Thursday, 5 June 2014



  Fourth Estate, London, 2009
Where Oliver Morton writes in the introduction:

          “On this day, and the next day, and every day, a scarcely conceivable 4000 trillion kilowatt hours of energy reached the top of the earth’s atmosphere as sunshine…  And over the course of the day, that energy served to turn hundreds of millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide into food and living tissue. And as a result the world stayed alive. 
That’s what really happened today.”

Earthrise photo from the Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter

On this basis, I decided to do a little spreadsheet calculation -- remembering the
Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics [1] :

Hmmm, even the IPCC estimate of ‘man-made global warming’ (AGW) is no more than a onehundredthousandth of the sunshine total influencing the Earth’s average surface temperature.
Now please go to 
or, of course

and decide for yourself whether tampering with any of the measured values shown in these graphs, by a onehundredthousandth of their values shown, would allow any interpretation other than that there is no discernible contribution to global temperatures from any anthropogenic global warming (AGW) which is not totally irrevelant in comparison to the measured variability of solar irradiance over any time period one cares to choose.   

Consider also estimates of annual global carbon dioxide emissions: 

I find it hard to believe that about 7 GtC/year out of total global emissions amounting to some 200 GtC/year should alone and exclusively be responsible for affecting ‘global climate’ to the extent proposed, especially when evevn the IPCC’s own estimates represent only one 100,000th  part of the Sun’s influence alone. 

Is scepticism not the only possible rational response in the light of these figures?

In the light of earlier musings on the subject,

and of latest addenda to

scepticism alone just will no longer suffice. 

see also link arrived 07/07/2014: 
or at: via @wattsupwiththat 

[1]  PS added 01 DEC 2014

Oxford University Press Inc, New York, 2007

[1] further PS added 25 JUNE 2015  and see also 


  1. Calculation looks perfectly fine. See also
    Energetic imbalance in hiroshima bombs per second JUN13
    sunlight delivers 1000 times the energy of Nuccitelli/Cook's claimed imbalance due to CO2AGW.

    It is not skepticism that is justified - open mockery of Global Warming believers is the order of the day! Just laugh at them; they're stoopid! None of them could even explain a technical means of MEASURING the imbalance given the measurement tolerances of any such means. They need a rubber room, not a supercomputer - supercomputers have pointy edges.


  2. The references to the solar irradiance graphs were added today, 07 June 2014 12:43 BST.

  3. The source for deltaT in my spreadsheet is NASA at which gives a deltaT of 30°C from a ‘with atmosphere’ high of 15°C. As other sources quote a ‘without atmosphere’ low as far down as -20°C I chose a deltaT of 33°C. [I find 15°C more understandable in normal discussion than 288.15K]
    Generally, I specifically published my whole spreadsheet with its calculation methods shown, so that anyone can replicate it in about 10 minutes flat, I reckon. It is then also possible to change any input value to see what happens to the end result in a split-second. E.g. I have chosen 80 years for the time to achieve the 4°C temperature rise ‘consensed’ by the politicians of the IPCC. If anyone thinks that should be any other period, just put it in your spreadsheet, again for instant result. Same applies to any other input value anyone wishes to explore.

  4. As I wrote elsewhere before:

    L Michael Hohmann
    May 5, 2012 at 6:39 pm • Reply
    I am getting bored. The globe can be getting warmer or colder, but the idea that the human contribution from burning carbon fuels has anything to do with it is not only IMHO the biggest political and intellectual fraud ever – but so says the IPCC itself: The ongoing discussion pro and con is becoming akin to the scholastic argument as to how many angels can dance on the head of a needle. Which is, of course, exactly what is intended to achieve worldwide disorientation away from the actual IPCC aims of monetary and energy policies – and bringing a whole, if not all, of science into disrepute. Even the UK Royal Society has become Lysenkoist. viz.

    I remember also Buckminster Fuller writing in 1981 [CRITICAL PATH, Hutchinson]:
    “For only a short time, in most countries, has the individual human had the right of trial by jury. To make humanity’s chances for a fair trial better, all those testifying must swear ‘to tell the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth.’….. If we don’t program the computer truthfully with all the truth and nothing but the truth, we won’t get the answers that allow us to ‘make it’ “. In that respect the jury is still out