Question 2

An appeal to the climate experts to make the following calculation and also to explain so that everyone can understand

why the IPCC has miscalculated by about 60 years, based on climate sensitivity=3.

This error, which everyone can see, does not inspire confidence. +2C would occur in 2100 according to the blue sign

and it comes 60 years earlier.




We know that the IPCC created curve B with climate sensitivity=3, which shaped the bill, climate law and NetZero policy.

We know that Curve A has been known ever since Exxon Mobil secretly calculated it 42 years ago.

We know that Curve A is now recognised by the SMHI and the IPCC under the designation ssp5-8-5

We see that Curve A is in harmony with NASA real measurements (SVART)

We know that the curve B created by the IPCC shows an error of 60-70 years in relation to reality

Thus the value 3 of the climate sensitivity is grossly wrong.


The mathematical task for the climate experts is to calculate from curve A

to calculate the current climate sensitivity.

We see that the actual value must be higher than 3

but it must be possible to calculate this precisely.




One approach might be to use the formula for future overtemperature that

proposed by Professor Peter Nightingale, USA

-0.3 + e^(0.025*(t - 2010)) to calculate the climate sensitivity


This is an extremely important calculation because it shows whether the IPCC is giving the wrong climate sensitivity to the world,

which in turn risks giving the wrong climate policy on all fronts and the biggest risk is that NetZero policy

by its very nature proves completely ineffective.


A good start is that you can already see by eye that red curve A rises much steeper than blue curve B.

Thus it is obvious, without using mathematics, that the climate sensitivity should be greater than 3.

The result will be a scientific earthquake (the words come from Prof. Johan Rockström)


If the energy of the oceans doubles in 19 years, this should mean that the derivative

of the Earth's temperature curve doubles in that time. It is possible to set up a system of equations

with these conditions, but it only seems to make sense if you accept a varying climate sensitivity

in this narrow range










This is a personal appeal to the following climate experts:


Frida Bender, Associate Professor, Senior Lecturer in Climate Modelling, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University

Rodrigo Caballero, Professor of Climate Modelling, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University

Deliang Chen, Professor of Physical Meteorology, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Gothenburg

Thorsten Mauritsen, Senior Lecturer in Climate Science, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University

Jonas Nycander, Professor of Physical Oceanography, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University

Michael Tjernström, Professor of Meteorology, Department of Meteorology, Stockholm University

Erik Kjellström, Professor, SMHI

Johan Kuylenstierna, Professor

Markku Rummukainen, Professor Climatology

Björn Sandén, Professor, Innovation


For you climate scientists who have devoted many decades to climate calculations, the task must be simple,

probably a few minutes' work.


I will put your findings in the video that is under development and the manuscript is here,

Many thanks for your help on the most important climate issue of all. The Swedish people must urgently take note of this

as it will affect future elections and the whole direction of climate policy.


It would be best if the press could ask this question and present the derivation and discussion