[ RadSafe ] Text only] CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal Of Our Time! 2007

Maury Siskel maurysis at peoplepc.com
Mon Dec 17 21:05:17 CST 2007

  Here is the link to complete published article in pdf:

The corruption documented below probably is one of the most significant 
daily living and financial events to occur in many of our lifetimes. The 
man-made climate change mischief is intimately related to nuclear power, 
to the availability and cost of all fossil and so-called renewable 
fuels, and to all energy uses which are central to most growing 
civilizations throughout history. If this truism needs illustration, 
just go outside to your electric service box and pull the main switch -- 
back to the good old days!

An additional serious impact of this newest tulip-mania is the corrosion 
of science and the compromise of scientists and politicians. As always, 
one would wish that the general public could understand science and what 
is being done to them by means of the abusive distortions of science.
Maury&Dog (Maury Siskel maurysis at peoplepc.com)

CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal Of Our Time!
by Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc.

21st CENTURY Science & Technology Spring/Summer 2007


On Feb. 2, 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 
again uttered its mantra of catastrophe about man-made global warming. 
After weeks of noisy propaganda, a 21-page “Summary for Policymakers” of 
the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007, was presented in grandiose 
style in Paris to a crowd of politicians and media, accompanied by a 
blackout of the Eiffel Tower to show that electric energy is bad. The 
event induced a tsunami of hysteria that ran around the world. This was 
probably the main aim of this clearly political
paper, prepared by governmental and United Nations bureaucrats, and 
published more than three months before the IPCC’s 1,600-page scientific 
report, which is to be released in May. In the words of the IPCC, this 
delay is needed for adjustment of the main text, so that “Changes . . . 
[could be] made to ensure consistency with the ‘Summary for 
Policymakers.’ ” Not a single word in these 1,600 pages is to be in 
conflict with what politicians said beforehand in the summary

This is a strange and unusual method of operation for a scientific 
report, and even stranger is the frankness of the IPCC’s words about the 
delay, disclosing its lack of scientific integrity and independence. It 
is exactly the same modus operandi demonstrated in the three former IPCC 
reports of
1990, 1995, and 2001: First the politics, then the science. The IPCC 
style was strongly criticized some years ago, in two editorials in 
Nature magazine (Anonymous 1994, Maddox 1991). In each of these 
criticisms, Nature used the United Nations Scientific Committee on the 
Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) as an ideal example of how an 
independent and objective scientific report should be prepared, in this 
case a report on the global risks from all sources of radiation, 
including nuclear weapons and Chernobyl. The UNSCEAR assessments 
presented each year to the U.N. General Assembly are regarded as a bible 
of the science
of ionizing radiation. Yes, UNSCEAR mostly fits Nature’s description — 
but for a price. Because UNSCEAR’s scientific reports often widely 
differed from the catastrophic views of the United Nations Environmental 
Programme or of the former U.N. Secretary-General, the U.N. bureaucracy 
has squeezed the finances of UNSCEAR, down to a level
that caused almost a complete halt of its activity (Jaworowski 2002).

This obviously is not the case with the IPCC, which is stuffed with 
money, and in agreement with the U.N. politics, which are dominated by 
greens and misanthropic fanaticism. During the past six years, the 
President of the United States devoted nearly $29 billion to climate 
research, leading the world with its unparalleled financial commitment 
(The White House 2007). This was about $5 billion per year, more than 
twice the amount spent on the Apollo Program ($2.3 billion per year), 
which in 1969 put man on the Moon. A side-effect of this situation, and 
of politicizing the climate issue, was described by meteorologist Piers
Corbyn in the Weather Action Bulletin, December 2000: “The
problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment
and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding 
are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the 
scientists in them have sold their integrity.”

The question arises: Were the decisions concerning this enormous funding 
for global warming research taken out of genuine concern that the 
climate is allegedly changing as a result of CO2 industrial emissions, 
or do some other undisclosed ideas stand behind this money, IPCC 
activity, Kyoto,
and all the gruesome catastrophic propaganda the world is now exposed 
to? If this concern is genuine, then why we do not see a storm of 
enthusiastic environmentalists and United Nations officials demanding to 
replace all fossil-fuel plants with nuclear plants, which have zero 
emission of greenhouse gases, are environmentally friendly, more 
economical, and
safe for plant workers and much safer for general population than other 
sources of energy (Jaworowski 2006)?

Why do we not see a global-scale effort to replace the internal 
combustion automobile engine with a zero-pollution compressed-air 
engine? An improved version of such an engine, invented in 1870 by 
Ludwik Mekarski, drove the trams in Nantes and Paris for 34 years after 
1879, transporting millions of passengers. Pneumatic locomotives were 
working in the mines the world over until the end of the 1930s. A 
pneumatic car is not pie in the sky, but a real thing, now under 
construction, which in its French version drives some 300 km before the 
air tank must be refilled, at a cost of about $2 per 100 km. Can you 
imagine the beneficial, stabilizing consequences for global politics and 
economy, and for urban hygiene, of such a replacement, combined with a 
switch from oil, gas, and coal into nuclear energy? But at the November 
2006 mass meeting in Nairobi of 6,000 followers of Kyoto (including U.N. 
Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the Presidents of Kenya and Switzerland, 
and a cortège of ministers from some 180 countries), the participants 
were pressed to not even mention nuclear energy.1

The concern at the top about “climate change” is not genuine, and there 
are hidden motives behind the global warming hysteria. Although there is 
not the space in this paper to discuss these motives fully, they may be 
illustrated by the following citations (for full references, see 
Jaworowski 1999).

• Maurice Strong, who dropped out of school at age 14, established an 
esoteric global headquarters for the New Age movement in San Luis 
Valley, Colorado, and helped produce the 1987 Brundtland Report, which 
ignited today’s Green movement. He later become senior advisor to Kofi 
Annan, U.N. Secretary-General, and chaired the gigantic (40,000 
participants) “U.N. Conference on Environment and Development” in Rio de 
Janeiro in 1992. Strong, who was responsible for putting together the 
Kyoto Protocol with thousands of bureaucrats, diplomats, and 
politicians, stated: “We may get to the point where the only way of 
saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.”

Strong elaborated on the idea of sustainable development, which, he 
said, can be implemented by deliberate “quest of poverty . . . reduced 
resource consumption . . . and set levels of mortality control.”

• Timothy Wirth, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Issues, 
seconded Strong’s statement: “We have got to ride the global warming 
issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing 
the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

• Richard Benedick, a deputy assistant secretary of state who headed 
policy divisions of the U.S. State Department, stated: “A global warming 
treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to 
back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect.”

The Four Basic IPCC Lies

But let us switch back to the IPCC 2007 report. The four basic 
statements in the “Summary for Policymakers” are:
(1) Carbon dioxide, the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas, 
increased markedly as a result of human activities, and its atmospheric 
concentration of 379 ppmv (parts per million, by volume) in 2005 by far 
exceeded the natural range of 180 to 300 ppmv over the last 650,000
(2) Since 1750, human activities warmed the climate.
(3) The warmth of the last half-century is unusual, is the highest in at 
least the past 1,300 years, and is “very likely” caused by increases in 
anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations;
(4) Predictions are made that anthropogenic warming will continue for 
centuries, and between 2090 and 2099 the global average surface 
temperature will increase 1.1°C to 6.4°C. Various scare stories of 
global catastrophes are prophesied to occur if man-made emissions are 
not curbed by drastic political decisions. The obvious beneficial 
effects of warming for man and all the biosphere are downplayed.

Except for CO2, all these points are garlanded with qualifications such 
as “likely,” “very likely,” “extremely likely,” “with very high 
confidence,” and “unequivocal.” In fact, to the contrary, all these 
points are incorrect. The first “Summary for Policymakers” statement on 
the man-made increase of CO2, is a cornerstone of the IPCC report, and 
of the global warming edifice. This statement is a manipulation and a 
half-truth. It is true that CO2 is “the most important anthropogenic 
[trace] greenhouse gas,” but a
much more important greenhouse factor is the water naturally present in 
the atmosphere, which contributes some 95 percent to the total 
greenhouse effect. This basic fact is not mentioned at all in the 
“Summary for Policymakers.” Also not mentioned is the fact that 97 
percent of the total annual emission of CO2 into the atmosphere comes 
from natural
emissions of the land and sea; human beings add a mere 3 percent. This 
man-made 3 percent of CO2 emissions is responsible for a tiny fraction 
of the total greenhouse effect, probably close to 0.12 percent. 
Propositions of changing, or rather destroying, the global energy system 
because of this
tiny human contribution, in face of the large short-term and long-term 
natural fluctuations of atmospheric CO2, are utterly irresponsible.

The Truth About Ice Cores

Because carbon dioxide ice core records are regarded as a foundation of 
the man-made global warming hypothesis, let us dwell on them for a while.

The basic assumption behind the CO2 glaciology is a tacit view that air 
inclusions in ice are a closed system, which permanently preserves the 
original chemical and isotopic composition of gas, and thus that the 
inclusions are a suitable matrix for reliable reconstruction of the 
pre-industrial and ancient atmosphere. This assumption is in conflict with
ample evidence from numerous earlier CO2 studies, indicating the 
opposite (see review in Jaworowski et al. 1992b). Proxy determinations 
of the atmospheric CO2 level by analysis of ice cores, reported since 
1985, have been generally lower than the levels measured recently in the 
atmosphere. But, before 1985, the ice cores were showing values much
higher than the current atmospheric concentrations (Jaworowski et al. 
1992b). These recent proxy ice core values remained low during the 
entire past 650,000 years (Siegenthaler et al. 2005) — even during the 
six former interglacial warm periods, when the global temperature was as 
much as 5°C warmer than in our current interglacial!

This means that either atmospheric CO2 levels have no discernible
influence on climate (which is true), or that the proxy ice core 
reconstructions of the chemical composition of the ancient atmosphere 
are false (which is also true, as shown below).

It was never experimentally demonstrated that ice core records reliably 
represent the original atmospheric composition. Other proxies 
demonstrated that many millions of years ago, CO2 levels in the 
atmosphere reached, at various times, 377 ppmv, 450 ppmv, and even 3,500 
ppmv (Kurschner et al. 1996, Royer et al. 2001), and that during the 
past 10,000 years these levels were, as a rule, higher than 300 ppmv, 
fluctuating up to 348 ppmv (Kurschner et al. 1996, Royer et al. 2001,
Wagner et al. 1999, Wagner et al. 2002). The results of these last 
studies prove false the assertion of stabilized Holocene CO2 
concentrations of 270 ppmv to 280 ppmv until the industrial revolution.

The results of the cited pre-1985 studies are strongly supported by 
direct CO2 measurements, carried out in the preindustrial and 20th 
Century atmosphere (see below). About 2 billion years ago, the CO2 
atmospheric level was 100 or perhaps even 1,000 times higher than today. 
According to today’s climate models, the Earth would have been too hot 
for life at
that time (Ohmoto et al. 2004). However, geologic evidence suggests 
there was not a Venus-style, “runaway warming.” Instead, life flourished 
then in the oceans and land, with such enormously high levels of this 
“gas of life,” from which our bodies and all living creatures are built 
(Godlewski 1873). Yet, Greens now call this gas a dangerous “pollutant.”

There are four other arbitrary assumptions behind the CO2 glaciology.
which were used to support the first assumption above:
(1) No liquid phase occurs in the ice at a mean annual temperature of 
–24°C or less (Berner et al. 1977, Friedli et al. 1986, Raynaud and 
Barnola 1985).
(2) The entrapment of air in ice is a mechanical process with no 
differentiation of gas components (Oeschger et al. 1985).
(3) The original atmospheric air composition in the gas inclusions is 
preserved indefinitely (Oeschger et al. 1985).
(4) The age of gases in the air bubbles is much younger than the age of 
the ice in which they are entrapped (Oeschger et al. 1985), the age 
difference ranging from several tens to several tenthousands of years.

More than a decade ago, it was demonstrated that these four basic 
assumptions are invalid, that the ice cores cannot be regarded as a 
closed system, and that low pre-industrial concentrations of CO2, and of 
other trace greenhouse gases, are an artifact, caused by more than 20
physical-chemical processes operating in situ in the polar snow and ice, 
and in the ice cores. Drilling the cores is a brutal and polluting 
drastically disturbing the ice samples—Figures 1 and 2 (Jaworowski 
1994a, Jaworowski et al. 1990, Jaworowski et al. 1992a, and Jaworowski 
et al. 1992b). Some of these processes, which all cause fractionation of 
air components, are related to the solubility of gases: In cold water, 
CO2 is more than 70 times more soluble than nitrogen (N2) and more than 
30 times more soluble than oxygen (O2). Liquid water is commonly present 
in the polar snow and ice, even at the eutectic temperature of –73°C 
(see review in Jaworowski et al. 1992b). Therefore, the conclusions on 
low pre-industrial atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases cannot be 
regarded as valid, before experimental studies exclude the existence of 
these fractionation processes. Such studies were proposed by this author 
(Jaworowski 1994a, Jaworowski et al. 1992b), but for years they were not 
performed. In response to criticism of the reliability of ice records, 
CO2 glaciologists could only state that the ice core record itself proves
that the changes in greenhouse gases are not caused by post-deposition
processes, but accurately reflect atmospheric changes (Raynaud et al. 1993).

Only recently, many years after the ice-based edifice of anthropogenic 
warming had reached a skyscraper height, did glaciologists start to 
study the fractionation of gases in snow and ice (for example, Killawee 
et al. 1998), and the structure of snow and firn which might play a 
first-order role in changing gas chemistry and isotopic profiles in the 
ice sheets (Albert 2004, Leeman and Albert 2002, and Severinghaus et al. 
2001). Recently, Brooks Hurd, a high-purity-gas analyst, confirmed the 
previous criticism of ice core CO2 studies. He noted that the Knudsen 
diffusion effect, combined with inward diffusion, is depleting CO2 in 
ice cores
exposed to drastic pressure changes (up to 320 bars—more than 300 times 
normal atmospheric pressure), and that it minimizes variations and 
reduces the maximums (Hurd 2006).

This is illustrated by comparing for the same time period, about 7,000 
to 8,000 years before the present, two types of proxy estimates of CO2. 
The ice core data from the Taylor Dome, Antarctica, which are used to 
reconstruct the IPCC’s official historical record, feature an almost 
completely flat time trend and range, 260 to 264 ppmv (Indermuhle et al.
1999). On the other hand, fossil leaf stomata indices2 show CO2 
concentrations ranging widely by more than 50 ppmv, between 270 and 326 
ppmv (Wagner et al. 2002). This difference strongly suggests that ice 
cores are not a proper matrix for reconstruction of the chemical 
composition of the ancient atmosphere.

The CO2 ice core data are artifacts caused by processes in the ice 
sheets and in the ice cores, and have concentration values about 30 to 
50 percent lower than in the original atmosphere. Ice is an improper 
matrix for such chemical studies, and even the most excellent analytical 
methods cannot be of help when the matrix and samples are wrong. Before 
basic research on gas differentiation was even started, a plethora of 
glacier studies on temporal trends of greenhouse gases had been 
published during past decades, aiming to demonstrate that: (1) these 
gases are responsible for climatic changes, and (2) that their level in 
the atmosphere was
increased by human activity. These studies are beset with a unilateral 
interpretation and manipulation of data, and with an arbitrary rejection 
of both the high greenhouse gas readings from the pre-industrial ice, 
and the low readings from the contemporary samples (Jaworowski 1994a, 
Jaworowski et al. 1992b).

Were the CO2 ice core data and their interpretation correct, then they 
should be treated as evidence that during the past 650,000 years, CO2 
had no discernible effect on the global temperature. This for two 
reasons: first, the temperature increase appears beforethe claimed 
increase in CO2; and second, there are monotonically low proxy CO2 
levels in the ice cores during the periods of warm climate, both in 
ancient and modern times.

In the ice cores, the isotopically determined temperature signal and the 
signal of CO2 air concentrations are out of phase by hundreds to several 
thousands of years (Jaworowski et al. 1992b), with the temperature 
increases always preceding the rising CO2 levels, not the reverse 
(Caillon et al. 2003, Fischer et al. 1999, Idso 1988, Indermuhle et al. 
2000, Monnin et al. 2001, and Mudelsee 2001). This suggests that the 
increasing temperature of the atmosphere is the causative factor for CO2 
increases, probably via higher erosion of the land and gas exhalation 
from the warmer ocean.

We have observed this in modern times. Solubility of CO2 in warm water 
is lower than it is in cold. When climate warms, less CO2 can be 
retained in the upper 3,000-meter layer of oceans, and it is exhaled 
into the atmosphere, where the CO2 content is more than 50 times lower 
than it is in the ocean. This is the reason that between 1880 and 1940, 
when the
global average temperature warmed up by about 0.5°C, the direct 
measurements in the atmosphere registered a very large increase of CO2, 
from about 290 ppmv in 1885 up to 440 ppmv in 1940—about 60 ppmv higher 
than now (Beck 2007). In this period, the man-made emissions of CO2 
increased only by a factor of 5. Then, between 1949 and 1970, the global 
temperature decreased by about 0.3°C, and the atmospheric
CO2 level dropped to about 330 ppmv (Boden et al. 1990). Now, when 
man-made CO2 emissions are 30 times higher than in 1880 (Marland et al. 
2006), the CO2 atmospheric level is similar to that recorded before the 
1940s climatic warm event.

The CO2 concentrations in the air inclusions in ice, which are assumed 
to be pre-industrial or ancient, are always about 100 ppmv below the 
current atmospheric level (Indermuhle et al. 1999, Pearman et al. 1986, 
Petit et al. 1999; see also the review in Jaworowski et al. 1992b). Yet, 
during the past 420,000 years, the climate was often much warmer than 
the present, (Andersen et al. 2004, Chumakov 2004, Ruddiman 1985, 
Shackleton and Opdyke 1973, Zubakov and Borzenkova 1990, and Robin 
1985). Even about 120,000 years ago, when the global surface temperature 
was as much as 5°C higher than now (Andersen et al. 2004), the 
atmospheric CO2 concentration derived from glacier data was only 240 
ppmv (Petit et al. 1999)—that is, below the current level by some 130 ppmv.

More recently, during the Holocene (8,000 to 10,000 years before the 
present) when the temperature of the Arctic was 5°C warmer than now 
(Brinner and al. 2006), ice core records show a CO2 level of about 260 
ppmv (IPCC 2007).

The Hockey Stick Curves

On the basis of assumption piled upon assumption, several versions of 
CO2 “hockey stick curves” were compiled, by combining the distorted 
proxy ice core data and the recent direct atmospheric CO2 measurements. 
The authors of such studies claimed that their curves represent the 
atmospheric CO2 levels during the past 300 years (Neftel et al. 1985, 
Pearman et al. 1986, Siegenthaler and Oeschger 1987), or the past 10,000 
years (in the “Summary for Policymakers”), Figure 3, or even
the past 400,000 years (Wolff 2003). They all show low pre-industrial

CO2 concentrations, ranging from about 180 to 280 ppmv during the past 
400,000 years, and soaring up to about 370 ppmv at the end of the 20th 
Century. These so-called hockey stick curves were published countless 
times as a proof of the anthropogenic increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. 
They were created by illegitimately mixing the false proxy ice core data 
with direct measurements in the atmosphere.

However, the worst manipulation was the arbitrary changing of the age of 
the gas trapped in the upper part of the core, where the pressure 
changes were less drastic than in the deeper parts. In this part of the 
core, taken from Siple, Antarctica, the ice was deposited in the year 
1890, and the CO2 concentration in it was 328 ppmv (Friedli et al. 1986, 
Neftel et al. 1985), and not the 290 ppmv needed to prove the man-made 
warming hypothesis. The same CO2 concentration of 328 ppmv was measured 
in the air collected directly from the atmosphere at the Mauna Loa 
volcano, Hawaii, 83 years later in 1973 (Boden et al. 1990). So, it was 
shockingly clear that the pre-industrial level of CO2 was the same as in 
the second half of the 20th Century.

To solve this “problem,” these researchers simply made an ad hoc 
assumption: The age of the gas recovered from 1 to 10 grams of ice was 
arbitrarily decreed to be exactly 83 years younger than the ice in which 
it was trapped! This was not supported by any experimental evidence, but 
only by assumptions which were in conflict with the facts (Jaworowski 
1994a, Jaworowski et al. 1992b). The “corrected” proxy ice data were
then smoothly aligned with the direct atmospheric measurements from 
Mauna Loa (Figures 4a and 4b).

Thus, falsified CO2 “hockey stick curves” were presented in all the IPCC 
reports, including Figure 3 in the “Summary for Policymakers” in 2007. 
These hockey sticks were credulously accepted by almost everyone, 
together with other information on greenhouse gases determined in the 
ice cores, which were plagued by improper manipulation of data, an 
arbitrary rejection of high readings from old ice, and an arbitrary 
rejection of the low readings from the young ice, simply because they 
did not fit the preconceived idea of man-made global warming. It is a 
habit that has become all too common in greenhouse gas and other 
environmental studies (Jaworowski 1994a, Jaworowski 1994b, and 
Jaworowski et al. 1992b).

Direct CO2 Measurements in the Atmosphere

We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of 
man-made global warming — with its repercussions in science, and its 
important consequences for politics and the global economy — is based on 
ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 
levels. Meanwhile, more than 90,000 direct measurements of CO2 in the 
atmosphere, carried out in America, Asia, and Europe between 1812 and
1961, with excellent chemical methods (accuracy better than 3 percent), 
were arbitrarily rejected. These measurements had been published in 175 
technical papers. For the past three decades, these well-known direct 
CO2 measurements, recently compiled and analyzed by Ernst-Georg Beck 
(Beck 2006a, Beck 2006b, Beck 2007), were completely ignored by 
climatologists — and not because they were wrong. Indeed, these
measurements were made by several Nobel Prize winners, using the 
techniques that are standard textbook procedures in chemistry, 
biochemistry, botany, hygiene, medicine, nutrition, and ecology. The 
only reason for rejection was that these measurements did not fit the 
hypothesis of anthropogenic climatic warming. I regard this as perhaps 
the greatest scientific scandal of our time.

 From among this treasure of excellent data (ranging up to 550 ppmv of
measured CO2 levels), the founders of the anthropogenic global warming 
hypothesis (Callendar 1949, Callendar 1958, and Keeling 1986) selected 
only a tiny fraction of the data and doctored it, to select out the low 
concentrations and reject the high values — all in order to set a 
falsely low pre-industrial average CO2 concentration of 280 ppmv as the 
basis for all further climatic speculations. This manipulation has been 
discussed several times since the 1950s (Fonselius et al. 1956, 
Jaworowski et al. 1992b, and Slocum 1955), and more recently and 
in-depth by Beck 2007.

The results of Ernst-Georg Beck’s monumental study of a large body of 
direct atmospheric CO2 measurements from the 19th and 20th Century, 
smoothed as five-year averages, are presented in Figure 5. The 
measurements show that the most important political message of the IPCC 
in 2007 is wrong: It is not true that the CO2 atmospheric level during 
the pre-industrial era was about 25 percent lower than it is now, and it 
is not true that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 have caused what is 
actually our beneficially warm climate today.

Direct atmospheric measurements indicate that between 1812 and 1961, the 
concentrations of CO2 fluctuated by about 150 ppmv, up to values much 
higher than those of today. Except for the year 1885, these direct 
measurements were always higher than the ice core data, which are devoid 
of any variations. During the 149 years from 1812 to 1961, there
were three periods when the average CO2 concentration was much higher 
than it was in 2004, 379 ppmv (IPCC 2007): Around the year 1820, it was 
about 440 ppmv; around 1855, it was 390 ppmv; and around 1940, it was 
440 ppmv. Data compiled by Beck (Beck 2007) suggest also that changes of 
the CO2 atmospheric concentration followed, rather than preceded, the 
temperature changes. These findings make the manmade
global warming hypothesis invalid.

Anthropogenic Warming That Isn’t

The second most important message of the “Summary for Policymakers” of 
2007 is that “Most of the observed increase in globally averaged 
temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the 
observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse concentrations.” However, 
neither the “Summary for Policymakers” document, nor the three former IPCC
reports, supported this statement with any convincing scientific evidence.

The infamous temperature hockey stick curve, the leading symbol of the 
IPCC report in 2001, was created to show that the global average 
temperature in the 1990s was unusual and the highest in the past 1,000 
years. The Medieval Warming (the years 950 to 1300), well documented in 
the former IPCC reports, disappeared from this hockey stick curve, as 
did the earlier Roman Warm Period (200 B.C. to 600 A.D.), the Holocene 
Warm Period (8,000 to 5,000 years before the present), and the deep 
cooling of the Little Ice Age (the years 1350 to 1850) — Figure 6.

The fraudulence of this hockey stick curve was documented by Legates 
2002, Legates 2003, McIntyre and McKitrick 2003, Soon 2003, Soon and 
Baliunas 2003, and Soon et al. 2003. But criticism of the IPCC 2001 
hockey stick curve of temperature appeared to be a mine field: The six 
editors of the journal Climate Research who dared to publish the Soon and
Baliunas 2003 paper were fired by the publisher. In the “Summary for
Policymakers” 2007 report, the IPCC truncated its original 
1,000-year-long hockey stick temperature curve by a factor of 10, 
starting it at 1850, exactly at the time when the Earth’s climate began 
to recover by natural forces from the Little Ice Age, when the emissions 
of CO2 had been 135 times lower than they are now (Marland et al. 2006).

This natural recovery from the Little Ice Age is interpreted by the IPCC 
as a man-made calamity; the IPCC regards the last 50 years as the 
warmest in the past 1,300 years because of fossil fuel burning. This 
monothematic line of thinking does not take into account the 
astronomical evidence that these last 50 years have had the highest 
solar activity of the past several thousand years. There has not been an 
equally high activity of the Sun since more than 8,000 years ago (Figure 
7), and the Sun has
been the dominant cause of the strong warming during the past three 
decades (Solanki et al. 2004).

Cosmoclimatology: Cosmic Rays and the Sun Rule the Climate

For about the past 15 years, we have had a rapid development of a new 
scientific field: cosmoclimatology. It was started by a seminal paper by 
Friis-Christensen and Lassen in 1991, in which they documented a close 
relationship between solar activity and the surface temperature of the 
Earth. (This development was reviewed by Svensmark in 2007.) Later 
studies demonstrated that the main mechanism by which cosmic factors 
regulate our weather are cosmic rays penetrating the Earth’s atmosphere. 
Their flux is determined by fluctuations of magnetic fields of the Sun 
and by the Solar System migration over the varying environments of the 
Milky Way, with different concentration of dust and activity of novas.

The variations of cosmic-ray flux are an order of magnitude greater than 
those caused by the Sun. Cosmic rays rule the climate by producing an 
ionization of air molecules at the rate required to have a measurable 
impact on climate. Ionization helps to create condensation nuclei in the 
troposphere, needed for cloud formation. At low solar activity (or in 
some parts of Milky Way), more cosmic radiation penetrates into the 
troposphere, and more clouds are formed, which act as an umbrella to 
protect the Earth against irradiance by the Sun. Recently, experimental 
evidence was provided for a mechanism by which cosmic rays can affect 
the cloud cover (Svensmark 2007). This cover exerts a strong cooling 
effect, which offers a mechanism for solar-driven climate change that is 
much more powerful than the small 0.1 percent variations in the solar 

According to Khilyuk and Chilingar (2006), the total anthropogenic CO2 
emission throughout human history constitutes less than 0.00022 percent 
of the total CO2 amount naturally degassed from the mantle of the Earth 
during geological history. Anthropogenic CO2 emission is negligible in 
any energymatter transformation processes changing the Earth’s climate. 
The forces of nature that are driving the climate (solar irradiation, 
fluctuating along with solar activity and orbital deviations, 
outgassing, and microbial activities) are 4 to 5 orders of magnitude 
greater than the corresponding anthropogenic impacts on the Earth’s 
climate (such as heating and emission of greenhouse gases), even without 
accounting for the cosmic
ray influences.

Human beings may be responsible for less than 0.01°C of warming
during the last century; the hypothesis that the currently observed 
"Modern Warming” is a result of anthropogenic CO2, and of other 
greenhouse gas emissions, is a myth.

The cosmoclimatic factors account for climate fluctuations on the 
decadal, centennial, and millennial timescales. During the Little Ice 
Age (1350 to 1850) the exceptionally weak solar magnetic field of the 
Sun, reflected by an extremely low sunspot number during the Maunder 
Minimum (1645 to 1715), coincided with its coldest phase. Another 
sunspot minimum, the Dalton Minimum of the early 19th Century, was 
associated with another cold phase.

On the other hand, the Medieval Warm and the Modern Warm periods showed 
excellent matches with the low cosmic ray intensities, governed by solar 
cycles. During the past several 10,000s to 6,000 years, temperature 
events corresponded well to solar perturbations, suggesting that the 
driving force of the Holocene temperature fluctuations was caused by 
solar activity, and related to this, by cosmic ray flux (Bashkirtsev and 
Mashnich 2003, Dergachev and Rasporov 2000, Friis-Christensen and Lassen 
1991, Marsh and Svensmark 2000, Svensmark and Friis-Christensen 1997, Xu 
et al. 2005, Xu et al. 2006, Bago and Buttler 2000, and Soon et al. 
2000), rather than by CO2 changes, which lag behind the temperature 
changes, and appear to be an effect, not the cause of temperature 
variations (Figure 8).

Over the past 750,000 years, the rate of change of global ice volume was 
fluctuating in exact agreement with the summertime insolation at the 
northern high latitudes, in agreement with the Milankovitch theory (Roe 
2006). In this study it was also found that variations in melting 
precede variations in atmospheric CO2, suggesting that CO2 variations 
play a relatively weak role in driving changes in global ice volume, 
compared to solar influence. Over the longer intervals, the changing 
galactic environment of the Solar System had dramatic consequences in 
the past, including “Snowball Earth” episodes (2,300 million and 700 
million years ago), when all the Earth was frozen. The climate 
fluctuated rather regularly throughout the past 3 billion years of the 
Earth’s history, evolving gradually towards cooling and the increased 
frequency, duration, and
scale of glaciation (Chumakov 2004). Periodic climatic changes, 
recognizable by geological methods, can be divided into five categories:
(1) super-long fluctuations (approximately 150 million years);
(2) long fluctuations (a few to 15 million years);
(3) middle fluctuations (1 million to about 10 million years);
(4) short fluctuations (few tens to hundreds of thousands of years); and
(5) ultra-short fluctuations (millennial, centennial, and shorter).
During the Phanerozoic Era (the past 545 million years) the Earth passed 
through four super-long climate cycles, probably related to the cosmic 
ray flux changes, caused by passages of the Solar System through various 
environments of the spiral arms of the Milky Way (Shaviv and Veizer 2003).

The temperature fluctuations during the Phanerozoic varied in accordance 
with the cosmic ray flux, but revealed no relationship to CO2 content in 
the atmosphere. Two long and extensive glaciations occurred in this 
period, at the time of CO2 minima, at about 300 million years before the 
present, and were interpreted as an indication that the CO2 atmospheric
greenhouse effect was a principal control of climate over geologic time 
(Berner 1998).

However, long and extensive glaciations also existed twice, between 353 
and 444 million years ago, when the CO2 level in the atmosphere was up 
to 7 and 17 times higher than today (Chumakov 2004). The paleogeographic 
studies provided proxy data on global climatic gradients in the 
Phanerozoic (Berner 1997), which show no relationship with the CO2 
atmospheric concentration estimated by Boucot et al. in 2004.
Assigning a long-term principal control of climate to trace 
concentrations of a single agent, the CO2 gas, which currently 
contributes about 2 percent to the total greenhouse effect (Lindzen 
1991), and neglecting the 98 percent contribution of water, and the 
contribution from the other factors listed below, conflicts with the 
cosmoclimatic data.

The temperature fluctuations in five Antarctic regions, reconstructed 
from the ice core stable isotope records between 1800 and 1999, are 
similar to the CO2 fluctuations measured directly in the atmosphere 
since 1812 (Figure 9). According to the IPCC, the highest rise of 
temperature caused by the emission of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, 
should occur in
Antarctica and the Arctic. These predictions do not fit the temperature 
data in Figure 9, which, according to Schneider et al. 2006, are also 
representative for the whole Southern Hemisphere. In Antarctica, the 
temperature in the 1990s was lower than during many decades in the past 
two centuries, and much lower than the mean for 1961 to 1990, 
represented by the zero line.

In the northern part of the Earth, direct temperature measurements in 
the boreholes at the Summit and Dye sites in Greenland (Figure 10) 
demonstrated that during the last 8,000 years, the temperature in the 
Arctic fluctuated similarly as the proxy global temperature 
reconstructed in the IPCC 1990 report (Figure 6), and that at the end of 
20th Century, the temperature in the Arctic was lower than during the 
Medieval and Holocene Warmings. The proxy temperature reconstruction 
spanning nearly 2,500 years at Taimyr Peninsula in Russia (poleward of 
70° N) revealed also the Holocene, Medieval, and Modern Warmings, with 
the first two warmer than the 20th Century one, in which the temperature
peak appeared around 1940 (Naurzbayev et al. 2002). Instrumental 
measurements of surface air temperature in the Arctic were started in 
1874 in Greenland, followed by stations at Spitsbergen, Canada, and 
Russia. Since that year, until about 2000, the highest temperature at 37 
Arctic and 6 sub-Arctic stations was observed in the 1930s, and was 
higher by about 2 to 5°C than those occurring prior to the 1920s. Even 
in the 1950s, the temperature in the Arctic was higher than in the 
1990s. In Greenland, the level of temperature in the 1980s and in the 
1990s was similar to that observed in the 19th Century (Przybylak 2000).

Other instrumental records covering the last 100 years demonstrate 
similar temperature fluctuations in the Arctic. According to Chylek et 
al. (2004), instrumental temperature measurements in Greenland show that 
the highest temperature there occurred in the 1920s, when in less than 
10 years it increased by 2 to 4°C, and at some stations even by 6°C. At 
that time, the anthropogenic emissions of CO2 were nine times lower than 
now (Marland et al. 2006).

Since 1940, however, the Greenland coastal data have predominantly
undergone cooling. At the summit of the Greenland ice sheet, the summer 
average temperature has decreased at a rate of 2.2°C per decade, since 
the beginning of measurements in 1987. Similar results are reported for
Arctic temperature measurements carried out between 1875 and 2000 
(Polyakov et al. 2003). This is against all the predictions of climate 

The disparity between the tropospheric and surface temperature trends 
measured by balloons and satellites, and the greenhouse models’ 
predictions, was recently discussed by S. Fred Singer in a letter 
rejected by Nature,and published on Feb. 13, 2007 on


As stated by Singer, “Greenhouse models indicate that the tropics provide
the most sensitive location for their validation: trends there [should] 
increase strongly with altitude, peaking at around 10 kilometers. Actual 
observations, however, show the opposite: flat or even decreasing 
tropospheric trend.” This comparison of models with balloon and 
satellite data, contradicts the most important conclusion of IPCC that 
the current warming is “very likely” the result of human activities.

The Specter of Floods

The most trendy adverse effect of climate warming is the melting of the 
polar ice sheets, which, it is claimed, will cause catastrophic flooding 
of vast areas. From among a host of recent papers presenting evidence 
against these gloomy prophesies, I will refer only to a paper by my 
friend H. Jay Zwally, from NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, who for 
decades has used satellite techniques to measure the mass of the polar 
ice sheets. In his paper (Zwally et al. 2005), he presents the study of 
in ice mass derived from 10.5 years (Greenland) and 9 years (Antarctica) 
of satellite radar altimetry data.Zwally et al. show that the Greenland ice
sheet is thinning at the margins (–42 Gt per year) and growing inland 
(+53 Gt per year). This corresponds to a sea level decrease of –0.03 mm 
per year. In West Antarctica, the ice sheet is losing mass (at –47 Gt 
per year), and in East Antarctica, it is gaining mass (+16 Gt per year). 
The combined net change of –31 Gt, corresponds to +0.08 mm per year of 
sea level rise. Hence, they report, “the contribution of the three ice 
sheets to sea level is +0.05 mm per year.”

During the period studied, the Antarctic Western Ice Shelf changed its 
mass by –95 Gt per year, and the Eastern one changed by +142 Gt per year 
(together their mass increased by 47 Gt per year). The contribution of 
polar ice of 0.05 mm per year to sea level rise is small, in comparison 
to the real sea level rise observed from satellite altimetry of 2.8 mm 
per year. The ice sheets’ contribution would take 1,000 years to raise 
global sea level by just 5 cm, and it would take 20,000 years to raise 
it 1 meter.

People are frustrated by the prospect of flooding the Pacific and Indian 
Ocean islands by our sinful activity. A good example of the futility of 
such fears is the beautiful archipelago of the Maldives in the central 
Indian Ocean, which consists of some 1,200 individual islands, grouped 
in about 20 larger atolls. They rise from a depth of about 2,500 meters, 
and consist
of coral reefs, coral reef debris, and coral sand. Their elevation is 
only 1 to 2 meters. Hence, they have been condemned to disappear in the 
sea in the near future (IPCC 2001).

Multiple geomorphological and sedimentological investigations, and 
satellite altimetry measurements by Morner et al. (2004) contradict this 
dire hypothesis. The islands existed prior to the last glaciation 
maximum, and have been inhabited for at least 1,500 years before the 
present. During this period, at around 1,000 to 800 years before the 
present, that is, during the Medieval Warming, the inhabitants survived 
a sea level that was some 50 to 60 cm higher than it is now (Figure 11).

During the past decades, both the satellite altimetry and gauge records 
do not record any significant rise in sea level at the Maldives. Some 
100 to 30 years ago, the sea level was 20 to 30 cm higher than it is 
today. There is firm evidence that the sea level fell there by 20 to 30 
cm in the last 30 years, contrary to IPCC expectations.

The Near Future

During the past 1 million years, there have been some 10 Ice Ages, each 
lasting about 100,000 years, interspersed with warm interglacials, the 
duration of which was only about 10,000 years. The last Ice Age came to 
its end about 10,500 years ago; thus, our present interglacial seems to be
a bit longer than average. The new Ice Age looms in waiting, and whether 
it comes in decades, centuries, or even a millennium, is a matter of 
speculation. It seems that its inescapable advent will be induced by 
natural cosmic factors rather than by terrestrial ones. The hypothesis, 
in vogue in the 1970s, stating that emissions of industrial dust will 
soon induce the new Ice Age, seem now to be a conceited anthropocentric 
exaggeration, bringing into discredit the science of that time. The same 
fate awaits the present CO2 folly.

Using a novel multi-timescale analysis method to diagnose the variation 
of the annual mean global Northern Hemisphere and Chinese temperature 
data from 1881 to 2002, Zhen-Shan and Xian (2007) found four different 
quasiperiodic oscillations, among which the 60-year timescale 
oscillation of temperature was the most prominent. Despite the 
increasing trend in the atmospheric CO2 concentration, the pattern of 
the 60-year temperature oscillation is in a descent. The authors 
concluded that the atmospheric CO2 concentration is not the key 
determinant of periodic variation of the global temperature, that the 
CO2 greenhouse effect has
been excessively exaggerated, and that it is high time to reconsider the 
trend of global climate changes. Their analysis suggests that the global 
climate will be cooling in the next 20 years

This conclusion is in agreement with the projections of Russian 
astronomers from the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics in Irkutsk, 
who, from an analysis of the sunspot cycles for the period 1882-2000, 
deduced that the minimum of the secular cycle of solar activity will 
fall in the next cycle, in 2021-2026, which will result in the minimum 
global temperature of the surface air (Bashkirtsev and Mashnich 2003). They
found also that the temperature response of the air lags behind the 
sunspot cycles by about three years in Irkutsk, and by two years over 
the entire globe.

A similar projection, based on observations of the cyclic activity of 
the Sun, was announced from the Pulkovo Observatory, near St. 
Petersburg, Russia. The head of the Space Research Laboratory of the 
Observatory, Prof. Habibullo I. Abdussamatov, stated that instead of 
professed global warming, the Earth will be facing a slow decrease in 
temperatures in 2012-2015. The gradual cooling will reach its maximum by 
2040, and lead to a deep freeze around 2050 to 2060. This period of 
global freeze will last some 50 years, and will be comparable to the 
cooling that took place during the Little Ice Age in 1645-1715, when the 
temperature decreased
by 1 to 2°C (Abdussamatov 2004, Abdussamatov 2005, and
Abdussamatov 2006).

A similar impending cooling, with two new Little Ice Ages around 2100 
and 2200, was envisaged by the late Prof. Theodor Landscheidt, founder 
of the Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity in 
Germany (Landscheidt 1995 and Landscheidt 2003).

During the past 3,000 years, one can observe a clear cooling trend in 
the Earth’s climate (Keigwin et al. 1994, and Khilyuk and Chilingar 
2006). During this period, the global temperature deviations were 3°C, 
with a trend of decreasing global temperature of about 2°C. As Khilyuk 
and Chilingar stated: “This cooling tendency will probably last in the 
future. We live in the cooling geologic period and the global warming 
observed during the last approximately 150 years is just a short episode 
in the geologic history.” This is reflected in Figure 12.

Not man, but nature rules the climate. The Kyoto Protocol and the IPCC 
reports, tuned by Malthusian ideas, may surely make a lot of noise and 
cause enormous harm for the global economy and for the well-being of 
billions of people. But they can do nothing for the climate. This we 
shall learn in the near future.
Zbigniew Jaworowski is a multidisciplinary scientist, now a senior 
advisor at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw. 
In the winter of 1957-1958, he measured the concentration of CO2 in the 
atmospheric air at Spitsbergen. From 1972 to 1991, he investigated the 
history of the pollution of the global atmosphere, measuring the dust
preserved in 17 glaciers: in the Tatra Mountains in Poland, in the 
Arctic, Antarctic, Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas, the 
Ruwenzori Mountains in Uganda, and the Peruvian Andes. He has published 
many papers on climate, most of them concerning the CO2 measurements in 
ice cores. Two of his papers on climate appear on the website of 21st 
Century Science & Technology magazine, www.21stcenturysciencetech.com.
This is an expanded version of his article first published in EIR, March 
16, 2007.

Notes _____________________________________________________________
1. Private communication by Prof. Maciej Sadowski, Dec. 7, 2006.
2. Leaf surfaces have stomata, or small pores, which allow carbon 
dioxide to enter the leaf and oxygen to escape in the process of 

-------snipped, but available on request --Maury&Dog------------

More information about the RadSafe mailing list