A stunning new development is creating waves across the global warming community of activists with a report from NASA that burning carbon fuels actually lowers the temperatures in local environments.
According to a new report in the Express, the result throws “into doubt” many of the major theories about what causes temperatures to rise.
“Environmentalists have long argued the burning of fossil fuels in power stations and for other uses is responsible for global warming and predicted temperature increases because of the high levels of carbon dioxide produced – which causes the global greenhouse effect,” the report said.
But the new findings discovered aerosols, which are given off by burning fossil fuels, “actually cool the local environment, at least temporarily.”
As part of research intended to find out if global warming models were accurate, investigators looked into the Transient Climate Response and Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity of the earth.
“As part of that calculation, researchers have relied on simplifying assumptions when accounting for the temperature impacts of climate drivers other than carbon dioxide, such as tiny particles in the atmosphere known as aerosols, for example,” one NASA official told the newspaper.
The report said the spokesman confirmed it is “well known” that aerosols such as those released in volcanic eruptions and from power stations operations cool the earth’s surface.
“In a similar fashion, land use changes such as deforestation in northern latitudes result in bare land that increases reflected sunlight,” the spokesman said.
Climatologist Kate Marvel, a lead author, added, “Take sulfate aerosols, which are created from burning fossil fuels and contribute to atmospheric cooling. They are more or less confined to the northern hemisphere, where most of us live and emit pollution….
“Because earlier studies do not account for what amounts to a net cooling effect for parts of the northern hemisphere, predictions for TCR and ECS have been lower than they should be.”
The report said, “Climate scientist Gavin Schmidt, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York and a co-author on the study, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, said: ‘The assumptions made to account for these drivers are too simplistic and result in incorrect estimates of TCR and ECS.'”
Schmidt continued, “The problem with that approach is that it falls way short of capturing the individual regional impacts of each of those variables.”
NASA’s conclusion is that existing global warming models “have underestimated … the future impact.”
WND reported only days ago on President Barack latest actions to promote the agenda of global warming.
He smirked when he was told Republican presidential primary frontrunner Donald Trump criticized Obama’s claim that global warming is one of the nation’s greatest threats.
He and “CBS This Morning” co-host Norah O’Donnell had a good laugh over the issue.
Only in the last few weeks, in the wake of the terrorist attacks in Paris, Obama suggested a global warming conference in Paris would somehow serve as a rebuke to the Islamic State.
Yet in light of recent scandals over the validity of climate data, the president’s confidence in the science could be misplaced. As revealed in Sen. Jim Inhofe’s “The Greatest Hoax: How The Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future,” the “Climategate” scandal showed the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) may have been manipulating data and was putting a political agenda above scientific objectivity.
Recent data even revealed the arctic ice cap is actually growing, not shrinking, defying the predictions of climate change activists like former Vice President Al Gore. Expert observations in early 2015 also showed official temperature records cited to prove the existence of global warming had been systematically adjusted to falsely present the Earth as having “warmed” far more than the data showed.
This led a writer at the United Kingdom’s Telegraph to call the manipulation of climate data “one of the greatest scientific scandals of all time.”
Not surprisingly, the public seems to be tuning out warnings of apocalyptic doom. A recent poll from Fox showed only three percent of Americans thought “climate change” was the most important issue facing the country. Another poll taken in mid-October showed fewer than one in four Americans were extremely or very worried about climate change and only 36 percent saw climate change as a moral issue.
Nonetheless, don’t expect the climate change movement to go away anytime soon. Brian Sussman, a talk show host, former meteorologist and author of “Climategate” and “Eco-Tyranny” predicts environmentalists will simply double down on their claims. After all, he says, “climate change” has become a big business.
“I don’t see the climate change industry backing down because there is too much money to be made and too much power to be acquired,” Sussman told WND. “Again, the goal for some is to make loads of money, and for others to use ‘sustainable development’ as the key to pushing for global socialism and communism.”
Sussman accused the mainstream media of “carrying the torch for the climate agenda” and alleged the recent summit in Paris was dominated by this cynical agenda.
Global warming activists, as WND reported recently, have suggested a way to deal with those who don’t believe in their dogma.
They want Obama to use RICO laws to prosecute opponents who deny mankind is causing catastrophic changes in the climate.
That’s the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which can put people in jail.
In a letter addressed to Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren, the scientists from multiple universities said they “appreciate that you are making aggressive and imaginative use of the limited tools available to you in the face of a recalcitrant Congress.”
“One additional tool – recently proposed by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse – is a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) investigation of corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America’s response to climate change,” they wrote, according to Politico.
The scientists said their critics’ actions have been documented in various publications.
The scientists accused those who are not on a party of their campaign of using methods “quite similar to those used earlier by the tobacco industry. A RICO investigation (1999 to 2006) played an important role in stopping the tobacco industry from continuing to deceive the American people about the dangers of smoking.”
They continued, “If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that have been documented in books and journal articles, it is imperative that these misdeeds be stopped as soon as possible so that America and the world can get on with the critically important business of finding effective ways to restabilize the Earth’s climate, before even more lasting damage is done,” they said.
Blogger Steven Goddard at Real Science cited information from the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, showing the Arctic ice mass, as of Sept. 7, is substantially bigger than it was in September 2012.
“Nobel Prize winning climate experts and journalists tell us that the Arctic is ice-free, because they are propagandists pushing an agenda, not actual scientists or journalists,” he said.
In the past three years, he pointed out, the Arctic ice mass “has gained hundreds of miles … much of which is thick, multi-year ice.”
WND long has reported the predictions of an ice-free Arctic by scientists who believe mankind is causing global warming.
But in just last few winters, Cairo saw its first snow in 100 years. And Oregon, like several other states, reached its coldest temperature in 40 years. Chicago saw the coldest days ever recorded, and – as if to add finality to the trend – Antarctica reached the coldest temperature ever recorded anywhere on earth.
The holes in the theories that form the basis of ice-free Arctic forecasts are evident.
For example, London’s Independent newspaper declared at the turn of the millennium “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.” The report quoted David Viner, senior research scientist at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, long considered an authoritative resource for global warming research, saying snow would soon be “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain.
“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he claimed at the time.
Former vice president and current carbon-credit entrepreneur Al Gore told an audience in a 2009 speech that “the entire north polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.” And his 2006 documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” famously predicted increasing temperatures would cause earth’s oceans to rise by 20 feet, a claim many scientists say is utterly without rational basis.
A 2013 column by Mark Hertsgaard was headlined: “The End of the Arctic? Ocean Could be Ice Free by 2015.”
He wrote: “Say goodbye to polar bears and a whole lot of ice. New research suggests the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free by 2015, with devastating consequences for the world. Can it be stopped?”
Goddard also cited another of Gore’s predictions, that the “polar ice cap may disappear by 2014.”
Taking one more step back in time, the BBC said the Arctic summers would be ice-free by 2013.
Sierra Club Canada also said in 2013 that the Arctic sea ice would vanish that year.
Well-known scientist Art Robinson has spearheaded The Petition Project, which to date has gathered the signatures of 31,487 scientists who agree that there is “no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”
They say, “Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plan and animal environments of the Earth.”
Robinson, who has a Ph.D. in chemistry from Cal Tech, where he served on the faculty, co-founded the Linus Pauling Institute with Nobel-recipient Linus Pauling, where he was president and research professor. He later founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.