This Paper Has Climate Change Deniers Very Excited. There’s Just One Tiny Problem

Climate change deniers have been getting excited about a recent paper published online titled No Experimental Evidence For The Significant Anthropogenic Climate Change, which goes against the widely accepted scientific consensus on climate change based on many years of climate data.

The paper, yet to be accepted for peer-review but published online on pre-print site arXiv, claims to “prove that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature” and the recent United Nations IPCC report (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) failed to include this. The authors claim that human contribution to global warming, estimated to be around 1°C over the past century, has thus been overestimated and is actually about 0.01°C.

“The IPCC climate sensitivity is about one order of magnitude too high, because a strong negative feedback of the clouds is missing in climate models,” the authors of the document write.


Recommended For You

InstaZign Diamond PRO | AI-Powered Design Spinner

AI-Powered Smart Design Spinner For Designs Styles on Demand With Automated Publishing and Scheduling System to Social Media. LOWEST One-Time Special Price Today Only! Increases to $297!

LocalOne - One Time Purchase

Everyone collects tools and software and training. But how many are making even $500/month from it? Using this system you’ll have both automation software to build HUGE local marketing lists AND a lead magnet that'll have them begging for your help.

StockKosh - Gigantic Collection of Premium 35,000+ 100% Royalty Free Never Before Released Stock Gra

StockKosh is the Biggest Ever Stock Content Launch in the History of Jvzoo. Featuring 115,000+ Images, 10,000+ Vectors, 665+ Transparent PNGs, 3,100+ HD Videos, 2,500+ HQ Clipart, 1,500+ Audio Tracks, 700+ Video Backgrounds, 8,000+ Animated Graphics and


“If we pay attention to the fact that only a small part of the increased CO2 concentration is anthropogenic, we have to recognize that the anthropogenic climate change does not exist in practice.”

Bold claims, but with one tiny problem: It is, of course, nonsense.

Several news outlets sympathetic to climate change denial picked up the story after it was published by Russia Today, whilst several more mainstream news organizations – most noticeably in countries where climate skepticism is strongest, like the US, Russia, and Australia – covered it with little to no criticism.

The story soon showed up on Fox News, Sky News Australia, Infowars (of course), and Sputnik. It also, thankfully, caught the attention of Climate Feedback, a worldwide organization of scientists that actively debunks unscientific claims about the climate crisis. 

“Some news outlets are publishing articles stating that this claim is based on a new ‘study’,” Climate Feedback stated in a detailed debunking. “If they had contacted independent scientists for insight, instead of accepting this short document as revolutionary science, they would have found that it does not have any scientific credibility.”

They were quick to point out what the study is actually based on is unclear, as the paper “provides neither the source of the data it uses nor the physics responsible for the proposed relationship between clouds and global temperature,” and the document declares the authors do not consider computer models as evidence.

The scientists and experts the organization asked to review this paper – vital in the peer-review process – list among the many issues the fact that “[the] document only cites six references, four of which are the authors’ own, and of these, two are not actually published.” Crucial data sources are not provided, figures used to support their claims are at odds with peer-reviewed studies, and the authors make claims “well beyond the scope of their data, without justification” they concluded.

The paper’s authors wrote that “clouds and humidity are causing all the temperature change, but satellite measurements suggest, if anything, the opposite,” Mark Richardson of the University of Californa, Los Angeles/NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, one of the experts consulted said, citing his sources like a proper scientist.

That the paper is not scientifically viable has been proven. Of course, any retractions that are published will not be seen by as many people as the original uncritical articles themselves, so the damage has already been done.


Recommended For You

ClickKosh 3 Domain License

Create Shoppable images in a snap!

Uduala DFY Gold

This is a DONE-For-You 6-Figure Ecom Business Setup By A Team With PROVEN Expertise and Customer SUCCESS... Store building, app installations, payment gateways, dropshipping automation... Everything Done For YOU!

HQWebinar Main course

HQWebinar Main course


Original Article : HERE ;

This post was curated & Posted using : RealSpecific

Thank you for taking the time to read our article.

If you enjoyed our content, we'd really appreciate some "love" with a share or two.

And ... Don't forget to have fun!


ListGrow - Affiliate Bootcamp - Silver

Step by step training on how to turn your list into a virtual ATM machine by promoting other people's product for on-demand commissions.


Mapify360 - A Complete Local Marketing Platform to find you unclaimed and un-optimized local business leads anywhere in the world!

Leave a Reply