Global warming, once known as global cooling and currently called man-made "climate change," has stayed in the headlines whether Americans care or not. According to a 2014 Gallup poll, it ranked towards the very bottom, second only to "race relations."
Despite an antarctic boat trip that resulted in the vessel getting stuck in the ice that wasn't supposed to be there and an alarming global warming report for New York City that proved untrue, climate change science continues to be pushed without skepticism. In fact, former popular kids science show host Bill Nye believes anyone who questions the science to be "f**king idiots, as the Inquisitr has reported.
The Daily Caller reports that a new German study might have just struck a serious blow to previous global warming reports. The new study questions the "settled science" on just how sensitive the atmosphere is to carbon dioxide emissions.
The study, conducted by Bjorn Stevens, director of the Department of Atmosphere in the Earth System at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, found that man-made aerosols have a much smaller cooling effect on the atmosphere during the 20th century than once thought by climate scientists. As a result, they offset carbon dioxide emissions and cause less global warming than previous models suggested.
Aerosols are a big component in the human activity aspect of the man-made global warming theory.
Aerosols also come from exhaust produced from driving automobiles, coal burning, and other fossil fuels. Clouds and fog are considered aerosols too, but the global warming theory only covers man-made aerosols. Most of these studies depend on positive or negative radiative forcing, which can have the effect of cooling or warming.
The study found that between 1850 and 1950, the cooling effect of aerosol emissions was less than currently believed. Therefore, because their projected cooling effect on the atmosphere is less, thus carbon dioxide's warming effect is also less. In layman's terms, the global warming science seems more like fear mongering than scientific fact.
According to the blog Climate Audit, climate researcher Nic Lewis found Stevens' study blew a hole through global warming and climate change study and even a recent United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Cato Institute reported.
"Instead of the IPCC's estimate that the equilibrium climate sensitivity likely lies between 1.5°C and 4.5°C, Lewis finds the likely range to be 1.2°C to 1.8°C (with a best estimate of 1.45°C). Recall that the average equilibrium climate sensitivity from the climate models used by the IPCC to make future projections of climate change and its impacts is 3.2°C — some 120% greater than Lewis' best estimate. But perhaps even more important than the best estimate is the estimate of the upper end of the range, which drops from the IPCC's 4.5°C down to 1.8°C."
Stevens and Lewis' findings seem to disprove the catastrophic effects of climate change and global warming, or at least, it's expanding and increasing at a rate that those who made it can't stop it.
[Image via Creative Commons]