A new measure of global warming from carbon emissions

This finding is contrary to physics, spectrometry, and common sense. It further fails to account for solar variability, regional geography, and albedo.

I suspect this is just a way to enable any sort of carbon tax to be constitutionally legal in the US as it adds an apportioning mechanism to an otherwise unapportioned taxation.

Unfortunately the abstract does very little to explain anything past the simple word problem posted before us.

So where is the beef, or is the modeling of the beef the beef? Oh, how euphemistically elegant sounding this word modeling is compared to that of speculation! Haven't those modelers been predicting the end of the world since the biblical times? The only difference is that nowadays they call themselves scientists, not prophets. After all, it sounds so euphemistically modern.

The earth has been cooling since 2003. CO2 has been going up. The "study" should have fiction stamped on the front.

If I emit 2% of the total carbon ever released until now, I can expect a corresponding rise in global temperature? Bunk! Even on the face of it, bunk! Carbon is exhaled by animals and consumed by plants. The more C02, the more plants are able to turn the Sun's energy into sugar (a usable energy source) and grow. More CO2 = MORE PLANTS (mostly single celled, but still...!) More plants = LESS CO2!!!

Someone who flunked 9th grade Intro to Science knows more about science than this idiot. CO2 levels will eventually level off and the global climate will eventually stabilize. The CO2 emitted back in the Roman Empire isn't around any more, nor is the bulk of the CO2 from World War II and even a good amount from 1980. 100 years from now, the bulk of the CO2 from my tailpipe today will be a distant memory. Saying that the CO2 produced today will affect the climate FOR ALL TIME is absurd in the extreme!

Is research grant money really worth burning what little credibility you have left? After writing this heap of filth, Damon Matthews's degree should be worth less than toilet paper and he should be laughed out of any scientific conference.

Sadly, politics seems to matter more in science these days than does... science!

Yeah, global climate change is real. Yeah, there is a man-made component of it. But don't prostitute yourself for political dollars and still call it science. For once, I'd like to see a study on actual climate change that incorporates the decadal climate cycles, the current data that clearly shows a cooling trend since the start of the decade and lets us make our own mind about what it says!

After all, any trend (even a modest one) extrapolated out 100 years will show naught but UTTER CATASTROPHE! Why should global climate change be any different?

These are the first tender shoots of a very nasty, invasive ideology. Press releases like this test the reactions of the public to see if the are ripe and ready for the coup d'etat.

Phrases like "we must restrict total carbon emissions - from now until forever " should snap even the most ardent eco-revolutionary out of their media-induced hyponosis long enough to realize the framework behind the statement.

This ideology presents a more dangerous incursion into Western civilization than communism, fascism, or religious fundamentalism. It has spent 10 years on the blitz to shock the public into fear, while carefully positioning solutions that provide an entirely novel, incredibly clever path to a scientific, yet totalitarian system of human control.

This ideology has nothing to do with climate, ecology, or even conservation. None of its claims or promises even try to represent reality, instead they have everything to do with infiltrating governments, economies, and populations with the single-minded goal of creating a world where human life subsists in perpetual bondage to a supranational oligarchy, whose iron rule is established by an emergency that can never end.

In a world ruled by these viciously intelligent plutocrats only their cronies would have the means of production and wealth, while all others would be subject to oppressive regulations, smothering all free economic activity and concentrating the people into managed systems of artificial scarcity. Rights and constitutions would be canceled by false "emergencies" presented by ecological propaganda, and those few nations that resisted and asserted liberty and reason would be isolated and sanctioned, perhaps even to the point of war and invasion.

It will pose as a democracy, but a vote in such a system would be a meaningless placebo as power would be concentrated and brokered far away from the people. Tear out this invader by the roots and throw it into the fire.

i can see the future 40 years from now..

global warming is proved false and ALL these researchers careers are over just as if they put: 20 years at the lysenko institute of genetics...

What about other greenhouse gases? Were they included in the model? Because the CO2 is like the most harmless one, even if the one the most emitted.

What about other greenhouse gases? Were they included in the model? Because the CO2 is like the most harmless one, even if the one the most emitted.

I agree, but I'd question whether CO2 is the one most often emitted. I'd say human activities produce far more water vapor than anything.

More BS, different day. As PC "climate scientists" go about kissing the rear ends of their funders, real scientists get ignored and ridiculed. Data is routinely hidden from those whose ability it is to fact check, statistically, a study's meaningfulness. Just ask Steve McIntyre at climateaudit.org.

If this guy is so good that his model can predict global warming based on CO2 increase alone? Then he must have eliminated all the other variables that affect climate change. A superb achievement!
Therefore his model should be able to predict the weather too... WOW!!
But wait, as far as I know, no-one can predict the weather more than a few days in advance using any kind of model, and that is for a very small potion of the Earth.
This guy is either a genius extraordinaire, or, like most of his kind before him, another so-called scientist with an ego far bigger that his propensity for common sense.
A bit of humility would go a long way in promoting REAL science...

My religious faith in global warming denialism is not shaken by this article whatsoever. My religious faith is so deep that I deny that CO2 even exists. Big oil loves me, yes I know, for Pope Rex Tillerson tells me so.

I would say that the underlying source of his models is a collection of corked and thermometered jars filled with various levels of CO2 and surrounded by an array of heat lamps.

A lab does not the planet make. :)

So I guess green plants do not turn CO2 into O2 and biomass. Gee... I guess my 8th grade teacher was wrong. Otherwise we could emit all the CO2 we want so long as we increase the number of green plants to compensate.

Conclusion: this is an idiotic article about good research or a good article on idiotic research, I'm not sure which. I'll leave that up to the reader.