The climate crisis can only be resolved if two factors are met:
§ 1. The climate experts and the IPCC must tell the truth.
The IPCC gives the world Climate Sensitivity=3 C which make us blind to reality.
Prof. James Hansen is finally starting to knock holes in this. Then it becomes obvious
that NetZero is an ineffective policy. The earth's temperature continues
upwards for a long time after all emissions have been stopped. (ex. Hansen:Pipeline Paper)
§ 2. Clausius led the whole world on the wrong path with his theory of Entropy in 1865.
The truth as stated in the book "Beyond Entropy", by Prof. Phil Attard
will unleash the technology needed to solve the climate crisis.
If you calculate with the correct climate sensitivity, you will see that our only chance
is to suck away 200 Gtons of CO2 per year. Start NOW! This is 6 million times more
than what the best known technology can do today.
For our survival: Everybody has to understand and fight The Evolution Paradox
If thousands of professors of thermodynamics had the courage to question the laws of Entropy
(Clausius 1865) and choose instead to listen to Maxwell (1871)
and Prof. Phil Attard (Now), the way is open to extract 200 Gton/year.
With new technology we can handle 6 million times more CO2 than what the best known
technology can do today.Only the climate experts can start this process by telling the truth.
The climate experts can easily calculate the earth's thermal response to different CO2
developments in the future. One should do this for all combinations of climate sensitivity
and time delay RC (between changed CO2 and changed temperature).
Then you will see that the best curve fitting is achieved at climate sensitivity=36
and time constant RC=600 years. With these parameters, accurate projections can be made.
and you arrive at the mathematical proof that 200 Gtons of CO2 must be removed per year,
starting now. This may require a GDP from each country. There is no other way out and
climate experts have to recalculate and tell the truth, in a way that everybody can understand.
If global dimming is integrated in the model, then the temperature rises faster than
what NASA can measure. The best fit might be cs=36 and RC=400 years. It is up
to the climate experts to recalculate.
The picture also shows how completely wrong the IPCC is with climate sensitivity = 3.
Holding on to the red IPCC line means the end of civilization in the very near future.
Holding on to the scientific papers below is even worse.
In the wake of the incorrect climate sensitivity from the IPCC, thousands of scientific papers are wrong.
A serious example is this scientific paper that concludes climate sensitivity=2.4C.
An Assessment of Earth's Climate Sensitivity Using Multiple Lines of Evidence
S. C. Sherwood, M. J. Webb, J. D. Annan, K. C. Armour, P. M. Forster, J. C. Hargreaves, G. Hegerl, S. A. Klein, K. D. Marvel, E. J. Rohling, M. Watanabe, T. Andrews, P. Braconnot, C. S. Bretherton, G. L. Foster, Z. Hausfather, A. S. von der Heydt, R. Knutti, T. Mauritsen, J. R. Norris, C. Proistosescu, M. Rugenstein, G. A. Schmidt, K. B. Tokarska, M. D. Zelinka
This paper contributes to entire countries designing ineffective climate policies and thousands of necessary innovations are not realized.
Therefore, it should be discussed, on solid ground,
whether this paper is the most inaccurate, dangerous and flawed scientific
paper ever published.
If these conclusions are correct, the authors have the opportunity to apologize and
withdraw this scientific paper and
to produce a new paper that powerfully helps the world solve the climate crisis.
The same problem exists in the scientific paper:
"What caused Earth's temperature variations during the last 800,000 years?"
Authors
Professor Peter Köhler
Professor Richard Bintanja
Professor Hubertus Fischer
Professor Fortunat Joos
Professor Reto Knutti
Professor Gerrit Lohmann
As transparency and accuracy are of the highest priority, all authors have been invited for months now to
to provide their comments, which can be published and discussed here.
Everything is repeated. In 1850, Dr. Semmelweis wrote to all the medical professors in Europe to enforce hand washing
before childbirth or surgery. Semmelweis was laughed at, mocked in the press and fired from his job in Vienna.
It was ordinary people and midwives who led a medical revolution against the professors of the time.
Perhaps it is time for today's professors to start suspecting that the key to our survival may come from ordinary people
while the professors, out of sheer prestige, put every possible obstacle in the way.
No response to my appeal suggests that today's scientific experts do not even want to discuss dissenting opinions and
submit to the laws of nature. This is a betrayal and a deadly threat to our own children and to civilization as a whole.
If these conclusions are correct, the authors have the opportunity to apologize and
withdraw these scientific papers and
to produce a new paper that powerfully helps the world solve the climate crisis.
You have the capacity to do so, but time is running out !
It is estimated that the costs is $1000 per ton to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
The IPCC further estimates that 10 Gtons of CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere
around 2050. This figure is based on the incorrect climate sensitivity = 3.
Here it is shown by simple calculation, which everyone can understand,
that the correct figure is 200 Gton/year, starting immediately.
At the current cost of removing CO2, there is a bill for each inhabitant
in the rich world of US$ 330ooo / year. Not dealing with this bill means
that a billion years of development on earth became meaningless.
One way to deal with the cost is to develop new technologies that the world has
has never seen. This could bring the cost per ton down to a fraction
of what current technology can do. The discussion has not even begun.
The main blame must be placed on climate experts and the IPCC
who cannot calculate a true value for climate sensitivity.
The experts do not even want to discuss the main threat
to the survival of humanity:
IPCC's erroneous climate sensitivity=3
Bengt Ovelius
PS I would be happy if the climate sensitivity was indeed 2.4.C
Then it would be easy to solve the climate crisis.
To the climate experts: Prove that you are right, so that
everyone can understand. Open up a free, honest debate.
Allting upprepas. Dr Semmelweis skrev 1850 till alla medicinska professorer i Europa och ville genomföra att man tvättar händerna
före förlossning eller operation. Semmelweis blev utskrattad, hånad i pressen och han blev avskedad från sitt jobb i Wien.
Det var vanligt folk och barnmorskor som genomdrev en medicinsk revolution i strid med dåtidens professorer.
Det kanske är dags för dagens professorer att börja misstänka, att nyckeln till vår överlevnad kan komma från vanligt folk
medan professorerna av ren prestige lägger alla möjliga hinder i vägen.
Inga svar på mitt upprop tyder på att dagens vetenskapliga expertis inte ens vill diskutera avvikande åsikter och
underordna sig naturlagarna.
Detta är ett svek och dödligt hot mot våra egna barn och hela civilisationen.