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
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.