We have shown that anthropogenic forcings do not polynomially cointegrate with global temperature and solar irradiance. Therefore, data for 1880–2007 do not support the anthropogenic interpretation of global warming during this period. This key result is shown graphically in Fig. 3 where the vertical axis measures the component of global temperature that is unexplained by solar irradiance according to our estimates. In panel a the horizontal axis measures the anomaly in the anthropogenic trend when the latter is derived from forcings of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. In panel b the horizontal axis measures this anthropogenic anomaly when apart from these greenhouse gas forcings, it includes tropospheric aerosols and black carbon. Panels a and b both show that there is no relationship between temperature and the anthropogenic anomaly, once the warming effect of solar irradiance is taken into consideration.
So, someone finally decided to account for the sun’s impact
on global temperature (not to beat a dead horse here, but this is basically the
most obvious adjustment to make, but it’s no surprise that researchers would
fail to do this since it doesn’t fit the official narrative). Consequently, the data now suggests that man
has little impact on global temperatures.
Of course, this conclusion shouldn’t be all that
surprising. In the first place, it is
hilariously arrogant to think that man can have such a profound and immediate
impact on the entire planet. In the second
place, the scientific support for anthropogenic global warming was never all
that sound, as evidenced by the fact that most policy recommendation for dealing
with global warming weren’t particularly efficient at solving the problem (this
was addressed quite thoroughly at the end of Superfreakonomics).
At any rate, the final nails are being pounded in the coffin
of the anthropogenic global warming narrative.
Finally.
