Tom V. Segalstad
University of Oslo
Sars' Gate 1, N-0562 Oslo
The three evidences of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), that the apparent contemporary atmospheric CO2 increase is anthropogenic,
is discussed and rejected: CO2 measurements from ice cores; CO2 measurements in
air; and carbon isotope data in conjunction with carbon cycle modelling.
It is shown why the ice core method and its results must be rejected; and that
current air CO2 measurements are not validated and their results subjectively "edited".
Further it is shown that carbon cycle modelling based on non-equilibrium models,
remote from observed reality and chemical laws, made to fit non-representative data
through the use of non-linear ocean evasion "buffer" correction factors constructed from
a pre-conceived idea, constitute a circular argument and with no scientific validity.
Both radioactive and stable carbon isotopes show that the real atmospheric CO2
residence time (lifetime) is only about 5 years, and that the amount of fossil-fuel CO2
in the atmosphere is maximum 4%. Any CO2 level rise beyond this can only come from
a much larger, but natural, carbon reservoir with much higher 13-C/12-C isotope ratio
than that of the fossil fuel pool, namely from the ocean, and/or the lithosphere, and/or
the Earth's interior.
The apparent annual atmospheric CO2 level increase, postulated to be
anthropogenic, would constitute only some 0.2% of the total annual amount of CO2
exchanged naturally between the atmosphere and the ocean plus other natural sources
and sinks. It is more probable that such a small ripple in the annual natural flow of CO2
would be caused by natural fluctuations of geophysical processes.
13-C/12-C isotope mass balance calculations show that IPCC's atmospheric
residence time of 50-200 years make the atmosphere too light (50% of its current CO2
mass) to fit its measured 13-C/12-C isotope ratio. This proves why IPCC's wrong model
creates its artificial 50% "missing sink". IPCC's 50% inexplicable "missing sink" of about
3 giga-tonnes carbon annually should have led all governments to reject IPCC's model.
When such rejection has not yet occurred, it beautifully shows the result of the "scarethem-
to-death" influence principle.
IPCC's "Greenhouse Effect Global Warming" dogma rests on invalid presumptions
and a rejectable non-realistic carbon cycle modelling which simply refutes reality, like
the existence of carbonated beer or soda "pop" as we know it.