|
Global
<br />~.S r - -
<br />~ 1997-1998
<br />Northers Hemisphere El Niio
<br />U ~.S
<br />c
<br />$~
<br />w
<br />~-a.s
<br />A
<br />Soothers Hemisphere
<br />Tropics
<br />SateNite
<br />ifa9 ifa5 199a 1995 200 2a65
<br />Year
<br />Figure 14: Satellite microwave sounding unit (blue) measurements of tropo-
<br />spheric temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 0 and 82.5 N,
<br />Southern Hemisphere between 0 and 82.5 S, tropics between 20S and 20N,
<br />and the globe between 82.SN and 82.SS between 1979 and 2007 (29), and
<br />radiosonde balloon (red) measurements in the tropics (29). The balloon mea-
<br />surements confirm the satellite technique (29-31). The wamvng anomaly in
<br />1997-1998 (gray) was caused by El Nino, which, like the overall trends, is
<br />unrelated to COZ (32).
<br />unrelated to hydrocazbon use. A fiuther doubling of world hydrocar-
<br />bon use would not change these trends.
<br />Figure 12 shows the close correlation between the sea level and
<br />glacier records, which further validates both records and the duration
<br />and character of the temperature change that gave rise to them.
<br />Figure 4 shows the annual temperature in the United States during
<br />the past 127 years. This record has an upward trend of 0.5 °C per
<br />century. Global and Northern Hemisphere surface temperature re-
<br />cords shown in Figure 13 trend upward at 0.6 °C per century. These
<br />records are, however, biased toward higher temperatures in several
<br />ways. For example, they preferentially use data near populated azeas
<br />(33), where heat island effects are prevalent, as illustrated in Figure
<br />15. A trend of 0.5 °C per century is more representative (13-17).
<br />The U.S. temperature record has two intermediate uptrends of
<br />comparable magnitude, one occurring before the 6-fold increase in
<br />hydrocarbon use and one during it. Between these two is an interme-
<br />diate temperature downtrend, which led in the 1970s to fears of an
<br />impending new ice age. This decrease in temperature occurred dur-
<br />ing aperiod in which hydrocarbon use increased 3-fold.
<br />Seven independent records -solar irradiance; Arctic, Northern
<br />Hemisphere, global, and U.S. annual average surface air tempera-
<br />tures; sea level; and glacier length -all exhibit these three intermedi-
<br />ate trends, as shown in Figure 13. These trends confirm one another.
<br />Solar irradiance correlates with them. Hydrocarbon use does not.
<br />The intermediate uptrend in temperature between 1980 and 2006
<br />shown in Figure 13 is similaz to that shown in Figure 14 for balloon
<br />and satellite tropospheric measurements. This trend is more pro-
<br />nounced in the Northern Hemisphere than in the Southern. Contrary
<br />to the COZ warnung climate models, however, tropospheric tempera-
<br />tures aze not rising faster than surface temperatures.
<br />Figure 6 illustrates the magnitudes of these temperature changes
<br />by comparing the 0.5 °C per century temperature change as the Earth
<br />recovers from the Little Ice Age, the range of 50-year averaged At-
<br />lantic ocean surface temperatures in the Sargasso Sea over the past
<br />3,000 years, the range ofday-night and seasonal variation on average
<br />in Oregon, and the range of day-night and seasonal variation over the
<br />whole Earth. The two-century-long temperature change is small.
<br />Tropospheric temperatures measured by satellite give comprehen-
<br />sive geographic coverage. Even the satellite measurements, however,
<br />contain short and medium-teen fluctuations greater than the slight
<br />warming trends calculated from them. The calculated trends vary sig-
<br />nificantly as a function of the most recent fluctuations and the lengths
<br />of the data sets, which are short.
<br />Figure 3 shows the latter part of the period of warming from the
<br />Little Ice Age in greater detail by means of Arctic air temperature as
<br />compazed with solar irradiance, as does Figure 5 for U.S. surface
<br />temperature. There is a close correlation between solar activity and
<br />temperature and none between hydrocarbon use and temperature.
<br />Several other studies over a wide variety of time intervals have found
<br />similar correlations between climate and solar activity (15, 34-39).
<br />Figure 3 also illustrates the uncertainties introduced by limited
<br />time records. If the Arctic air temperature data before 1920 were not
<br />available, essentially no uptrend would be observed.
<br />This observed variation in solar activity is typical of stars close in
<br />size and age to the sun (40). The current warming trends on Mars
<br />(41), Jupiter (42), Neptune (43,44), Neptune's moon Triton (45), and
<br />Pluto (46-48) may result, in part, from similar relations to the sun and
<br />its activity -like those that are warming the Earth.
<br />Hydrocarbon use and atmospheric COZ do not correlate with the
<br />observed temperatures. Solar activity correlates quite well. Correla-
<br />tion does not prove causality, but non-correlation proves non-causal-
<br />ity. Human hydrocarbon use is not measurably warming the earth.
<br />Moreover, there is a robust theoretical and empirical model for solar
<br />warming and cooling of the Earth (8,19,49,50). The experimental
<br />data do not prove that solar activity is the only phenomenon respon-
<br />sible for substantial Earth temperature fluctuations, but they do show
<br />that human hydrocarbon use is not among those phenomena.
<br />The overall experimental record is self-consistent. The Earth has
<br />been warning as it recovers from the Little Ice Age at an average
<br />rate of about 0.5 °C per century. Fluctuations within this temperature
<br />trend include periods of more rapid increase and also periods of tem-
<br />perature decrease. These fluctuations correlate well with concomitant
<br />fluctuations in the activity of the sun. Neither the trends nor the fluc-
<br />tuations within the trends correlate with hydrocarbon use. Sea level
<br />and glacier length reveal three intermediate uptrends and two down-
<br />trends since 1800, as does solar activity. These trends are climatically
<br />benign and result from natural processes.
<br />
<br />as U
<br />a
<br />L
<br />V
<br />e ~`
<br />a
<br />aL
<br />a
<br />8
<br />F
<br />11,900 IilO,ON 1,00~.~00 1tii>00.0~0
<br />PopulaNoa oiCorsty
<br />Figure 15: Surface temperature trends for 1940 to 1996 from 107 measuring
<br />stations in 49 California counties (51,52). The trends were combined for
<br />counties of similaz population and plotted with the standard errors of their
<br />means. The six measuring stations in Los Angeles County were used to cal-
<br />culate the standard error of that county, which is plotted at a population of
<br />8.9 million. The "urban heat island effect" on surface measurements is evi-
<br />dent. The shaight line is aleast-squares fit to the closed circles. The points
<br />marked "X" are the six unadjusted station records selected by NASA GISS
<br />(53-55) for use in their estimate of global surface temperatures. Such selec-
<br />tions make NASA GISS temperatures too high.
<br />-5-
<br />
|