WUWT Epic Fail: Zero CO2 Warming Supports Null Hypothesis
How do we know Anthony Watts of WUWT supports junk climate science? Just take a look at his latest foray on Twitter for the proof. Below are copies of an exchange (October 18, 2013) between Anthony Watts and Simon Conway-Smith as featured on the climateofsophistry.com blog. In them Mr. Watts is making some bold but irrational claims about the supposed greenhouse gas effect (GHE) and carbon dioxide (CO2) warming.
To us at “Slayersland” or more correctly, Principia Scientific International (PSI), these tweets demonstrate that Watts doesn’t understand the concept of the null hypothesis. He seems incapable of applying it to discredited ‘science’ that asserts carbon dioxide is a gas adding/trapping heat in our atmosphere making it warmer. Watts and others are still hanging on to the belief, despite growing evidence to the contrary, that CO2 must cause warming.
But as Conway-Smith suggests, the black and white facts of the past 17 years are proving to be an inconvenient truth. Global thermometers show no warming trend despite huge increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Doesn’t that then prove the null hypothesis – CO2 is not a warming gas?
Science 101: The Null Hypothesis
Let’s clarify for non-scientists what is meant by the term ‘null hypothesis.’ It is an important step that serious scientists must follow in order to produce legitimate work in scientific research. In science the null hypothesis is of great use; it is a fail safe to enable researchers to know when not to waste further time and effort exploring a phantom connection between a chosen independent and dependent variable. Moreover, it should also be the signal for politicians to reign back on insane and expensive CO2-capping policies.
In short, we need to recognise that the null hypothesis is a hypothesis of no effect. In other words, the best test of the validity of the GHE is in the real world ‘laboratory’ of earth’s atmosphere over a period of time. If we can demonstrate over a number of years no additional warming despite a huge increase in CO2 levels then that should persuade us of the null hypothesis: no greenhouse gas effect. This is a fair and absolute test because the core claim made about the GHE is that more CO2 equals more warming. Well, the paleoclimatic record over the past 400,000 years (Antarctic ice core data) shows beyond all doubt that rises in levels of atmospheric CO2 FOLLOW rises in temperatures by between 400 to 1,000 years.
In other words, rising temperature cause an increase in levels of CO2, not the other way around as predicted by the GHE hypothesis.
But worse for those who blame humans for higher CO2 levels is the satellite data showing natural variation looks highly likely to be the reason for increased CO2. As the Japanese IBUKI satellite data indicates, where the areas of highest CO2 emissions are is precisely those regions with most vegetation and least industry.
When will Greenhouse Effect Believers Abandon their Bogus Theory?
For many years now scientists and researchers at Principia Scientific International (PSI) have repeatedly pointed to real world evidence proving zero impact of CO2 on global warming. The cold hard facts are that despite atmospheric levels of CO2 increasing by a whopping 40 percent in recent decades baffled climatologists now admit temperatures have flatlined for 17 years (‘The Climate Pause‘). Not only that, PSI researchers have also used standard satellite data to prove there is no GHE ‘hot spot’ which GHE-promoting climatologists predicted would be there is the GHE was ‘real.’ For more details of our scientific rebuttals see here, here and here.
By failing to admit to these self-evident truths and to actively promote junk science on his WUWT blog and on Twitter, Mr. Watts has flunked a basic tenet of science: ignoring the null hypothesis.
Junk Science Doubling Down: CO2 Meters and IR Absorption
But not content with ignoring the null hypothesis Watts then goes on to tweet to Conway-Smith the most absurd ‘proof’ of a GHE: his CO2 meter.
As climateofsophistry.com blog owner, Joe Postma points out:
“Does Mr. Watts’ reply even make sense? A device that measures IR absorption by CO2 doesn’t mean that CO2 is heating up the device. Let’s put this into climate terms: the ground surface is a device that emits IR, and CO2 absorbs and scatters some of it… This does not mean that CO2 is heating the surface.“
As award-winning astrophysicist, Dr. Nir Shaviv recently pointed out, we are now awash with proof that those self-appointed ‘experts’ on climate are “incompetent.”
It is a sad day for science when Watts and others won’t accept the null hypothesis and admit that CO2 is increasingly shown to have no impact on temperatures. Dare we say it, these ‘experts’ seem to be more part of the problem than of the solution in our search for better understanding of earth’s complex climate system. The sooner more WUWT readers follow Conway-Smith’s lead and challenge Watts to back his unsupported claims the better.
Trackback from your site.