Data from a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggest that the Earth's warming trend over the past two decades may not be attributable to human-related activities. [emphasis, links added]
Experts analyzing the report pointed to changes in the Earth's albedo (the proportion of solar energy reflected by the Earth) as a factor driving rising global temperatures.
Albedo fluctuations cause the Earth to reflect less solar energy and absorb more, leading to a warming trend often cited by activists, advocates and policymakers concerned about climate change.
As global leaders increasingly adopt aggressive policies to mitigate climate change, data showing that human activity is not the main driver could reshape global public policy.
In a recent interview with SCNR, Dr. Ned Nikolov, a scientist in the fields of climate, cosmology and astrophysics, expressed concerns about the integrity of the IPCC report and accused the group of manipulating climate data.
Nikolov's research, based on satellite data from NASA's Cloud and Earth Radiation Energy System (CERES) program, revealed The IPCC distorts trends in solar and longwave radiation by inverting the data.
he thinks Rather than accurately describing the Earth absorbing more solar energy due to fewer clouds ——An observation supported by NASA—— The IPCC revised the data to show the opposite, indicating less solar energy was absorbed.
Nikolov believes that this Data inversion is no accident and suggest The IPCC may have deliberately falsified these data to fit the widely accepted narrative of man-made climate change.
The IPCC did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
While writing a paper using CERES satellite data, I discovered that the latest IPCC report severely distorted CERES observations of reflected solar and outgoing longwave radiation.
In Chapter 7 of the WG1 contribution, Figure 7.3 shows the inverted trends in reflected sunlight and longwave flux! pic.twitter.com/lJqO0g7gVG— Dr. Ned Nikolov (@NikolovScience) June 21, 2024
Nikolov thinks All of the warming observed over the past 24 years can only be explained by increased solar absorption, not by rising concentrations of carbon dioxide or greenhouse gases.
“This, this is not my theory,” he reiterated. “It comes directly from satellite data provided by NASA. It's on their website.
He also pointed to the wider implications for climate science, claiming Greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide Compared with the effect of atmospheric pressure, the impact on global warming is negligible.
Climate scientist Carl Zeller, a longtime research assistant to Nikolov, criticized the IPCC's interpretation of the data, stating Their model presented a misleading trend by inverting the actual measurements, showing an increase in albedo.
He told SCNR that the discrepancies stem from the way the IPCC calculates anomalies, which significantly changes the findings.
The two scientists developed a regression equation based on satellite data that predicts temperature changes caused by changes in solar input.
Their research suggests that recent warming can be attributed to changes in solar radiation, rather than greenhouse gases as is widely accepted.
They recently published their findings in a peer-reviewed journal Geoinformaticsthe conclusion is “Data measured by CERES explain 100% of the global warming trend observed over the past 24 years and 83% of the interannual variation in GSAT, including the extreme high temperature anomaly in 2023”, NASA said it was the hottest year on record.
“These findings call for a fundamental reconsideration of the current paradigm for understanding climate change and related socioeconomic initiatives aimed at drastically reducing industrial carbon emissions at all costs,” they wrote.
Although their conclusions are important, Nikolov points to the lack of response from the wider scientific community, attributing it to political and economic interests that may hinder public discussion of the issue.
He called for further transparency and scrutiny of climate data.
The pair's research highlights that if these differences were widely acknowledged, the man-made global warming narrative could collapse.
However, Nikolov acknowledged that challenging such an entrenched global consensus is difficult because most media and scientific institutions are reluctant to discuss the findings.
For more information, visit SCNR
