopy of the impacts of various gases was ignored and the impact of the Beer-Lambert law of physics, which down-rated the efficacy of additional concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane, was also minimised by either intent or modelling emphasis.
5. The true natural power of the water cycle was de-rated by deliberately splitting up the three thermally active phases of (i) evaporation – yielding water vapour, (ii) condensation – yielding clouds, and (iii) precipitation – yielding rain, hail or snow (by which high altitude H₂O is transferred to earth’s surface with cooling effect).  It is the water cycle that always provides the climate with moderation.
6. The automatic cleansing effect of the water cycle is deliberately ignored and in particular the way in which rain brings carbon dioxide (which is also heavier than air) and all pollutants – including residue of the worst catastrophic events earth can sustain – back down to where we live, farm and fish.
7. The impact of the variable heating from sub-sea volcanism is little understood as is the impact of changes to the magnetosphere from changes in the variability of solar electromagnetic energy.
8. There is a large area of study still into the role and impact of the changed cyclic influx of galactic cosmic rays on cloud formation and the huge variability in the changes in the thickness and temperature of Earth’s Thermosphere.  

With new missions now on their way to Mars, “Climate Science”, the one-dimensional perspective of Earth’s climate being enclosed in a greenhouse, is akin to the now rejected flat earth theories of the 17^th Century.

Climatologists now keep a weather eye on the “space weather” (key variables are published each day on www.spaceweather.com). There is growing evidence that it is the space weather (where the role of the sun dominates) that drives our terrestrial climate.  Certainly, that has been the interpretation of the folk running the Russian experiments on the International Space Station. Their views are shared by many NASA astronauts.  So what is delivered to us as “settled science” is really just a set of theories for which there is no empirical scientific proof at all! Human carbon emissions don’t have a significant role to play.

While we are told that many countries do not support the actions of the UN (such as with the Paris Accords), the fact is that there are good and proper reasons to object – and from objectors there is considerable empirical scientific evidence, in addition to the factors that were accepted by the Russian Academy of Sciences in this 2014 presentation (please forgive and forget the audio: concentrate on the screen shots):

The use of “misdirection” techniques is too obvious to ignore and this suggests that there is an undercurrent of intent to deceive in much of the material I have reviewed.

If you enjoyed this BFD article please share it.