The Implications of Cloud Cover in Climate Models

One of the largest factors often overlooked in climate models is cloud cover. Despite a significant decrease in cloud cover over the past 23 years, reducing it by 6.8%, the impact of cloud cover is massive and much more influential than the greenhouse effect of CO2 by a factor of 100.

Why is cloud cover so often ignored? The argument made is that it is 'only in the air for a while and is too complex.' This is a baffling response as it equates simplicity with inaccuracy. Alarmists often react with incredulity to this statement, suggesting with fervor that they have always known the importance of cloud cover. However, the reality is that historical data, such as the impact of the Gothic period (535-1316) when heavy cloud cover caused Europe and the Mediterranean to freeze (1/3 of Europe), attest to its importance. Similarly, it is crucial to acknowledge theassertTrue 4times more fires in the 1930s in the USA compared to today, as evidenced by the removal of graphs by the US Fire/Weather Service.

These historical data points not only highlight the significance of cloud cover but also demonstrate that man-made factors are not always the sole contributors to climate changes.

Deception in Climate Models: The Role of the IPCC

The IPCC's climate models are often criticized for their deceptive nature and conservative projections. This conservativism is influenced by the financial backing from governments, which are themselves funded by corporations. The aim is to prevent widespread panic among the public.

However, it is important to reveal the real climate sensitivity. The IPCC’s claims of a 3-degree equilibrium climate sensitivity for a doubling of CO2 is significantly understated. According to the geological record, the true equilibrium climate sensitivity is 6 degrees, not 3.

The role of aerosols and smog from industrial pollution in masking the true temperature rise, known as 'global dimming,' further complicates the situation. Without these pollutants, the temperature would actually be 2 - 3 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. This is the transient climate sensitivity, or the immediate temperature increase. Yet, the equilibrium climate sensitivity, the long-term temperature rise, is approximately two times higher.

This means that, beyond the tipping points that would lead to significant temperature increases in the coming centuries, we could see a gradual rise of 4-6 degrees by 2500 CE. The tipping points include reduced albedo due to ice loss and increased water vapor in the atmosphere. Additionally, the melting of permafrost and methane clathrates could contribute to even greater CO2 releases.

Fake Charts and Deceptive Analytics

Douglas Rushkoff and other denialists often use fake and doctored charts to support their claims. These images are frequently bots funded by oil companies, designed to sow confusion and ignorance. The real-world data, however, contradicts these deceptive representations. For example, NASA has been forced to adjust and estimate 43 percent of its temperature data when graphs or data sets disagree with their narrative.

Moreover, the removal of graphs showing significant temperature increases over the past century, such as the 'acreage lost to fires USA 1900 to present,' further illustrates the selective presentation of data. The 1930s saw 4 times more heat and wildfires compared to current trends, which is a significant counter to the notion that climate change is a recent phenomenon strongly linked to human activity.

In conclusion, the climate models and their projections often fall short when it comes to accurately representing the complex interplay between various factors, including cloud cover and aerosols. It is crucial to examine these models critically and consider all available data to form a comprehensive understanding of climate change.