Why the Greenhouse Gas Theory is Invalid
Data Challenges
Blog
Discussions

What is the Climate Science Journal?

We have a problem. Science, specifically climate science, has been corrupted. 

“Since about 2014 or so, the public debate on climate change has become less ‘scientized’, with economics, social justice and raw politics taking center stage.

Dr. Judith Curry, 2019

What is the effect of this corruption? Temperature data has been altered, irrationally justified, in order to conform to a “global warming” representation. The evidence shows the world has not been warming, so the data has been changed. 

The scientific press has gone berserk. Not only have they altered the data, they denounce science itself:

“…the only way to really find out if phenomena like sunspots and solar wind are playing a larger role in climate change than most scientists now believe would be to significantly reduce our carbon emissions. Only in the absence of that potential driver will researchers be able to tell for sure how much impact natural influences have on the Earth’s climate.”

Scientific American, 2009

Really? The only way to find out of sunspots or solar wind have a substantial impact on Earth’s climate? So the task of science is to give up trying to study alternative approaches and the impacts of potentially devastating solutions in advance? We are to go ahead and implement a drastic international program of change, even if it means destroying economies, infrastructure, lives and standards of living to “significantly reduce carbon emissions”, because we cannot tell otherwise?

Rubbish! We can tell in other ways, and that should be the task of rational, competent scientists. Many capable scientists are already showing that when fewer sunspots cause lower solar winds, more cosmic radiation enters the planet’s atmosphere, and that causes more precipitation, cooling the planet. And there are other ways to study the phenomena, and are finding that the Sun is the primary cause of Earth’s constantly-changing climate.

We cannot let humanity lose science–it is the foundation of all the technology and infrastructure than 7.5 billion people require to survive. When academics en masse abandon integrity, when it becomes stylish to be dishonest, then we put our world in peril. 

Science is not a popularity contest. Just because a thousand people agree with an idea does not make it a sound idea. It is a question of accuracy of representation, and that thousand people can be less interested, biased, or unaware of competing knowledge.

Science needs lots of views, and competition among them with freedom of speech.

The Climate Science Journal is about restoring integrity to the study of climate change. Please consider supporting our project by buying one of the our books or eBooks, or making a donation.

The Basic Argument Challenging the Greenhouse Gas Theory

The prevailing “Greenhouse Gas Theory” holds that some atmospheric gases that make up less than 1% of the atmosphere, CO2, CH4, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and water vapour are “greenhouse gases”, because they have more atoms per molecule and therefore store more thermal energy in their molecular vibrations than the primary gases N2 and O2. Even anthropogenic global-warming

Read More »

And Now for Something Completely Different #1…

“It’s a record snow year, we’ve never had this much snow before” 2019 Norwegian Snow-skiing Video Nikolai Schirmer and Skiing Professional Kristofer Turdell Please enter your email so that we can update you when the new book is out, and to download the free paper: Note the outstanding peer reviews below, presented anonymously, which you

Read More »

Why is the Earth’s Albedo the Most Important Measurement?

There is a means of ascertaining actual changes in the Earth’s absorption, which reflects changes in chemical composition of its surface or atmosphere, without relying upon speculative or subjective computer model predictions. The Earth’s albedo (a measure of the proportion of total radiation reflected by the planet), in all its nuances, can be measured from

Read More »

Do Nitrogen or Oxygen Absorb Infrared Photons?

If they do, there is something wrong with the Greenhouse Gas theory The prevailing theory is that surface radiation is trapped by “greenhouse gases” disproportionately, but that theory does not stand up. Is radiation from the surface only stored by “greenhouse gas” molecules? The answer is no, both N2 and O2 also absorb and radiate in the infrared spectrum,

Read More »

Global Average Surface Temperatures

Average? The global average temperature, presumably accurately calculated in the same way for the last 140 years (otherwise it is not very scientific, see below), is a measure of thermal energy storage—that is what temperature is a measure of. Addressing the specific heat capacity of the various molecules is the correct method of ascertaining their

Read More »

Why Support Science?

While leftists finance global-warming alarmism in an attempt to confiscate €25 trillion from the Paris Accord climate agreement, and use the always changing climate as an excuse to nationalize more of economies, who supports honest science challenging this pseudo-science?

Many people say talk to the oil companies. But most oil companies will not touch the global warming issue: because their interests lie in selling hydrocarbons, they appear to be biased no matter what they say. So they have invested generally in renewable energy, and it is no longer a primary issue to them which side wins, or what the future holds, as they are covered either way.

But what about science? Do you personally care whether scientific progress continues, and humans learn more about nature so that we can actually solve real problems? If you care about humanity, then you should care about science.

Again, science needs lots of views, and competition among them with freedom of speech. Please consider supporting our project by buying one of the our books or eBooks, or making a donation.

"You have found a promising approach to demonstrate successfully that the long suspected culprits of global warming, e.g. CO2, CH4, are actually not !"

PhD, Physics
Rutgers University, New Jersey
B.A. Cornell University, New York

"…seems to be path-breaking research in the domain. The paper reads nice and the science involved is analogous and clear. This paper is a hallmark and would benefit the advances in science, government planning as well as policy makers for the next course of action. I congratulate you for this great work and thank for giving me an opportunity to read it and enlighten myself."

PhD, Atmospheric Sci and Meteorology, IISc
M.Sc., Geophysics, ISC
BSc., (Hons) Physics, Delhi U

"An alarmist bias in Global Warming Research has corrupted the academic/scientific community"

Dr. Roy W. Spencer
Ph.D. Meteorology
University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Principal Research Scientist at UoA
Former Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center

"I have studied your paper during the weekend and I am impressed by your brilliant analysis and convincing argumentation. This looks like a very original thought process and one that does deserve broad dissemination."

B.Sc. (Hons) Mech. Eng.
DTU, Denmark
C.P. Eng. (Chartered Prof. Eng.)
Former Project Manager, CERN
Geneva, Switzerland

previous arrow
next arrow
Slider

The Climate Science Journal Allows Anonymous Reviews, and Paper Presentations

The use of pseudonyms has a long history in science and philosophy, as a means of evading retaliation by those who are threatened by the advance of human knowledge and understanding, including:

  • Nicolaus Copernicus (who first put forward his theory of heliocentrism anonymously),
  • Galileo (writing as Lothario Sarsio Sigensano),
  • Isaac Newton (as Jehovah Sanctus Unus)
  • John Locke (his Two Treatises on Government was published anonymously)
  • Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (as Lewis Carroll) and
  • François-Marie Arouet (as Voltaire)

Climate Science Journal

London, UK

info@climatesciencejournal.com