There is no Carbon Pollution Effect: The Proof

The table shows the average temperature at the 1000 millibar pressure level (sea level) for the Southern Hemisphere for the last seven decades. The warmest decade is marked in red and the coolest in blue.

The warmest decade in January occurred in 1979-1988.  The failure to warm indicates that the much celebrated hypothetical link between carbon dioxide and atmospheric temperature is absent. Carbon dioxide is well mixed. It’s supposed effects on the temperature of the atmosphere, via ‘back radiation’ should be present in all locations, at all times, continuously. Plainly, if it skips the entire southern hemisphere, in January, for thirty years, its a furphy. A ‘furphy’ is an Australian term for an erroneous or improbable story that is claimed to be factual.

The data is from the NCEP reanalysis accessible here:

NCEP reanalysis provides a record of the characteristics of the atmosphere at seventeen pressure levels from the surface of the globe to the 10 millibar pressure level’. The NCEP record begins in 1948. From the 1960”s accuracy and reliability has been enhanced via access to observations from orbiting satellites.

Reanalysis data-sets are used in climate diagnostics and attribution.
The are created by assimilating (“inputting”) climate observations using the same climate model throughout the entire reanalysis period in order to reduce the affects of modeling changes on climate statistics. Observations are from many different sources including ships, satellites, ground stations, RAOBS, and radar.

Via reanalysis the inconsistency due to constant adjustment of the surface temperature record is avoided. Sampling error is reduced. Localized ‘urban warming’ in human settlements on land is less likely to affect the record.

Students of the change that has occurred in the Earths atmosphere should be aware that it is not at the surface, but in the region where the troposphere interacts with the stratosphere that surface wind and climate is driven.

The next post will explore the factors responsible for change. One can not begin to explain the causes of change unless one is familiar with the characteristics of change. Fortunately, change comes with a time signature that provides the vital clue as to its origin.




Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics

Volumes 90–91, December 2012, Pages 9-14
  • National Institute of Geophysics, Geodesy and Geography, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 3 G. Bonchev, Sofia, Bulgaria

The strong sensitivity of the Earth’s radiation balance to variations in the lower stratospheric ozone—reported previously—is analysed here by the use of non-linear statistical methods. Our non-linear model of the land air temperature (T)—driven by the measured Arosa total ozone (TOZ)—explains 75% of total variability of Earth’s T variations during the period 1926–2011. We have analysed also the factors which could influence the TOZ variability and found that the strongest impact belongs to the multi-decadal variations of galactic cosmic rays. Constructing a statistical model of the ozone variability, we have been able to predict the tendency in the land air T evolution till the end of the current decade. Results show that Earth is facing a weak cooling of the surface T by 0.05–0.25 K (depending on the ozone model) until the end of the current solar cycle. A new mechanism for O3 influence on climate is proposed.



I disagree with the authors interpretation of the mechanism involved that is described in part as:  increase or decrease of the greenhouse effect, depending on the sign of the humidity changes. 

More simply, the Earths radiation balance is much affected by the degree to which incoming radiation is reflected by cloud cover.

I maintain (suggest is too weak a word) that ozone as an absorber of outgoing radiation by the Earth, radiation continuously, day and night,  impacting the temperature and relative humidity of the highly reflective ice-cloud-zone that is found from a couple of kilometres above the surface of the Earth unto the limits of the ‘weather-sphere’. The weather-sphere, I would describe as the zone that contains sufficient water vapour to promote the appearance and disappearance of  minute, highly reflective, multi-branching  (like the international space station) crystals of ice.

Ice crystals reflect and scatter incoming radiation,

There is no need to invoke carbon dioxide or its increasing presence in the atmosphere, or the notion of a greenhouse effect, to explain surface temperature variations. Insofar as carbon dioxide promotes the growth of vegetation and increases the mass of water in the hydro logic cycle it will promote humidity and the formation of more cloud.

The atmosphere ejects heat by virtue of convection. It lacks any of the properties of a greenhouse. The tragic failure of climate science, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is to misunderstand the physics of the atmosphere.

The wilfulness of ignorance and the determination to hang on to old dogma is astounding: this paper appeared in 2012.

Reflection of sunlight from cloud at 5-8km in elevation (Cirrus).


The EPIC data also helped confirm that the flashes are coming from a high altitude, not simply water on the ground. Two channels on the instrument are designed to measure the height of clouds. According to the observations, high cirrus clouds—5 to 8 kilometers (3 to 5 miles) up in the atmosphere—appeared wherever the glints were located.

“The source of the flashes is definitely not on the ground,” Marshak said. “It is definitely ice, and most likely solar reflection off of horizontally oriented particles.”

Marshak is now investigating how common these horizontal ice particles are, and whether they are common enough to have a measurable impact on how much sunlight passes through the atmosphere. If so, it is a feature that would need to be incorporated into computer models of how much heat is reaching and leaving Earth.

Perhaps we should admit that it will take time to get ‘the science’ properly settled.

There is a notion in IPCC  ‘climate science’ that high altitude cloud has a warming influence on the surface.    A manurial notion if ever there was one.

As to whether there will be ice cloud at elevation or not….then the ozone content of the air will be a factor of importance because ozone absorption of infrared from the Earth itself determines air temperature and therefore relative humidity and the degree and extent of precipitation.


If one appreciates the way in which the planet has warmed in some places and not in others, the way it warms in winter rather than in summer, the way it warms in fits and starts then, the thesis that the warming relates to the steadily increasing proportion of so called ‘greenhouse gases’ in the atmosphere must be seen to be implausible. If one appreciates that the high latitudes of the southern hemisphere are cooler today than seven decades ago, then it is obvious that there are more influential factors at work. If one appreciates that the entire southern hemisphere is no warmer today in the month of December than it was in the nineteen fifties then a sensible person would have to conclude that something other than the ‘enhanced greenhouse effect’ is at work. The  change in surface temperature is plainly not due to enhanced back radiation alone, if at all.

Indeed there are natural factors at work that have nothing to do with the activities of man. THE FUNDAMENTAL modes of natural climate change have been termed the Northern Annular Mode and the Southern Annular Mode. These modes involve shifts in atmospheric mass from high to mid and low latitudes and across the hemispheres accompanied by change in surface pressure, the winds and surface temperature.

Surface pressure simply reflects the total ozone content of the atmospheric column, an identity that was discovered more than 100 years ago. Ozone is material to the presence of what we call the stratosphere. It is change in the ozone content of the stratosphere that is responsible for change in surface pressure, surface winds, sea surface and air temperature.

I abandoned this blog for months while engaged in a project that demanded my full attention. During this period the election of Trump to the presidency of the USA and the appointment of men who understand that cheap and reliable energy is a requirement for economic growth and sustained living standards has led climate realists to think that the tide of manipulation designed to promote the idea of  ‘renewables’ will been turned back and we can at last relax.

The last few days have been spent on the flat of my back. With little else to do I went to Google to discover whether any progress has been made in explaining the role of the annular modes …and indeed there has, but in Beijing, not in Washington or Colorado.

I direct the reader to this page:

It is a treasure trove of useful observation and deduction.

A paper published in December 2016 is of the first importance

Xie, F., J. Li*, W. S. Tian, Q. Fu, F. F. Jin, Y. Y. Hu, J. K. Zhang, W. K. Wang, C. Sun, J. Feng, Y. Yang and R. Q. Ding, 2016:A connection from Arctic stratospheric ozone to El Niño-Southern oscillation. Environ. Res. Lett., 11, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124026.

The paper can be accessed here:

What is known as the El Nino Southern Oscillation represents the most spectacular manifestation of surface temperature change. This phenomenon has been described as an ‘oscillation’ that is said to be internal to the climate system. Not so. It has its origin in change in the stratosphere in high latitudes that is the subject of previous chapters in this blog. The most dramatic swings in the ozone content of the stratosphere occur in the northern hemisphere in winter.The poles are where climate change is initiated.

The authors conclude that: ‘understanding this kind of connection and potential feedback between the stratospheric tracer gases (such as ozone) and the climate system deserves more attention.’

I concur.

It’s one thing to identify the chain of causation and another to understand and explain the physical processes behind it. It’s yet another to explain how and why ozone varies in the polar stratosphere and to explain the drivers that operate in the upper atmosphere where the Earth system is a part of the interplanetary environment. This is the real frontier in climate science.

There is no great urgency to discover and describe the mechanisms involved, no pressing need for massive funding unless humanity is led astray by false prophets. We can expect that those who have a vested interest in continued funding of their ‘global warming’enterprise will put up vociferous arguments to try and justify their claims. End of the day, the voters decide how their taxes are spent and it appears that, when offered a clear alternative, voters can work out when they are being ‘had’ and adjust accordingly. It’s possible to fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time.

Let’s hope the tide has turned.

Its a worry that ‘global warming’ hysteria got as far as it did and did as much damage as it did before people woke up to what has been happening.