To prove that climate change is not terrible, they say that the warm period was the heyday of the Han and Tang dynasties.

The following article is from Voice of the Wind and Cloud, written by Yuan Lanfeng

Author: Wei Ke, PhD, associate researcher, deputy director of the Monsoon System Research Center, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and member of the Youth Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. His research areas are stratosphere-troposphere interaction, East Asian monsoon and extreme climate events.

With the arrival of summer, record-breaking high temperatures and extreme rainstorms have repeatedly occurred. For the first time, Beijing experienced three consecutive days of extreme high temperatures above 40°C. From May 31 to June 27, Beijing's rainfall was only 1.1 mm, a significant decrease of more than 98% compared with the 55 mm in the same period of previous years. These extreme weather conditions remind us that humans are already in a serious climate crisis. However, many people are still confused by the following views, which have become a fog shrouding our cognition, such as: the global climate is not warming, global warming is a conspiracy of unscrupulous scientists, it is nature rather than human activities that cause global warming, the current warming is not worth mentioning in the history of the earth, global warming is caused by solar activity, and global warming is a conspiracy... In fact, there are more than 200 such views.

These views and arguments are the legacy of the past 30 years of climate wars, in which one side is the mainstream scientists who support global warming, and the other side is a mixed group of anti-climate change groups, including oil companies, coal mining associations, media celebrities, lobbying groups, and some non-mainstream "scientists". Today, when global warming has become a fact, we see those "naked swimmers" who have receded in the tide, those anti-climate change groups, who have concocted and spread anti-climate science views and profoundly influenced global cognition, making conspiracy theories, scientific uncertainty, warming benefits, and climate change harm the economy widely circulated, and also making global decisions and actions to address climate change hesitant. They even successfully got the United States to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, which ultimately led to the suspension and delay of actions to address climate change for 30 years.

During the sixth round of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report, the facts of various extreme climate disasters awakened many people, among whom young people emerged as a new force. They refused to be fooled. Coupled with the development of climate science, the pseudoscience of climate change has lost its foundation. The smoke of a climate war that has lasted for more than 30 years is about to dissipate. With the support of science, the world is firmly on the road to carbon neutrality, but who can be held responsible for the lost 30 years? Who should be held accountable for the loss of life and property caused by extreme weather in the past and in the future? For at least the next 30-50 years, we will all be in the post-disaster reconstruction of the climate war of the past 30 years, and this impact may last for hundreds to thousands of years.

01. Hunting for climate science

Is there global warming? What causes warming? What impact will global warming bring? This was originally a scientific issue in climate research, but the climate response actions triggered by this involve energy transformation and policy adjustments on a global scale, and the stakeholders are all over the world. As a result, the climate issue has broken through the scientific field and become the core of the struggle between various forces. The most effective way to deal with science is to use "scientists" to fight scientists. The vested interests fund and bribe scientists whose scientific beliefs have collapsed, so that they put forward various seemingly scientific views, creating the illusion that scientists have inconsistent views for the public and decision makers, and then cooperate with other lobbying activities of petrochemical groups to make the real scientific content dusty, so that climate action is hesitant.

On June 23, 1988, American climatologist James Hansen attended a U.S. Congressional hearing and presented the latest data and model predictions at the time, emphasizing the impact of greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activities on the Earth's climate system, making global warming a highly-regarded issue and promoting important actions by the international community to address climate change. In the same year, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) jointly initiated and established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess and provide scientific knowledge on climate change on a global scale.

In 1989, the Global Climate Coalition was established to counter the scientists' actions. The alliance is composed of some American business groups, industry associations and energy companies, aiming to promote debate on global warming and resist environmental policies targeting greenhouse gas emissions. Its members are well-known, such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, and Shell in the oil and gas industry, Royal Dutch Shell in the coal industry, and automakers Ford Motor Company and General Motors.

The Global Climate Coalition is mainly composed of American business groups, industry associations and energy companies.

There are many organizations that oppose climate change. For example, the Cool Heads Coalition is also a very powerful organization. This organization is mainly composed of anti-climate change think tanks. Its members include many "famous" think tanks, such as the Christian Coalition, the American Legislative Exchange Council, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Center for Science and Public Policy, the Marshall Institution, the Liberty Frontier Organization, the Pacific Institute, the National Center for Policy Analysis, etc.

The Cooler Heads Coalition is mainly composed of American anti-climate change think tanks.

The climate war against climate science began 30 years ago and has continued to this day. In his new book, Hot Air, British meteorologist Peter Stott describes an encounter in the mid-1990s. In 1996, Stott, who had just entered the field of climate change research, went to the United States to attend the AGU annual meeting held in San Francisco. A week before Christmas that year, the branch venue that Stott attended attracted a large number of listeners, so much so that the aisles and the backstage were full of people. Benjamin Santer, a big name in climate change attribution analysis, was blocked by Patrick J. Michaels, a well-known anti-climate change person, at the venue. Their reports were put together. Half of the audience who came here really wanted to understand what caused climate change, while the other half were probably just there to watch the fun.

Benjamin Santer's report was entirely academic in style. Based on his paper published in Nature [1], he discussed the role of humans in climate change. Benjamin Santer was a postdoctoral fellow recruited by 2021 Nobel Prize winner Klaus Hasselmann in 1987. He assisted Hasselmann in pioneering a new research field, climate change detection and attribution. Benjamin Santer revealed the human factors that affect climate change: the increase in greenhouse gases leads to global warming, while the increase in pollutants leads to global cooling. The two offset each other, resulting in a relatively small warming in the 20th century. However, with the control of pollution and the continued surge in greenhouse gases, the magnitude and speed of global warming will continue to increase.

In his report, Michaels accused Benjamin Santer's view that "humans have a clear impact on the global climate" was completely wrong, and accused climate scientists of deceiving decision makers and the public, making them mistakenly believe that human activities are causing global warming. The IPCC report in which Benjamin Santer participated (then the second IPCC assessment report) was distorted and would lead to unnecessary restrictions on economic growth, thereby destroying the world economy.

The AGU conference is an annual academic conference. Scholars present their own views and there is no live debate. After listening to the different views of the two factions, the audience can judge for themselves. The confrontation between scholars studying climate change and anti-climate change advocates in the 1990s is a good example. Such disputes convey a dangerous message to the media and the public, that the scientific community is still not in agreement on the facts and causes of climate change, and that there is no unified understanding of global warming within the scientific community.

This is exactly what anti-climate change activists want to achieve. The public cannot tell who is the real climate change scientist between Benjamin Santer and Michaels. In short, although Michaels is a professor of environmental science at the University of Virginia, he is not a real climate change scientist. He accepts funding from coal companies and opposes the science of global warming on various occasions, believing that global warming is small and that the fuss of the scientific community is a means to obtain research funding. But in fact, it is he who has received a lot of funding from the petrochemical industry. According to a 2005 report by the Seattle Times, he received more than $165,000 in funding from the petrochemical industry. In 2006, he received another $100,000 in funding from the Intermountain Rural Electric Association, an energy agency in Colorado. Of course, this is only what appears in public reports and is only part of the financial support he received. Michaels once said on CNN that 40% of his funding came from the oil industry, but the actual proportion is estimated to be higher than this.

Since 1994, Michaels has published a newsletter, World Climate Report, which is published annually by the Greening Earth Society. If you continue to track, you will find that the Greening Earth Society has a close relationship with the Western Fuels Association (WFA), which is an association of coal-burning companies. In addition, Michaels is also a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, a US think tank (lobbying organization), which was founded by Charles Koch, a billionaire in the oil industry, in 1977. So, although he is also a professor at a university, he has already joined the petrochemical group.

When real scientific researchers comprehensively reveal the causes, current situation, impacts, future trends, and coping strategies of global warming from global observation data, theoretical research, and numerical simulations, and call on the world to actively respond and reduce fossil fuel consumption, petrochemical organizations will naturally not sit idly by. They choose to launch an all-out attack. Funding scholars to oppose it is a good idea. These scholars participate in the debate, making the public and decision-making departments believe that the issue of global warming is not worth mentioning, or that the scientific community has not yet studied the issue of global warming clearly. This buys valuable time for the petrochemical industry.

Another recipient of funding from the petrochemical industry is Fred Singer, who received a Ph.D. in physics from Princeton University in his early years. He was the founding dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami, served as deputy assistant administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and chief scientist of the Department of Transportation, and was a professor at the University of Virginia. He holds a prominent position. In 1990, Singer, who had long since retired, founded the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), an organization funded purely by private funds. From this time on, Singer took a different approach and embarked on a path that went against the mainstream scientific community. Scientists say that the ozone hole problem is very serious, and it is caused by ozone-depleting substances such as CFCs emitted by humans. CFCs release free chlorine in the stratosphere under the action of ultraviolet rays, and these free chlorines will act as catalysts to destroy ozone; Singer and Michaels, as scholars, have said on various occasions that ozone depletion is a natural result of volcanic eruptions and has nothing to do with CFCs. They calculated that the amount of ozone-destroying chlorine released by the 1976 eruption of Mount St Augustine was more than 500 times the total amount of CFCs produced worldwide that year. They published a series of articles in the Washington Times and presented their "research results" at US hearings.

When the scientific community opposed tobacco, pointing out that smoking causes lung cancer and that secondhand smoke is also an important carcinogenic factor, Singer and Michaels said on various occasions that these studies were just simple statistics and lacked credibility. They became the favorites of the tobacco industry for a while, and the tobacco industry used their status as scholars to try to create a "debate" in society, confusing the public and the government and causing them to lose their decision-making direction.

It is worth mentioning that SEPP, founded by Fred Singer, is affiliated with the lobbying group Washington Institute for Public Policy Values, which itself is funded by the Unification Church, which is currently identified as a cult organization in my country. The founder, Sun Myung Moon, advocated collective weddings. Many Unification Church believers' marriage partners were randomly assigned and they did not know each other before the wedding. Believers had no right to refuse the marriage partners assigned by the leader. The collective wedding of the Unification Church is called the "holy marriage blessing ceremony". If the newlyweds participate in this wedding ceremony, they will wash away their sins and give birth to children as pure as blank paper in the future. According to regulations, newlyweds must live in special church dormitories and are prohibited from having sex within 40 days. The Unification Church has invested a lot of money in the Washington Times, which has published many articles opposing the scientific consensus on climate change, ozone depletion and the harm of secondhand smoke, including Singer's articles.

When it comes to global warming, Fred Singer has been doing a lot of things. He took advantage of the uncertainty in climate change research and claimed that the tools used to study climate change - climate models - are not credible and that there are problems with climate data. Naturally, predictions about the future using climate models are also not credible, thus logically completing a closed loop.

Climate models are tools for simulating climate change, which include complex processes such as atmosphere-ocean-ice-snow-land-vegetation-ocean geochemical processes-volcanoes-human greenhouse gases-human aerosols. Accurately describing each part is a big scientific and technological problem. To integrate all processes and simulate the history and future of climate, there will naturally be many rough or inaccurate parts. Similarly, global observation data covers hundreds of years, and has been affected by observation specifications, instrument updates, site migration, urban heat island effects, etc., and the representativeness of sites in forests, deserts, mountains, oceans, and the poles is limited. Therefore, there is indeed uncertainty in using these data to calculate the global average temperature. There are of course many problems with picking on models and data, and Singh seized this point and opened fire on it, attacking the scientific basis of global warming, which is full of loopholes and not worth mentioning.

Although climate models and data are not perfect, these do not actually affect scientific conclusions. In the 1960s, Japanese-American scientist Syukuro Manabe used the climate model of that era to estimate climate sensitivity and the impact of increased CO2. After more than half a century, the complexity of the model has changed, but Syukuro Manabe's results are still unbreakable, perfectly matching the observational data for more than half a century. Syukuro Manabe also won the 2021 Nobel Prize in Physics. This shows that even the earlier and more imperfect climate models have long been capable of studying climate change. To make an analogy, studying climate change is like a doctor making a diagnosis. Using the pulse and stethoscope is enough to determine whether there is a heart rate problem in the heart, and even lying on the chest can hear that the heart beats abnormally. However, Singer has been attacking the stethoscope for not being good enough, not accurately measuring blood pressure and heartbeat strength, and being a black box, like a "glass ball", with a distance between it and the object being measured, and cannot truly and fully explain the abnormal condition of the heart. When doctors can use cardiac color ultrasound to depict the picture of the heart, Singh still has something to say, saying that this cardiac color ultrasound equipment has poor accuracy, is not a good brand at first glance, the results are unreliable, is irresponsible to patients, and is suspected of excessive examinations, and it is obvious that the doctor wants to kill for money.

In 1995, Singer issued the Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change, announcing that there was no scientific consensus on global warming. The declaration was revised in 1997 and 2005. He claimed that the declaration had been signed by 80 scientists and 25 television news meteorologists, jointly opposing the Kyoto Protocol.

In response to the scientific assessments on climate change conducted by the IPCC every few years, Singh took the lead in establishing the NIPCC, the "Non-Governmental Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change", in 2004. The NIPCC calls itself "an international alliance of scientists" and will independently assess the causes and impacts of climate change "without bias and selectivity" based on published peer-reviewed literature.

In 2007, the IPCC released its fourth climate change assessment report (IPCC AR4). In April of the same year, the NIPCC organized an international climate symposium in Vienna and released the NIPCC report "Natural causes, not human activities, are responsible for global warming" in 2008. In 2013, the IPCC Working Group I released its fifth assessment report "Climate Change 2013: The Natural Science Basis". In response to this report, the NIPCC released the NIPCC report "Revisiting Climate Change II: The Natural Science Basis". Through such operations, Singh created the illusion that there is no unified view in the scientific community. It is very important to create such an illusion because it will make the public and decision makers hesitant when facing major decisions. Since the scientific community "can't explain it clearly", will the response measures be "a bit hasty"? It is worth noting that Fred Singer's books "Revisiting Climate Change: Report of the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change", "Global Warming - The Unfounded Panic" and "Nature is the Main Driver of Climate Change" have been published by Science Press, Shanghai Scientific and Technological Literature Publishing House and China Science and Technology Press respectively. His views have long been widely disseminated in China. However, since these books are published by professional science presses, their erosion of scholars and researchers is more serious, especially those in non-climate change fields.

Anti-climate change advocates are also good at collective signature and joint petition campaigns. For example, the Heartland Institute once published an advertisement: "More than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition arguing that global warming may be a natural phenomenon rather than a crisis." Later, even Scientific American magazine could no longer stand the chaos of the petition. They randomly selected 30 of the 1,400 signatories on the petition list who allegedly held a doctorate in climate-related sciences and conducted a survey. The results showed that only 11 people agreed with the petition (including 1 active climate researcher), 6 said they did not sign, 3 did not remember it at all, and 1 had already passed away... Based on this ratio, Scientific American estimates that the supporters of the petition are only centered on about 200 climate researchers, and none of these 200 climate researchers have published any relevant research to support their assumed skepticism, but they are still able to sign with confidence.

Singer's activities are funded by many lobbying organizations, including the conservative think tank Heartland Institute, which in turn is funded by petrochemical giant ExxonMobil. According to the website http://exxonsecrets.org/, between 1998 and 2014, ExxonMobil sponsored various anti-climate change organizations and individuals with a total amount of $30,925,235. The recipients include not only the Heartland Institute, but also the George C. Marshall Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the American Council for Capital Formation Center for Policy Research, Frontiers of Freedom, the Annapolis Center, the Atlas Economic Research Foundation, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute, the National Center for Policy Analysis, and the National Black Chamber of Commerce. Analysis)…There are so many individuals behind these lobbying groups, and their power is astonishing.

From 1998 to 2014, ExxonMobil sponsored various anti-climate change organizations and individuals with a total amount of US$30,925,235. The specific amount of funding can be found at the following website: http://exxonsecrets.org/

Companies sponsored by ExxonMobil and the individuals behind them between 1998 and 2014.

Others funded by the oil and coal agencies include Malaysian-American astrophysicist and aerospace engineer Willie Soon, who works in the Solar and Stellar Physics Department at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and has received more than $1 million in funding from the oil and coal agencies since 2001. He has publicly accused the IPCC of being a "pure bully" and "blatantly manipulating the facts," arguing that global warming is primarily caused by solar changes, not human activities.

Another person who holds a similar view is Sallie Louise Baliunas, an astrophysicist at Harvard University. She is a member of the American Astronomical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, the International Astronomical Union, etc. She has worked at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and served as deputy director of the Mount Wilson Observatory. She and Willie Soon have worked together to insist that solar variability is more closely related to temperature changes. This statement has been widely publicized by lobbying groups including the Marshall Institute and TCS Daily. Half of the 10 editors of Climate Research magazine, which published her research, resigned to protest against the irregularities of peer review. However, Sallie won the Peter Beckman Award for her criticism of the "global warming scam" (Peter Beckman is a professor of electrical engineering who later became famous for opposing Einstein's theory of relativity and other modern physics theories). The aforementioned Willie Soon, Fred Singer, and Patrick Michaels have all "won" this award.

Also rising to fame for his opposition to climate change is Canadian Stephen McIntyre, famous for his opposition to the "hockey stick curve", founder and editor of the anti-climate blog Climate Audit, which won the 2007 "Best Science Blog" blog award and was named 32nd in the New Statesman's "50 Important People of 2010" for questioning the scientific community in the "Climategate" incident.

Ross McKitrick, a professor at the University of Guelph in Canada, has also benefited from anti-climate change. He serves as a senior researcher at the Fraser Institute, a lobbying organization, and a member of the Academic Advisory Committee of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). He is engaged in environmental economics and policy analysis. He is famous for questioning the hockey curve. His anti-climate science work "Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics of Global Warming" published in 2002 won the second place in the Donner Prize (awarded by the Donner Canadian Foundation, one of Canada's largest foundations).

After 20 years, looking at the anti-climate change "books" and various awards won by anti-climate change advocates, I have to sigh that various institutions have awarded funds, honors and awards to pseudoscience and anti-climate change, highlighting the obvious tendency of various awards, while real scientific works have been criticized. It is worth noting that books including the NIPCC report have also been translated and introduced into China, and related views have long been widely circulated in the Chinese world.

Under the operation of these institutions and individuals, various views against climate change have been thrown out, completely confusing the media and the public. Most of these people are not from meteorology, climate or environmental fields, many have no scientific research experience, and most have not received training in natural sciences, but this does not hinder their influence. These people write books, participate in TV and radio programs, cater to the public's tastes, and harvest Internet traffic.

The public does not like things that follow the rules. They like entertainment, huge conspiracy stories, explosive news, alarmist predictions, and exposing scientists' "manipulation" and "conspiracy", which are exactly what many climate change opponents are good at. Based on this, those who oppose climate change like to package global warming as a huge conspiracy, such as: "Global warming is a conspiracy of scientists around the world", "Scientists with ulterior motives artificially modify data", "The greenhouse effect theory has been artificially tampered with!", "There is corruption in the peer review process of scientists", "Scientists try to hide the cooling in the global temperature series", etc.

We can also make economic calculations. Other anti-climate change arguments include "addressing global warming kills jobs", "even if CO2 emissions are limited from now on, it won't make much difference", "renewable energy is too expensive", "limiting CO2 is harmful to the economy", and "adapting to global warming is cheaper than preventing it".

Or they promote agnosticism, "There is no completely certain science (even the theories of Newton, Einstein, etc. are constantly being revised, so how can today's climatologists say for sure that there is global warming!)", "The climate is in a chaotic state and is unpredictable", "Scientists cannot even accurately predict the weather, let alone the climate in the next hundred years".

Some people think that climate change is not worth making a fuss about, that "humanity has successfully experienced climate change in the past", "historically, the extent of Arctic sea ice has been smaller than it is now", "heat waves and extreme heat waves are common throughout history", "human activities have insignificant impact on global climate", "the IPCC are alarmists and worrywarts", and some even play the sympathy card, saying that "climate change skeptics are the Galileo and Bruno of today".

The author has summarized the relevant viewpoints and found that there are more than 200 views and "facts" against climate change put forward by these organizations and individuals over the years. These views are widely circulated in various media, eroding the scientific knowledge of the public and the media from all corners. Many people think that they have reached the conclusion through "independent thinking", but they don't know that those anti-climate change remarks have already influenced them in a subtle way. Please refer to the appendix at the end of this article for relevant arguments to see if there are any statements that you are familiar with. There is an unconfirmed story that after Einstein came out of nowhere and proposed the theory of relativity, 100 "scientists" jointly opposed it. When Einstein learned about it, he laughed and said that if I was wrong, I didn't need 100 people to sign it, and one person could prove that I was wrong. If global warming is false, there is no need for more than 200 facts and opinions, just one is enough.

The purpose of these climate change opponents throwing out so many opinions and "facts" is to muddy the waters and make the legislatures and governments of various countries hesitate when they should take resolute measures to deal with global warming, which will eventually lead to delays, lay the foundation for the continued interests of the petrochemical industry, and win time for industrial transformation. It has to be admitted that these operations are very successful. They have completely made the US government do nothing to deal with climate change, and it has withdrawn from global cooperation to deal with climate change twice. The first time was in 2001. The newly-elected Bush administration used the excuse that "reducing greenhouse gas emissions will affect the economic development of the United States" and "developing countries should also assume the obligation to reduce and limit greenhouse gas emissions" and believed that "the scientific basis for global warming is not conclusive" and announced that it would refuse to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, thus withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol signed in 1997. The second time was in 2017, when the newly-elected Trump announced his withdrawal from the Paris Agreement signed in 2015.

Anti-climate institutions and organizations have played a role in fueling the US government's withdrawal from international agreements. On March 23-24, 2017, the Harlan Institute held the "12th International Conference on Climate Change" (March 23-24) in Washington. The main topic of the conference was: how to get the Trump administration to get out of the Paris Agreement as quickly as possible.

It is worth noting that the signing of international agreements requires the support of not only developed countries but also developing countries. In addition to shaking the will of developed countries and influencing the direction of public opinion, it is also a good idea to interfere with the cognition of developing countries and make them oppose international agreements. In addition to the more than 200 opinions and "facts" that are spread around the world, the developing countries still like conspiracy theories the most, such as "global warming is a conspiracy by developed countries such as the United States to contain developing countries." Such remarks make developing countries always wary of international cooperation and international agreements, making international agreements and international cooperation difficult. Interestingly, the opposite view is also circulated within developed countries, such as "the concept of global warming was fabricated by the Chinese and for the Chinese in order to make the US manufacturing industry lose its competitiveness... global warming is a complete and expensive scam," which was the public view of former US President Trump during his campaign.

Driven by anti-climate change organizations and individuals, global climate scientists have experienced the "hockey stick curve", "climategate", "glaciergate", "Amazongate" and other events, and have been exhausted physically and mentally. Currently, there is a spoof video on YouTube that mocks meteorologist Professor Michael Mann [2]. He was mocked for falsifying data, inventing the "hockey stick" curve, and cursed that he had committed a great sin and would not live long. The video was produced by the "Minnesota for Global Warming (M4GW)" organization, using Michael Mann's head portrait, and the lyrics are as follows:

“Using the old method to fabricate data

Confusing data day by day

Ignore the snow and cold

And the downward curve

Hide the cooling

Michael Mann thinks he's smart

Invented the whole hockey curve

Ignore the snow and cold

And the downward curve

Hide the cooling

Climategate, I think you are doomed

I hope you have lots of time.

But what you did was a great crime.

Tree-ring data are too narrow

You should cut down more trees.

Instead of embracing them

Ignore the snow and cold

And the downward curve

Climategate, I think you are doomed

I hope you have lots of time.

But what you did was a great crime."

However, in such an environment, climate science still tenaciously moves forward. The early atmospheric circulation model was combined with the ocean circulation model to form a coupled model (CCM), and then the land surface model and sea ice model were continuously added to form the physical climate system model. Subsequently, the global carbon and nitrogen cycle and biogeochemical processes were also included, and the model further developed into the Earth System Model (ESM). The model is also becoming more and more refined, from the early 400-500 km grid spacing, which has been refined for decades to 10 km at present, and the processes such as clouds, aerosols and radiation included in the model are becoming more and more accurate.

From the 1990s to 2023, the IPCC has released six assessment reports on climate change, and the wording of the reports on the impact of human activities on climate change has become increasingly certain. IPCC AR6 can already give quantitative values ​​of climate change. According to IPCC AR6, the possible range of global surface temperature increase caused by humans since 1850-1900 is 0.8°C to 1.3°C, and the best estimate is 1.07°C. Among them, greenhouse gases may cause a warming of 1.0°C to 2.0°C, other human-driven factors (mainly aerosols) cause a cooling of 0 to 0.8°C, and other natural processes (solar radiation and volcanic activity, etc.) cause temperature changes ranging from -0.1°C to 0.1°C, while changes caused by internal variability in the Earth's climate system are -0.2°C to 0.2°C.

02. The most confusing anti-climate change view

"The climate is changing. It has changed before and will change in the future. The current warming is normal."

This view is the most confusing one against climate change and has long been ranked first among all the views against climate change (https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php). Even many scholars at home and abroad cannot distinguish between ancient climate change and current global change.

The deceptiveness of this view lies in the fact that it contains both scientific facts and unreliable views. To use Franklin's words, "a half-truth is often a lie". In the history of the earth, there have indeed been dramatic climate changes, with many changes from glacial to interglacial periods, and the accompanying global warming and cooling. In most of the history of the earth, the global temperature was much higher than it is now, and even the time when there was ice and snow at the poles was very limited. The change that is often mentioned in European and American society is that Spitzbergen Island in the Arctic Circle of Norway used to have alligators and tropical forest wetlands, but is now covered with ice and snow. This is seen as a typical case of climate change.

Therefore, anti-climate change activists often use ancient times to explain current climate change, explaining ancient climate change as:

There have been various climate changes in the history of the Earth , some of which were far more severe than today, but the Earth's creatures still survived. What's the big deal about the current climate change?

There have been many climate changes in history that were far greater than today's, but there were no humans at that time, so humans are not the main cause of climate change.

This interpretation confuses the main difference between ancient climate change and modern climate change:

1) Ancient climate change was mainly caused by natural causes, while modern global warming is caused by human activities.

2) Ancient climate change took longer to complete, while modern climate change is happening much faster.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : If compared with climate change in the past million years, the recent increase rate of greenhouse gas concentration is more than hundreds of times the fastest speed in the past million years. The difference in this speed is equivalent to "a person dies when he lives for two weeks" and "a person dies when he lives for a hundred years". For the latter, most people will not be too worried and worried, and accept it calmly, which will not affect their lives. For the former, they need to seek medical treatment immediately to find the cause.

“Global warming is caused by solar activity”

The changes in solar irradiance are relatively complex, with a tendency to brighten for a long time, with the brightness increasing by about 8% every 1 billion years. The brightness of the early sun was only about 70% now. Many people regard this brightness as the cause of global warming. They have no idea about the "scale" of time. An increase of 8% per billion years is equivalent to only 0.008% per million years or 0.00000008% per cent per cent. This value is very, very small and is not enough to cause any perceived change. At this rate of change, the increase in the brightness of the sun from 1920 to 2020 can only increase the temperature of the earth's surface by about 0.0000016 ℃, and during this period, the temperature of the earth's surface actually increased by 1 ℃. It is obvious that this is not caused by the evolution of the sun.

There are 11-year cycles of solar activity. The perception of this cycle comes from the observation of the number of sunspots starting in 1611. There is a good positive correlation between the number of sunspots and the solar irradiance, that is, when the number of sunspots is large, the solar irradiance is strong, and when the number of sunspots is small, the solar irradiance is weak. Regarding the reason for its formation, recent research believes that every 11 years, Venus, Earth and Jupiter will be arranged in a row on the same side of the sun, thus forming the strongest gravity on the sun. The period in which such an arrangement corresponds to the extremely small period of sunspots.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : In terms of investment master Buffett's philosophy, "Investment is like a snowball. The important thing is to find very wet snow and long hillsides." The reason why the 11-year solar cycle cannot form a clear long-term trend is that "the snow is not wet enough" and the "hill slopes" are not long enough.

“Global warming is good for agriculture, so it’s a good thing”

People who hold this view mainly support "CO2 is a fertilizer for plants", believing that the increase in CO2 will promote plant growth, be conducive to the improvement of crop harvest, the expansion of agricultural arable area and the extension of the growing season. Plant growth is accompanied by the process of photosynthesis, in which plants use light energy to synthesize carbon dioxide and hydrate into organic matter, and at the same time release oxygen. Therefore, from the perspective of the raw materials for photosynthesis, carbon dioxide is indeed a fertilizer for plants. In theory, the increase in carbon dioxide will help the progress of photosynthesis, thereby increasing crop yield.

However, the growth of plants is not only related to the amount of CO2, but also needs to consider the temperature and water resources. Generally, the photosynthesis of plants has a certain temperature range. Within the temperature range, photosynthesis can be carried out normally, especially near the most suitable temperature, with the highest photosynthesis efficiency. However, when the temperature is too high, the activity of converting enzymes in the plant body will be affected and the efficiency of photosynthesis will be reduced. In addition, when the temperature is too high, the transpiration and respiration of plants will also accelerate. In order to prevent water evaporation, plants will close the pores, resulting in insufficient supply of carbon dioxide, and the photosynthesis of plants will then weaken rapidly. If the temperature rises to a certain level, the leaves will wilt due to severe water loss, which is more common in high temperatures at noon in summer, and in severe cases, it will even cause the plant leaves to dry and die.

For northern my country, although rising temperatures will help reduce cold damage and increase accumulated temperatures, it seems that it will make the high-altitude and cold areas in northern my country more livable and conducive to agricultural production. However, for the arid and cold northern regions, water resources are the primary factor restricting agricultural development. Therefore, the negative impact of aridification far exceeds the impact of warming, which is not conducive to agricultural development in these areas.

In the spring of 2022, India suffered a severe high temperature drought. In April, the average temperature in Punjab Province, known as the "Indian Bread Basket", in northern India rose to 7 degrees Celsius. The high temperature caused a decline in wheat production, with losses of more than 500 kg per hectare. On May 14, India announced the cessation of wheat exports and the ban came into effect immediately. As the world's second largest and small wheat producer, India's ban disrupted the global market to a certain extent, making international food security "intrusive". In the summer of 2022, Europe encountered extreme drought, and this incident was called the worst drought in 500 years, and wheat production is expected to be reduced by more than 8%.

In addition to the impact of yields, climate change will also lead to significant changes in the quality of crops. Taking Rice, the world's second largest food crop, as an example, research [3] shows that higher carbon dioxide concentrations will make rice unnutritious. The higher the concentration of carbon dioxide in the rice growth environment, the lower the content of protein, iron, zinc and some important B vitamins it contains.

Although the arable range in high-altitude areas in my country may increase, global warming not only brings high temperatures and heat, but also accelerates the global water circulation and disrupts the global atmosphere and ocean circulation, bringing the effect of "dry to dry, wet to wet", which makes rainstorms and floods in rainy areas more severe, and makes drought more severe due to regional drought. Compared with the limited increase in plantable area, the existing vast agricultural areas will be more affected by climate change and extreme weather. Therefore, the increase in plantable areas through global warming is somewhat similar to seeking skin with tigers. Combined, the overall risks and losses far exceed the benefits.

"Global warming helps revive the heroic spirit of the Han and Tang dynasties"

Many people believe that warming is a good thing, firmly believe that "the warm period in history corresponds to the prosperous times, and there are more wars in the cold period", and believe that rising temperature means that the "prosperity" is coming. This view is widely spread to cater to the public's yearning for the "prosperity of the Han and Tang Dynasties".

There are indeed many studies at home and abroad that during the warmer climate, my country has fewer border disasters, fewer peasant uprisings, and more stable society. In the colder climate, my country has more border disasters, more peasant uprisings, and more turbulent society. However, the governance, chaos, rise and fall of society is a complex system. For climate, China has a vast land area and a complex regional climate. The climate in the northern nomadic areas, the northern plains, the Central Plains, the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, the South China, the Northwest region, and other places have very different climates. The core factors and causes of climate abnormalities are huge. In addition to cold and warm, there are also the impact of drought, floods, heavy rainstorms, sandstorms, locust plagues, etc. Social stability is also related to the government's governance capabilities, culture, religion, etc. Different organizational methods and government governance capabilities can mobilize the social resources and response results in the same natural disaster. Therefore, when discussing the demise of the Tang Dynasty, meteorologist Zhang Deer pointed out that "Chinese history is a profound and profound, endless 'big book', and the change of historical dynasties has very complex reasons. The prosperity of Chinese civilization will never be so simple that it collapsed and collapsed by a certain natural factor (such as precipitation) and the changes in the ten-year scale. Why is my Chinese civilization so fragile!" [4] We also need to understand "times pass by". Whether the laws of the past apply to the present is still necessary to think deeply. We have entered the industrial society from agricultural society, from fragmentation to stable and unified, and from long-term threats from grassland nations to global competition. The previous laws may not necessarily apply to the present.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

The reasons for modern wars and social unrest are not only the competition for food resources, but more the competition for oil, natural gas, mineral resources, etc. Ideological collisions, geopolitical struggles, external interference and nationalism are all the causes of conflict and war. Although wars have continued in the past few thousand years of human history, the most tragic wars in human society took place in the 20th century, which can be called the "war century". World War I, World War II, the Korean War, Vietnam War, Afghanistan War, Cold War, Middle East War, Gulf War, etc., and countless regional conflicts. It is hard to say what the occurrence of these wars has to do with climate change, but these wars have indeed changed the regional and global situation.

Global warming will generally bring more climate disasters and have a far-reaching impact on global agriculture. In addition to raising great challenges to the eradication of poverty and sustainable development in developing countries, the social problems brought about by agricultural production cuts will also increase the risk of social unrest and regional conflicts in these regions. This will bring potential risks to my country's "Belt and Road" cooperation, involving various issues such as overseas asset preservation, project guarantee and expatriate protection. It will also bring about international gaps in the rich and poor, immigration and climate refugees.

03. Defeat magic with magic

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

In December 2018, Greta attended the United Nations Climate Conference (COP24) held in Katowice, Poland, and asked countries around the world to "take action, like adults." In September 2019, at the UN Climate Action Summit, she angrily denounced leaders of various countries: how dare you! This sentence won her honors such as "Time" 2019 Person of the Year, the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize, and the 2019 Big Ben Award for the Top Ten Outstanding Youths in the World.

Although many people do not agree with her "childish" appeals and proposals, the world treats her with tolerance. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres met her, former US President Obama met her, and Russian President Putin, US President Trump, French President Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, British Prime Minister Theresa May and Labor Leader Corbyn responded to her.

It is unrealistic to expect young people to be "mature and stable", and young people do not care about the views of "mature" adults. They do their own things regardless of their own affairs. Young people form radical climate group "Extinction Rebellion" and engage in various protests around the world: sticking hands on famous paintings, destroying public facilities, obstructing normal traffic of trains, smashing windows and glasses of buildings, blocking the main bridges of the Thames, and sticking themselves to the gates of Buckingham Palace. They believe that traditional petitions, lobbying, voting and protests have long lost their effect, and they hope to achieve change through resistance.

Strangely, while young people are "crazy" and causing trouble, although the old people who are anti-climate change are still mocking them, they have lost the focus of media and their voices. Sure enough, only magic is the only one who defeats magic. These old people not only lose their voice and focus, but also gradually get older and gradually withered. On April 6, 2020, Fred Singer died in a nursing home in Maryland at the age of 95. On July 15, 2022, Patrick Michaels died at the age of 72.

In October 2021, two scientists studying climate change, Shuro Magu and Klaus Hasselman, won the Nobel Prize in Physics. The former was the pioneer of numerical simulation of climate change, and the latter pioneered climate change detection and analysis. It seems that science has finally defeated anti-science, but this is difficult to be considered a victory, and at most it can only be considered a miserable victory. Because from the 1990s to the present, the global response to climate change has been delayed for nearly 30 years. In these 30 years, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has soared from about 350ppm in 1990 to about 420ppm in 2023. In the past two million years of the earth, such a large increase will take at least 10,000 to 30,000 years, and it has only been more than 30 years, and the speed is nearly a thousand times that of the earth's history. It can be said that "a day is now, several years in history."

Anti-climate changers have been abandoned by the times. Except for the magic of young people that defeated them, the most important thing is that the fact that global warming and extreme climate educated the masses. On June 29, 2021, the entire western region of North America was like fire. The maximum temperature in Lytton, a city in central British Columbia, Canada, reached 46.6°C, causing wildfires to burn. At the same time, western North America entered the worst drought period since the past 1,200 years; in mid-July 2022, the entire Western Europe continued to have high fevers, with the worst drought in 500 years. On July 19, the temperature in the area of ​​London Heathrow Airport in the UK soared to 40.2 degrees Celsius. The UK issued the first ever red warning for extreme high temperatures and declared a national emergency. In the summer of 2022, the highest temperature in Shanghai exceeded 40 degrees seven times. The Shanghai Meteorological Bureau rarely issued seven high temperature red warnings. However, the vast areas of my country from North China to the Yangtze River Basin, East China and South China have successively experienced the strongest high temperature processes since 1961, and the highest temperature in Chongqing even reached 45℃. In this extreme high temperature, the arguments such as "global warming is fake" and "global warming is not large" mentioned by anti-climate changers are falsified by facts. People suddenly realize: For anti-climate changers, anti-climate change is just a business.

: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

On March 27, 2023, the U.S. Energy Information Administration released a report announcing that due to the significant growth of wind and solar energy, the two contributed 14% of the U.S. power generation in 2022, plus 6% of hydropower, 1% of biomass and geothermal energy, and the proportion of renewable energy reached 21%, exceeding 20% ​​of coal power generation for the first time, and exceeding nuclear power generation for the second time. Although natural gas still contributed the largest share, reaching 39%, new energy surpassed coal, giving people the hope of a comprehensive replacement of new energy.

According to the 2022 energy statistics of Europe released by Ember in January 2023, Europe has survived the energy crisis brought about by the Russian-Ukrainian war, and wind energy and solar energy continue to develop. In 2022, wind energy and solar energy have become the largest source of electricity in Europe. The two have a power share in Europe of 22.3%, exceeding 21.9% of nuclear energy and 19.9% ​​of natural gas power generation. Solar energy and wind power generation supplemented 83% of the power shortage in the European crisis, becoming the "ballast stone" in the big winds and waves. There is no doubt that European solar energy and wind energy will continue to grow in 2023, and with the recovery of nuclear energy in 2023, if the weather is normal, hydropower will continue to recover, and its dependence on coal will be greatly reduced.

Energy companies are investing in new energy quickly, which puts the "scrambler" who cooperates with the giants to oppose climate change all the way. The script has changed. Where will it go in the future? Of course, this cannot defeat them. They are even better at dealing with this transformation than the public who listens to them. They have quickly boarded the expressway of global carbon neutrality and drove on the low-carbon technology.

Appendix: Common views on climate change [6]:

1) The climate is originally changing. It has changed before and will change in the future. It is normal to warm now;

2) Global warming is caused by solar activity;

3) Global warming is not a bad thing;

4) There is no consensus in the scientific community about global warming (commonsensus);

5) In fact, the world has been cooling down;

6) The pattern results are unreliable;

7) The temperature record is unreliable;

8) Animals and plants can adapt to global warming;

9) The temperature increase has stagnated since 1998;

10) Antarctica's ice and snow cover increases;

11) In the 1970s, an ice age was expected, and now it is expected that there will be a warming increase. Is scientists reliable?

12) The increase in CO2 lags behind the increase in temperature, so it is not global warming caused by CO2;

13) Although increasing CO2 can cause warming, the climate system's climate sensitivity to increasing CO2 is actually very low;

14) We are entering the next ice age;

15) The increase in CO2 causes the acidification of the ocean not serious;

16) The impact of CO2 increase is small and even no;

17) There is no correlation between CO2 and temperature;

18) CO2 is not a pollutant at all;

19) CO2 is a fertilizer for plants;

20) The CO2 content in history has been much higher than it is now;

21) The “hockey stick” curve with increasing temperature in the past millennium is unreliable [7];

22) The "Climate Gate" incident revealed that global warming is a common plan for scientists such as CRU (Climate Research Group of the University of East English) and others with ulterior motives;

23) Hurricane changes have no connection with global warming;

24) Al Gore is wrong[8];

25) The area of ​​glaciers is increasing;

26) It is cosmic rays that cause temperature increase;

27) 1934 was the hottest year in history;

28) I have been frozen to death recently. Who said global warming is coming? ;

29) Extreme weather is not caused by global warming;

30) The sea level rise is too exaggerated;

31) The urban heat island effect leads to warming;

32) The temperature during the warmer period of the Middle Ages was actually higher;

33) Mars is also heating (warming is not limited to the earth, so this warming is not caused by human activities);

34) The melting of ice and snow in the Arctic is the result of natural cycles;

35) The ocean is getting colder;

36) Recent global warming is part of a 1500-year cycle;

37) The CO2 emitted by humans is only a small part of the CO2 release;

38) The earth's warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions from human activities is very small and is not enough to change the law of natural climate change;

39) It is hard to imagine that just 5% of carbon can determine climate change, while 95% of carbon does not work

40) IPCC is some alarmist and worrying about the truth;

41) Water vapor is the strongest greenhouse gas;

42) Global warming is caused by the use of electromagnetic waves in human communication;

43) Restricting CO2 is harmful to the economy;

44) There is no such thing as global warming;

45) Greenland was previously covered with vegetation (Green) (previously higher temperatures);

46) The ice and snow in Greenland are increasing;

47) Greenland's ice sheet did not collapse;

48) Greenland lost only a small portion of its ice and snow;

49) There is no empirical evidence for global warming;

50) Other planets (Mars, Jupiter, Pluto) are also warming up;

51) Arctic sea ice is recovering;

52) We are just walking out of the Little Ice Age;

53) It was still cooling down in the middle of the last century;

54) Global warming has stagnated on 1998/2002/2007/2010;

55) It also increased warmth before 1940, and the CO2 content was very low at that time (carbon dioxide has nothing to do with heating);

56) Satellite data reveals that the troposphere has not warmed at all;

57) It is the aerosol change that causes global warming;

58) A record cold wave occurred in the winter of 2009-2010;

59) It is the global warming caused by the El Nino incident;

60) The decrease in ice and snow on Kilimanjaro Mountain in Africa is due to artificial land use;

61) Global warming is not caused by human activities (other than humans);

62) It is global warming caused by changes in natural cycles;

63) There are no troposphere hot spots at all;

64) It is a heating increase caused by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation phenomenon (PDO, Pacific Decadal Oscillation);

65) Scientists do not predict the weather accurately (not to mention predicting the climate in the next hundred years);

66) The changes in the Himalayan glaciers mentioned by the IPCC are wrong (in IPCC AR4, chapter 10.6.2, the IPCC wrote "the likelihood of [the Himalayan Glaciers] disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate." This sentence does not come from the official posting);

67) The second law of thermodynamics (temperature cannot be transmitted from low-temperature objects to high-temperature objects) is the opposite of greenhouse effect theory;

68) The theory of greenhouse effect has been artificially tampered with;

69) Setting restrictions on CO2 will harm the interests of the poor;

70) Cloud volume changes can provide a negative feedback mechanism;

71) There is no completely certain science (even theories of Newton, Einstein, etc. are constantly being revised. How can current climatologists say exactly about global warming!);

72) There is an exaggeration in the prediction of sea level rise;

73) It is global warming caused by ocean warming;

74) IPCC’s narrative of the Amazon rainforest is wrong;

75) Coral whitening can be recovered;

76) The greenhouse effect of CO2 has been saturated;

77) Volcanic activities release more CO2 than human activities;

78) CO2 is just a trace gas;

79) 500 scientists refuted the so-called "global warming consensus";

80) It is the global warming caused by methane CH4;

81) The CO2 resides in the atmosphere for a short time

82) The measurement of CO2 is suspicious;

83) The air humidity is decreasing;

84) Neptune is heating up;

85) Spring has not begun in advance;

86) Jupiter is warming;

87) It is the heating caused by land use;

88) Scientists try to hide the cooling in the global temperature sequence;

89) The CO2 content has not increased at all;

90) The snowfall hit a record, which in fact refuted global warming;

91) Some people deliberately changed "global warming" to "global change";

92) The length of the solar cycle has changed, which proves to be global warming caused by solar activity;

93) CO2 comes from the release of the ocean;

94) IPCC overestimates global temperature increase;

95) Pluto is heating up;

96) CO2 is not the only factor driving climate change;

97) There is corruption in the peer review process;

98) The Arctic was warmer in the 1940s;

99) Renewable energy is really too expensive;

100) Sea ice in the southern hemisphere is increasing;

101) The increase in sea level is decelerating;

102) Even if the total CO2 emission limit is set, there will be no big difference (compared to the non-limit).

103) Temperature changes are affected by environmental changes in the observation field (the observation station is close to the air-conditioning exhaust fan, and the surroundings are affected by radiation changes in parking lots, hot roofs, sidewalks, buildings, etc.);

104) Lindzen and Choi (2009) found that climate sensitivity was actually very low;

105) Phil Jones said there will be no global warming since 1995;

106) The impact of human activities on global climate is insignificant;

107) Increased temperature (main SST) leads to a decrease in cirrus clouds, allowing more outward infrared radiation, like the iris of the human eye (brighter and smaller pupils, darker and larger pupils), and regulates the earth's temperature by changing the amount of radiation (Lindzen et al. 2001);

108) When calculating the global average temperature, some sites were excluded, which led to temperature increase;

109) It is too difficult to reduce the total CO2 amount;

110) Reducing the total amount of CO2 is not that urgent;

111) It is global warming caused by changes in surface albedo;

112) The annual tree ring data after 1960 is different from temperature warming;

113) It is the global warming caused by carbon black;

114) Roy Spencer discovered the negative feedback process (a book "The great global warming blunder" is published, using a simple model to analyze global warming problems)

115) James Hansen's estimate in 1988 is wrong;

116) is the global warming caused by the global brightening (decreased cloud volume causes an increase in surface solar radiation);

117) The earth's warming is not as high as expected;

118) The decrease in Arctic sea ice is offset by the increase in Antarctic sea ice;

119) It is just a change in climate state;

120) Global warming caused by the solar cycle;

121) Only less than half of scientists support global warming;

122) Plant stomatal data indicate higher and larger changes in CO2 concentration;

123) More than 31,000 scientists signed the "OISM Petition" against the Kyoto Protocol;

124) No sea ice melting occurred;

125) Global warming is caused by the decrease in the frequency of volcanic activity;

126) IPCC deliberately made the medieval warmth disappear in long-sequence data;

127) The climate is in a chaotic state and is unpredictable;

128) Sea level has not risen;

129) It is the ozone change that caused global warming;

130) The requirements of the Freedom of Information Law have been artificially ignored;

131) Climate change skeptics are today’s Galileo;

132) IPCC consensus on global warming is a scam;

133) The sea level in Tuvalu (a Pacific island country) has not risen;

134) Naomi Oreskes (Professor of History and Science, University of California, San Diego)’s research on global warming consensus is problematic;

135) Renewable energy does not provide energy output at base load;

136) Kevin Trenberth said in an email in October 2009 that “we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment” (we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment);

137) The reduction in the ice sheet was exaggerated;

138) CRU (Climate Research Group of the University of East England, UK) tampered with temperature data;

139) Melting ice and snow does not make the Arctic warmer;

140) Respiratory action leads to an increase in CO2;

141) Satellite error causes the temperature of the Great Lakes to be inflated;

142) Paulo Soares (2010) found no correlation between CO2 and temperature;

143) In fact, we are about to enter a cold period;

144) Murry Salby found that the increase in carbon dioxide was a natural phenomenon;

145) The sun is getting hotter and hotter;

146) Earth's temperature has been warming for most of the past 10,000 years;

147) There is no correlation between CO2 emissions and CO2 concentration;

148) It is the heating caused by wasted heat;

149) Water vapor in the stratosphere can prevent global warming;

150) The current heating speed is almost the same as the speed in 1860-1880 and 1910-1940;

151) The exponential increase in CO2 can only lead to a linear increase in temperature;

152) The snow and ice cover in the United States in winter 2008/2009 set a record;

153) The Mauna Loa station in Hawaii, which measures CO2 concentration, is a volcano;

154) CERN CLOUD experiment proves that cosmic rays lead to global warming;

155) The so-called "97% of scientists' consensus on global warming" has been denied;

156) Venus does not have an out-of-control greenhouse effect;

157) Climate change negators are part of “97% of scientists”;

158) The water surface height is correlated with the number of sunspots;

159) Changes in planetary orbits have caused global warming;

160) The temperature in the Antarctic continent is too low, and there will be no reduction in ice and snow;

161) Positive feedback means out-of-control warming;

162) Global warming skeptics are excluded from IPCC;

163) CO2 was higher in the late Ordovician period than it is now;

164) The circular coral island will grow as sea level rises;

165) It is the internal variability of the climate system that caused global warming;

166) Natural processes cause CO2 growth, not human activities;

167) Adapting to global warming is lower than preventing global warming;

168) It is CFCs (freon) substances that cause warming;

169) Scientists have withdrawn their claims about sea level rise;

170) Warming increases lead to an increase in CO2;

171) Changes in carbon dioxide concentration are not strictly related to changes in temperature

172) Investment in renewable energy kills jobs;

173) Schmittner et al. (2011) found that climate sensitivity is relatively low;

174) There has been no significant warming in the past 16 years;

175) One large solar minimal period will lead to another ice age;

176) DMI (Danish Meteorological Institute) Arctic temperature data reveals that the Arctic is cooling;

177) Dr. Ben Santer (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) changed the 1995 IPCC report;

178) Even if the total CO2 limit is set, it is impossible to cool down the earth's temperature;

179) Global warming is a climate change caused by natural cycles;

180) The earth's climate has a 60-year cycle;

181) The Royal Society is a proponent of climate change skepticism;

182) Global warming is just a few degrees of warming up, so why bother?

183) It is the microwave transmission of satellites that lead to heating;

184) CO2 only plays a 35% role in global warming;

185) The IPCC reveals that the chart of heating acceleration is misleading;

186) Sea level decreased in 2010;

187) The range of Arctic sea ice in history is smaller than it is now;

188) The reconstructed satellite remote sensing atmospheric temperature data from UAH (University of Alabama at Huntsville) confirms that both climate patterns and surface temperature sequences are wrong;

189) There was no global warming during the Industrial Revolution;

190) Fredrik Ljungqvist (2010) Global Temperature Reconstruction Data (a 2000-length Temperature Reconstruction Data) debunks Mann's "Hockey" curve lie;

191) James Hansen (1988) once predicted that the West Coast Expressway of the Hudson River in the United States would be flooded by sea water. Now it is fine, it is purely unreliable;

192) Even if all CO2 in the atmosphere is removed, it will not cause any difference, so no measures are used;

193) Loehle and Scafetta's study (2008) found that there are 60-year cycles in climate history, which are the cause of global warming;

194) Joseph E. Postma's study (an article published on the website) proves that greenhouse benefits are false;

195) It is the change in underground temperature (geothermal) dominance of climate change;

196) Human beings have successfully experienced climate change in the past;

197) There are many heat waves and scorching heat in history;

198) Bush Jr.: It is not in the national interest of the United States to take measures to reduce CO2 emissions;

199) Trump: The concept of global warming was fabricated by and for the Chinese, with the purpose of making the US manufacturing industry uncompetitive;

200) Trump: Global warming is a complete and very expensive scam;

201) Climate change is made by meteorological weapons from the Soviet Union/Russia/US/China;

202) Climate change is a conspiracy by developed countries to contain developing countries;

Notes:

[1] SANTER BD, TAYLOR KE, WIGLEY TM, et al., 1996. A Search for Human Influences on the Thermal Structure of the Atmosphere [J]. Nature, 382(6586): 39-46.

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMqc7PCJ-nc.

[3] Zhu, C., K. Kobayashi, I. Loladze, J. Zhu, Q. Jiang, X. Xu, G. Liu, S. Seneweera, KL Ebi, A. Drewnowski, NK Fukagawa and LH Ziska, 2018: Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels this century will alter the protein, micronutrients, and vitamin content of rice grains with potential health consequences for the poorest rice-dependent countries. Science Advanceds, 4, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaq1012.

[4] Zhang Deer, 2008. Questioning the theory that monsoon leads to the demise of the Tang Dynasty by Chinese historical climate records [J]. Progress in climate change research (02): 126-130.

[5] https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/oceans/

[6] https://skepticalscience.com/argument.php

[7] The temperature curves of the past 1,000 years revealed by multiple sets of temperature reconstruction data in the Northern Hemisphere come from Mann (2008).

[8] 美国前总统，环境活动家，他制作的环保纪录片《难以忽视的真相》夺得2007年奥斯卡最佳纪录片奖，他和联合国组织政府间气候变化专门委员会IPCC一起获得了2007年度诺贝尔和平奖。

本文经授权转载自微信公众号“风云之声”。

The cover image of this article comes from the copyright library. Reprinting and quoting it may cause copyright disputes.