Ian Bradford: Can we really believe anything the climate alarmists tell us?

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is the UN climate arm whose aim is to provide information to the public about climate, particularly changes to climate and the causes of those changes. 

The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report stated that anthropogenic, (human caused) C­O₂ emissions  totalling about 2000 Giga tonnes since 1750 have increased atmospheric concentrations from 280 parts per million (ppm) to 420 ppm driving a global temperature increase of 0.8 to 1.1 Deg C since pre-industrial times. (A Giga tonne is a thousand million tonnes). The IPCC gets most of its information from organisations such as NASA, GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies), and The UK HadCRUT 4 after they have made adjustments for station biases, urban heat effects, and other inconsistencies. But a growing body of peer reviewed studies challenge these fundamental assumptions citing discrepancies between the raw data from observational records and the model projections. They argue that natural processes may dominate climate dynamics. 

Anthropogenic CO₂ emissions are given as 10 Giga tonnes per year and these are said to come from fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes. This amount represents only about 4% of all CO₂emitted per year. So the rest of the CO₂ comes from oceanic exchange, terrestrial processes (photosynthesis and respiration), and minor contributions from volcanic activity (Sabine et al 2004). It is estimated that the amount of Carbon stored in the oceans is 38,000 Giga tonnes and this includes dissolved CO_2, carbonates, and bicarbonates. The 140 ppm increase in CO₂ in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution, the IPCC attributes mostly to human emissions.  

However, during the Covid lockdowns there was a significant 0.7 Giga tonnes  reduction in CO₂  emissions  from humans which is equivalent to a 7% yearly reduction.  No change in the Mauna Loa CO₂ curve was observed. This curve rose 2 ppm from 414.4 ppm in 2019 to 416.4 ppm in 2020. This implies that natural sinks like the oceans rapidly neutralise the 10 Giga tonnes per year of human inputs rendering the 4% contribution negligible against a 220 Giga tonne back drop.  It suggests that the rise in the Mauna Loa curve is caused solely by natural processes. 

The graph goes to the end of 2020.  Lockdowns worldwide were in early 2020. There is no deviation in the curve.  The 7% decrease in human carbon dioxide had no effect. The graph kept rising from natural sources. 

CO₂’s  Time in the Atmosphere                     

The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment report estimates that the resident time for Carbon Dioxide released into the atmosphere at more than 100 years. The Bern Carbon cycle model suggests that after 500 years, 25% of emissions are still in the atmosphere.  So The IPCC claims that human CO₂ drives cumulative warming over large time scales. In other words, the warming caused by human caused CO2 emissions at present, continue warming the planet for a long time.  

However, several scientists dispute this. Koutsoyiannis et al employing what is called a mass balance approach yielded a residence time for carbon dioxide at 3.5-4 years. 

Hermann Harde’s post 2016 research further supports this shorter residence time. His method incorporating absorption spectroscopy and flux measurements estimates a residence time of approximately 4 years.  He argued that ocean uptake and biospheric cycling dominate over deep sink delays. 

Additonally, Harde and Salby 2021, demonstrated through radiative transfer and flux data that CO₂ ‘s  atmospheric lifetime is around 3years.

These findings corroborate empirical observations of carbon 14 decay from the 1950s to 1960s nuclear tests, where carbon 14 in carbon dioxide had a half life ranging from 5 to 10 years as it cycled through oceanic and biospheric reservoirs, a process detailed by Jacobson (2005) who estimated individual CO₂ molecule resident time at approximately 4 years.

So to briefly summarise: The IPCC have tried to scare us by telling us that any carbon dioxide put into the atmosphere, including that put out by humans, will stay in the atmosphere for more than 100 years and 25% of these emissions may stay for up to 500 years. 

However as above, several scientists have strongly disputed this with evidence, finding that carbon dioxide emissions only stay in the atmosphere for about 4 years.

Further evidence comes from the Covid lockdowns where a 7% drop in human carbon dioxide emissions failed to change Mauna Loa’s curve, suggesting carbon dioxide sinks  (things that absorb carbon dioxide),  adjusted within months - not many decades as suggested by the IPCC.  

Warming Precedes Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Further, the IPCC try to tell us that emissions of carbon dioxide essentially by humans, over the past 50 years at least, are causing global warming. However, Koutsoyiannis et al (2023), challenged this warming paradigm by looking at satellite data of global temperature and CO₂ measurements. They found that temperature changes precede CO₂ concentration increases by 6-12 months. It seems then that the present warming of at least parts of the oceans, is causing the emission of carbon dioxide (Henry’s Law), and there is also the release of huge amounts of carbon dioxide from sea grass in many areas of the oceans.   So the increase in carbon dioxide at present is not caused by humans, but rather is coming from the warming oceans. Paleoclimate records from the Vostock ice cores spanning some 420,000 years show a consistent pattern.CO₂  concentrations rise approximately 800 years after temperature increases.

The graph should be read from right to left – that’s coming back towards the present. The red graph is temperature and in general is on the right of the blue graph which is carbon dioxide concentration. So the temperature occurs first then the carbon dioxide emissions follow. Graph goes back to approximately 420,000 years ago and the zero on the left is 1995. 

Raw rural United States HCN data free from any adjustments show annual temperatures holding steady at 12.2 Deg C  from the 1930’s, and this contradicts the expected 0.28 – 0.55 rise from CO₂ global warming forcing. (HCN is the Historical Climate Network. It provides monthly and daily temperatures from 1218 stations across the US, and is designed to quantify national and regional scale temperature changes). The IPCC forcing estimate tied to a 0.8 global rise assumes CO₂ leads temperature.  Yet unadjusted data and causality analysis indicate the reverse, casting strong doubts on anthropogenic causation. These analyses confirm the cross–correlation studies of Humlum et al (2013), and the more recent publications of Salby and Harde (2021). All these studies indicate that temperature precedes CO₂ emissions. 

Model Predictions

What about model predictions? CMIPS models (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project), from 1979 to 2018 projected warming rates of 0.15 – 0.4 Deg C per decade, with an average of 0.25 Deg C per decade.  In contrast, satellite data recorded a global lower tropospheric trend of 0.13 Deg C per decade (bit over a tenth of a degree). CMIP6 models escalated predictions to 0.2-0.5 Deg C per decade, whereas USCRN (US Climate Reference Network) data show a maximum increase of 0.1 Deg C over 15 years with no statistically significant trend. 

McKitrick and Christy (2018) found that 90% of CMIP5 runs overestimated tropospheric warming.  (The troposphere is the first level of the atmosphere).

Taking Arctic sea ice extent, a key diagnostic averages 4.4 million sq km, since 2007 (NSIDC-National Snow and Ice Data Centre), with interannual swings from 3.4 million sq km to 5.1 sq km  defying CMIP5 projections of a 20%-50% decline, at 2-3% per decade. 

Raw rural USHCN data untainted by urban heat adjustments, maintains a consistent 12.2 Deg C annual average from the 1930’s Dust Bowl to the 2020’s, while CMIP6 outputs 13.3 to 14.4 Deg C by 2020, a 1.1-2.2 overestimate. 

Models fail to replicate natural oscillations or regional stability. They highlight a systematic inability to reflect real world dynamics.  A significant reason for the overestimation lies in the models’ exaggerated response to CO_2.  CMIP5 and CMIP6 models assume climate sensitivity (that’s the temperature increase when CO₂concentrations are doubled), range from 2.0 Deg C to 4.5 Deg C with a best estimate of around 3 Deg C. This far exceeds the observed global warming of 1 Deg C since the Industrial revolution despite a CO₂ increase from 280 ppm to 420 ppm.   Predictions by models stem from flawed assumption rather than accurate physics. They remain unvalidated against real world data.  

This graph gives the temperature increase for several computer models which are listed at the top.  They should be compared to the actual observed values- the blue and green graphs at the bottom.

Former IPCC lead author, head of UK’s “Met Office” for Climate Variability and Forecasting Group and modelling expert, Professor Chris Folland said: “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”  

Data Adjustments

NOAA’s dataset undergoes “homogenisation”, a process aimed at correcting perceived biases in raw temperature records to account for non climate influences such as station moves, instrument changes, and urban heat island effects. A station’s record is adjusted based on differences with neighbouring reference stations assumed to be unaffected by similar biases. What is done is to cool 1880’s global temperatures by around about 1 Deg C and warming the 2020’s by 0.5 deg C yielding a 0.8 Deg C rise. But unadjusted rural stations suggest a average increase of just 0.35 Deg C. 

This method assumes that most temperature changes between stations are due to non climatic factors, but this overlooks natural variability, such as El Nino and PDO which can affect multiple stations leading to over-corrections. For example rural data shows stability at 12.2 Deg C from the 1930’s to the 2020’s yet adjustments boost the 12.2 values to 12.5-12.8 Deg C. creating up to a 1 deg C trend. Note: PDO is Pacific Decadal Oscillation - a long-term fluctuation of the Pacific Ocean. PDO waxes and wanes every 20 to 30 years with a cool phase or a warm phase. The last PDO phase shift was in 2014 when the oceans turned strongly positive meaning a strong warming in the North, West, and Southern Pacific. Then of course we have the infamous Mann “hockey stick” graph which flattened Medieval warming to near modern levels whereas Greenland ice cores indicate at least 0.5 deg C higher temperatures, and this is consistent with the findings of Soon et al (2024). The validity of these adjusted results is further undermined by lack of independent validation.

The above graph by Mann shows all temperatures up until about 1950 were lower than the average temperature between 1961 and 1990. 

The Medieval Warm Period is entirely missing. This time was up to a degree warmer than now, and was a global temperature. Note the huge exaggerated rise in temperature at the end. Compare this to a record which shows these warm periods. 

Adjusted datasets like HadCRUT4 and GISS are tuned to match CMIP outputs - computer model outputs, i.e. a warming of 1 deg C by 2020, but unadjusted records show no trend, and rural readings are stable suggesting adjustments exaggerate trends to fit preconceived narratives.  It seems common for climate alarmists to lower old temperature readings and raise newer ones so as to exaggerate the amount of warming. 

Distribution of Weather Stations

There is an irregular weather station network. Stations are dense in urban areas and sparse in remote regions.  Areas are divided into grids, but the raw data is adjusted before gridding. Adjusting raw data before gridding can bias interpolated values. (Interpolated values fill in the gaps in between widely spaced stations.)  So for example, 1930’s rural stations are cooled below what they actually were, to align with urban trends. This bias can lead to overestimating warming in data scarce areas like the Arctic or the oceans. Soon et al 2024 documents NOAA’s specific manipulations such as the cooling of Kansas peaks 49.4 Deg C by 0.56 to 1.11 Deg C in order to tailor data to computer model (CMIP) outputs rather than reflecting reality. This practice is not supported by observed values. It suggests the practice of homogenisation introduces systematic errors particularly in interpolation where sparse station coverage amplifies adjusted biases distorting global temperatures.  Without these alterations warming decreases markedly and so no carbon dioxide global warming is needed.  

If this isn’t enough, the UK Government has been caught inventing climate data from 103 non-existent stations in order to push the net zero agenda. This fabricated data has found its way into climate models used by leading institutions worldwide, influencing the UN and other global organisations in shaping climate polices and driving alarmist narratives. It appears that 103 stations out of 302 sites supplying temperature averages do not exist. The practice of “inventing” temperature data from non-existent stations is a controversial issue also in the US where local weather service NOAA has been charged with fabricating data for more than 30% of its reporting sites. 

The IPCC CO₂ Global warming narrative collapses under scrutiny. Human emissions (4%), vanish in natural emissions and models fail predictive tests, adjusted data distort reality, and natural drivers such as solar variability, explain trends without anthropogenic forcing. Basically then what we are fed does not agree with the observed values, and nobody can dispute what we actually observe.                

The NZ Government needs to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord immediately. The last Labour government sent millions of dollars overseas to supposedly fight against climate change.  One may ask where exactly did this money go? The country cannot afford to prop up a fraudulent cause. Every resident of NZ is suffering in order to support the false idea  that humans are causing climate change, and we must do everything we can to stop it. 

I had an interview with a National party MP about three years ago. He said they wouldn’t withdraw from the Paris Accord because it would affect out trade - nations would not trade with us. The present climate minister in the National Party in Government Mr Watts, is saying the same thing. Well that’s a load of rubbish. Late last year President Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Accord. Did NZ stop trading with the US?  NO!! Every country including NZ is worried about Wednesday 3^rd April (in NZ) – it is “Liberation Day” in the US where tariffs go on most if not all countries. The tariffs have been set at 10%.  This clearly indicates to me that most countries being worried about tariffs imposed by the US have NOT stopped trading with the US and want to continue. So Mr Watts, your statement seems incorrect. You need to withdraw NZ from the Paris Accord immediately and help all the residents of this country.  

Ian Bradford, a science graduate, is a former teacher, lawyer, farmer and keen sportsman, who is writing a book about the fraud of anthropogenic climate change.