Japan scientists expose ClimateGate! (Part ONE of FOUR)
.
.
.
.
.
Japan’s
boffins:
Global
Warming
isn’t
man-made
By Andrew Orlowski
(Translation by
Charles Eicher)
February 25th, 2009
THEREGISTER.CO.UK
The Register (link)
_Part ONE of FOUR
.
.
Exclusive –
Japanese
scientists
have made
a dramatic break with
the UN and Western-
backed hypothesis of
climate change in a
new report from its
Energy Commission.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Three of the five researchers
disagree with the UN’s IPCC view
that recent warming is primarily
the consequence of man-made
industrial emissions
of greenhouse gases.
Remarkably,
the subtle and nuanced language
typical in such reports has
been set aside.
One of the five contributors
compares computer climate
modelling to ancient astrology.
Others castigate the paucity
of the US ground temperature
data set used to support
the hypothesis,
and declare that the unambiguous
warming trend from the mid-part
of the 20th Century has ceased.
The report by Japan Society
of Energy and Resources (JSER)
is astonishing rebuke to
international pressure,
and a vote of confidence in
Japan’s native marine and
astronomical research.
Publicly-funded science in
the West uniformly backs the
hypothesis that industrial
influence is primarily responsible
for climate change,
although fissures have
appeared recently.
.
.
Only one of the five top
Japanese scientists commissioned
here concurs with the man-made
global warming hypothesis.
JSER is the academic society
representing scientists from
the energy and resource fields,
and acts as a government
advisory panel.
The report appeared last month
but has received curiously
little attention.
So The Register commissioned
a translation of the document –
the first to appear in the West
in any form.
Below you’ll find some
of the key findings –
but first,
a summary.
.
.
Summary
Three of the five
leading scientists
contend that recent
climate change is
driven by natural cycles,
not human industrial
activity,
as political
activists argue.
Kanya Kusano is Program
Director and Group Leader
for the Earth Simulator at
the Japan Agency for
Marine-Earth Science & Technology
(JAMSTEC).
He focuses on the immaturity
of simulation work cited in
support of the theory of
anthropogenic climate change.
Using undiplomatic language,
Kusano compares them
to ancient astrology.
.
.
After listing many faults,
and the IPCC’s own conclusion
that natural causes of climate
are poorly understood,
Kusano concludes:
“[The IPCC’s] conclusion
that from now on
atmospheric temperatures
are likely to show a
continuous, monotonic
increase,
should be perceived as
an unprovable hypothesis,”
he writes.
Shunichi Akasofu,
head of the International Arctic
Research Center in Alaska,
has expressed criticism
of the theory before.
Akasofu uses historical data
to challenge the claim that
very recent temperatures
represent an anomaly:
“We should be cautious,
IPCC’s theory that
atmospheric temperature
has risen since 2000 in
correspondence with CO2
is nothing but a hypothesis.”
.
.
Akasofu calls the post-2000
warming trend hypothetical.
His harshest words are reserved
for advocates who give conjecture
the authority of fact.
“Before anyone noticed,
this hypothesis has
been substituted for
truth…
The opinion that great
disaster will really
happen must be broken.”
What is the source of the
rise in atmospheric temperature
in the second half of
the 20th century?
.
.
.
Japan’s
boffins:
Global
Warming
isn’t
man-made
By Andrew Orlowski
(Translation by
Charles Eicher)
February 25th, 2009
THEREGISTER.CO.UK
The Register (link)
_Part ONE of FOUR
.
.
Exclusive –
Japanese
scientists
have made
a dramatic break with
the UN and Western-
backed hypothesis of
climate change in a
new report from its
Energy Commission.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Three of the five researchers
disagree with the UN’s IPCC view
that recent warming is primarily
the consequence of man-made
industrial emissions
of greenhouse gases.
Remarkably,
the subtle and nuanced language
typical in such reports has
been set aside.
One of the five contributors
compares computer climate
modelling to ancient astrology.
Others castigate the paucity
of the US ground temperature
data set used to support
the hypothesis,
and declare that the unambiguous
warming trend from the mid-part
of the 20th Century has ceased.
The report by Japan Society
of Energy and Resources (JSER)
is astonishing rebuke to
international pressure,
and a vote of confidence in
Japan’s native marine and
astronomical research.
Publicly-funded science in
the West uniformly backs the
hypothesis that industrial
influence is primarily responsible
for climate change,
although fissures have
appeared recently.
.
.
Only one of the five top
Japanese scientists commissioned
here concurs with the man-made
global warming hypothesis.
JSER is the academic society
representing scientists from
the energy and resource fields,
and acts as a government
advisory panel.
The report appeared last month
but has received curiously
little attention.
So The Register commissioned
a translation of the document –
the first to appear in the West
in any form.
Below you’ll find some
of the key findings –
but first,
a summary.
.
.
Summary
Three of the five
leading scientists
contend that recent
climate change is
driven by natural cycles,
not human industrial
activity,
as political
activists argue.
Kanya Kusano is Program
Director and Group Leader
for the Earth Simulator at
the Japan Agency for
Marine-Earth Science & Technology
(JAMSTEC).
He focuses on the immaturity
of simulation work cited in
support of the theory of
anthropogenic climate change.
Using undiplomatic language,
Kusano compares them
to ancient astrology.
.
.
After listing many faults,
and the IPCC’s own conclusion
that natural causes of climate
are poorly understood,
Kusano concludes:
“[The IPCC’s] conclusion
that from now on
atmospheric temperatures
are likely to show a
continuous, monotonic
increase,
should be perceived as
an unprovable hypothesis,”
he writes.
Shunichi Akasofu,
head of the International Arctic
Research Center in Alaska,
has expressed criticism
of the theory before.
Akasofu uses historical data
to challenge the claim that
very recent temperatures
represent an anomaly:
“We should be cautious,
IPCC’s theory that
atmospheric temperature
has risen since 2000 in
correspondence with CO2
is nothing but a hypothesis.”
.
.
Akasofu calls the post-2000
warming trend hypothetical.
His harshest words are reserved
for advocates who give conjecture
the authority of fact.
“Before anyone noticed,
this hypothesis has
been substituted for
truth…
The opinion that great
disaster will really
happen must be broken.”
Shunichi Akasofu
Introductory discussion.
Point 1.1:
Global Warming
has halted
Global mean temperature
rose continuously from 1
800-1850.
The rate of increase was .05
degrees Celsius per 100 years.
This was mostly
unrelated to CO2 gas
(CO2 began to increase
suddenly after 1946.
Until the sudden increase,
the CO2 emissions rate had
been almost unchanged
for 100 years).
However,
since 2001,
this increase halted.
Despite this,
CO2 emissions are
still increasing.
.
___
.
According to the IPCC panel,
global atmospheric temperatures
should continue to rise,
so it is very likely that the
hypothesis that the majority
of global warming can be
ascribed to the Greenhouse Effect
is mistaken.
There is no prediction of
this halt in global warming
in IPCC simulations.
The halt of the increase
in temperature,
and slight downward trend
is “something greater than
the Greenhouse Effect,”
but it is in effect.
What that “something” is,
is natural variability.
From this author’s research
into natural (CO2 emissions
unrelated to human activity)
climate change over the past
1000 years,
it can be asserted that the
global temperature increase
up to today is primarily recovery
from the “Little Ice Age” earth
experienced from 1400
through 1800
(i.e. global warming
rate of change=0.5℃/100).
.
.
The recovery in temperatures
since follows a naturally variable
30-50 year cycle,
(quasi-periodic variations),
and in addition,
this cycle has been
positive since 1975,
and peaked in the year 2000.
This quasi-periodic cycle has
passed its peak and has begun
to turn negative.
(The IPCC ascribes the
positive change since 1975,
for the most part, to CO2 and
the Greenhouse Effect.)
This quasi-periodic cycle
fluctuates 0.1 degrees C per
10 years,
short term
(on the order of 50 years).
This quasi-periodic cycle’s
amplitude is extremely
pronounced in the Arctic Circle ,
so it is easy to understand.
.
.
The previous quasi-periodic
cycle was positive from
1910 to 1940 and negative
from 1940 to 1975
(despite CO2 emissions
rapid increase after 1946).
Regardless of whether or
not the IPCC has sufficiently
researched natural variations,
they claim that CO2 has
increased particularly
since 1975.
Consequently,
after 2000,
although it should have
continued to rise,
atmospheric temperature
stabilised completely
(despite CO2 emissions
continuing to increase).
Since 1975 the chances of
increase in natural variability
(mainly quasiperiodic vibration)
are high;
moreover,
the quasiperiodic vibration
has turned negative.
.
.
.
___35 Inconvenient Truths:
__________Lord Monckton Al Gore
________
__
.
Related links in GREEN
.
ClimateGate link in GREEN
.
.
.
.
.
[…] Japan scientists expose ClimateGate! (Part ONE of FOUR) Japan scientists expose ClimateGate! (Part TWO […]
ClimateGate: When scientists commit criminal fraud, does it still count? (Part TWO of TWO) « 22MOON.COM - November 30, 2009 at 10:13 pm |