Here is an example of how Climate Science could change.
I personally don’t believe CO2 caused the ice ages the way climate scientists have assumed for decades. They say that the sun variation from Milankovitch cycles produces only about 10% of the heat difference required for an ice age. So, 90% is missing. CO2 by itself only produces another 20%. So, they are missing 70% of the heat change needed.
They got around this by assuming that feedbacks in the climate system magnify the 20% of CO2 change by a factor of 4 or 5 to finish off the effect. That’s how they get 100ppm of CO2 change during the ice ages to change temp by 8C.
In order for CO2 to be responsible they have to multiply it’s effect by a massive positive feedback. That’s a little sketchy but they pointed out that water vapor alone might double or triple the effect of CO2. So it seemed plausible.
Using the ice ages as the basis you come up with approximately what they think the CO2 climate sensitivity is. It is a requirement to get the change they need for the ice ages. So, then they constructed computer models of the climate and tuned them. Voila what do you know they were able to build models which simulate roughly the factor of 4 amplification of CO2 effect. Case closed. Climate Science understood. I believed it initially.
However, some things worried me. No place in this theory did they consider if the oceans had any effect over periods of decades or longer. This seemed a little presumptuous. The ocean has 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere. Even the smallest change in ocean heat could generate far more than an ice age difference. The mantle is full of hot core that at times comes out as volcanoes. When they erupt a single explosion can change the earths temperature radically for years. What about underwater volcanoes. They had reasons to argue these things didn’t change over short periods.
In the 1990s and 2000s it became apparent the ocean wasn’t such a docile player. The PDO and AMO were found to cause El Niño’s to occur more frequently for 30 years and then less frequently for 30 years. More El Niño’s turns into a warmer climate and more La Ninas makes the climate cooler. This cycle has been observed 10 iterations for 600 years approximately. No one can explain this.
We also found more and more evidence that the Midievel warm period and LIA (Little Ice Age) happened outside of Northern Europe. I had a problem with them being regional in the first place because it implied that a part of the planet could be hot or colder for hundreds of years and there was no explanation for this. If you believe the MWP and LIA are regional you have to explain how that is possible because on the face of it it seems bizarre and impossible frankly. No explanation has been forthcoming but in any case dozens of studies have come out showing these phenomenon happened all over the world. Further, it is obvious in the climate record there is an oscillation around the 500 /1000 year range that caused the Roman Warm period and was coincident with the great optimum 5,000 years ago when human civilization first settled down to agriculture. The optimum was warmer than today. It was also when hunter gatherers finally found they could live off the land and didn’t need to move.
These 2 phenomenon (AMO/PDO, LIA and MWP) discovery also corresponded with the start of the pause. 20 years continuing to today really unless you believe pause-buster data put out last year that was whistle-blown by NOAA quality scientist as fake.
There is way too little temperature change to erase 20 years of less than predicted temperature change to make the models close to current temperatures even with their pause buster data and the El Niño that happens all the time in the middle of the down cycle of PDO/AMO that we just experienced. With Pause buster data we have 0.112C/decade change and without pause buster we have 0.06C/decade. Either way we are less than 1/2 what they need to match computer models. The computer models appear juiced and many scientific papers have been published which say this and have estimated TCS much closer to the 1.2C I believe it is. You won’t read that in the filter bubble.
So, all of this says that there is much higher likelihood that the environment is about 1/3 as sensitive to CO2 as what they said it was originally. The problem with that if you go back to the start is that then they have no explanation for the ice ages. Part of the reason they resist letting the TCS fall is that it makes significant consequences from CO2 disappear (which will hurt their funding) and also it leaves them without an explanation for the ice ages.
I get that. So, what is the explanation for the ice ages? New papers have shown the when the Earth comes under gravitational stress undersea vents have more eruptions. Essentially I explain this in my blog but the Milankovitch cycles through the gravitational pressures of other planets deform the molten spinning Earth and open recently discovered more prevalent undersea vents. These vents open until the caps melt and the earth slowly becomes more uniform in shape and the vents close.
As the vents close the Earth cools again and we head into another ice age. This theory has been coming for only the last 2 to 3 years. It explains more of the energy needed to explain the ice ages. This allows co2 not to have to be so powerful and for there not to be such a need for high feedback and therefore a 2/3 reduction in the CO2 effect is plausible.
If undersea volcanoes aren’t enough there could be things from cosmic rays and sun effects to biological and chemical interactions that could be unknown. There is huge uncertainty. In retrospect they had no right to disqualify other ideas so fast.
Science operates under Okkam’s razor and tries to find the simplest explanation. All we knew from the ice ages were a few variables. We don’t have a lot of good data. They built a theory around the data we had but we are far from knowing all the things that might have happened during these periods or even today we didn’t know about PDO / AMO just 20 years ago. We still don’t understand it.
10 years ago someone started to notice that heat was accumulating in the ocean below 300 meters in depth. Climate models didn’t anticipate this. Another huge miss. Some climate scientists jumped to the conclusion this is where the missing energy from co2 was going since temperatures weren’t going up. They jumped immediately to a CO2 explanation. I find that bizarre. They are saying essentially that this lower level ocean heat has never happened before. It has to do with CO2. This is not the first thing they should have thought of. For one thing nobody has a clue how the energy from CO2 which is in the bulk of the atmosphere at 5000 ft elevation could have snuck into the deeper ocean 1000 feet below the surface. It’s a bizarre jump to conclusions this energy was related to CO2.
If the temp varied in this part of the ocean it could explain the PDO/AMO phenomenon. It is much more likely that we aren’t seeing a unique effect but something that happens all the time. It’s just we never had the equipment to measure it before. In other words if we had ARGO 60 years ago it would have seen the same ocean warming. Where else could the energy for PDO/AMO come from? The point is again they didn’t know about this, they didn’t predict it and if this kind of thing is going on what other things in the ocean is going on that they just assumed wasn’t happening.
The climate scientists didn’t jump for joy that a new possible explanation was popping up. No, they tried to use it to buttress their CO2 theory. Their first instinct like the filter bubble is to defend defend defend. Discredit anything other than their theory.
We have to put these people out of business. They are literally wasting billions of dollars and impeding this science by spending all this time playing with adjustments to data to fix the data so it matches their theory. They refuse over and over to consider any possibility they are wrong but even with adjustments their models are so far off it’s not possible to believe them anymore. Now we are in science fiction land. They literally are talking about things that are crazy. The temps have gone nowhere for 20 years but we get stories that “It’s happeneing faster than ever…” It’s bizarre. They are literally saying completely indefensible things. They have wasted billions on computer models that are impossible but have spent years and years and billions and are no better than they were 30 years ago.
It’s time to end this. These people are scamming us. They are keeping it alive running to Paris with made up data to keep their careers alive to keep people panicked enough to keep funding their multi-billions in grants. We have to put an end to it. This is the biggest scandal ever in science.