Home Science Scientists project 5°C increase in global warming if emissions are not curbed

Scientists project 5°C increase in global warming if emissions are not curbed

Climate change is coming fast, and despite what many have called a slowdown over the course of the last decade, or so, it will make no difference by the time humanity reaches the year 2100. In fact, by the time 2040 comes around, new research has many scientists believing that we will have seen such massive shifts in climate change – that it won’t make a difference what happened in the very early parts of this century.

UNSW Scientia Professor Matthew England, who was the lead author on this study pointed out that, “This shows that the slowdown in global warming has no bearing on long-term projections – it is simply due to decadal variability. Greenhouse gases will eventually overwhelm this natural fluctuation.” He went on to point out that, “Our research shows that while there may be short-term fluctuations in global average temperatures, long-term warming of the planet is an inevitable consequence of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations.”

That’s why researchers like England are pushing so hard to see reform on a global scale when it comes to greenhouse gases and the carbon footprint of human life. Over the course of the next 50-100 years a change on a massive scale is going to be taking place, and at this point, it’s time to buckle down and really begin making changes to prevent what damage could be done.

This is also why the Global Warming Policy Foundation is working to change the way people perceive the official climate data that exists in the world. They’re enlisting a number of scientists who will work from all of the data that exists in the world to come up with a justifiable answer that can be held against criticism over time.

Right now there are plenty of official, and government agencies that have done work in the field of global warming, so it’s important to collect a vast amount of data that can weed through all of the different layers of official data. That’s the goal of this particular project put together by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. At the end of the day, creating a better tomorrow is the goal here, as global warming continues to have a significant impact on the world around us.



  1. The world has not experienced any statistically significant global warming in the past 18+ years despite increasing CO2 emissions during this period. If CO2 emissions were a direct and significant cause of global warming, we would have experienced global warming during the 18+ year pause. We did not.

    No one disputes that the climate is changing. The earth is estimated to be 4.5 billion years old and the climate has been changing the entire time. The question is how much , if any of, global warming is caused by human activities (primarily CO2 emissions)?

    There is no empirical evidence that CO2 emissions are or ever have been a MAJOR CAUSE of global warming. The hypothesis that catastrophic global warming ( CAGW) is caused by CO2 emissions is based on an unproven hypothesis and computers which overemphasize CO2’s role in climate change and de-emphasize the role of clouds, solar cycles, ocean cycles and other natural causes of climate change. These computers have been notoriously wrong almost all of the time (when compared to real world data) and have been compared to a sports team that played the entire season without winning a game. Computers that model an imaginary planet and are programmed with guesses of a few of the many variables affecting climate are not data or empirical evidence. Ninety-eight percent of the climate models relied upon by the IPCC failed to predict the 18+ year pause and their projections of future temperatures during the last 20 years substantially exceeded the observed temperatures during this period.

    The outside atmospheric levels of CO2 are currently around 400 ppm. During the last ice age CO2 levels fell to 180 ppm and plants started to shut down. If CO2 levels had reached 150 ppm or lower, plants would have died off and all plant and animal life on the planet would have died. Green houses regularly keep CO2 concentrations at 1000-1200 ppm because the plants grow better. In the past, CO2 levels have been at several thousand parts per million and plants and animals thrived. US submarines try to keep CO2 levels below 8,000 ppm. Federal OSHA standards set CO2 maximums at 5,000 ppm. When you exhale, your breath contains more than 40,000 ppm CO2. The most predominant greenhouse gas is water vapor and increased CO2 levels are greening the planet.

    We are much closer to being CO2 deprived than we are being threatened by too much atmospheric CO2. Plants thrive on more CO2- that is a good thing. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is a weak greenhouse gas that is colorless and odorless which comprises only .04% of the atmosphere (naturally occurring CO2 + CO2 emissions). A 2007 IPCC report estimated that CO2 emissions were only .03% of the total CO2 in the atmosphere. So, CO2 emissions make up only .0012% of the atmosphere. That is why blaming global warming on CO2 emissions is like having “the flea wag the dog”.

    Climate change is natural and has been occurring since the formation of the planet. The 18+ year pause just proves that the skeptics were right all along-natural causes of climate change are more powerful than the insubstantial effects that human generated CO2 has on the world’s climate.

    CAGW is about power, politics and greed. Every time the facts change, the Believers move the goal posts . They have at least 66 excuses for the 18+ year pause in global warming and the failure of the computer climate models to predict it. The Believers blame any unusual (but normal) climate event on global warming with no scientific proof. This is often done with a scary picture or one that pulls on the heart strings, and the text of the article will say “could be caused”, “is consistent with”, or “may be caused by” global warming. This is code for we have no scientific evidence but we want to scare you so we can tax CO2 and promote our political agenda.

    • I hope you get paid well to shoot your self in the foot with a 75mm cannon.

      But me, no amount of money is worth lying to my self or others. Deny reality all you want, it will still bulldoze you into the ground.

        • EVERY respected scientific institution that considered the issue concluded that CO2 emissions are a major contributor. Yes, EVERY ONE. And try to find a study that says otherwise. You can’t because human-caused climate change is a fact. Old news.

          Sad that your options are so apparently limited that you feel the need to post propaganda. But I’d love to read your story, how you got involved and what it’s all about. Visit my website and you’ll find an email address.

          Google: ExhaustingHabitability

      • Just like the believers some 1000 years ago, if you don’t have
        an argument then demonise your opposition. If that is not working then burn them just like Giordano Bruno or discredit them Galileo Galilei. The raise of a new religion of environmental believers
        all over again; the new devil CO2, every storm, rain or heat wave has become a sign of the CO2 devil in action.

        • A denier bot stalking me?
          Try finding something constructive to do instead of peddling the propaganda. Makes you look like a fool.
          Now go away with your nonsense.

    • It is not about Global Warming it is how to implement UN Agenda 21 without a peoples revolution against it and CO2 is just a convenient excuse how to con the world into a political agenda by fear . So the question is, can we stop the implementation of UN Agenda 21? If we cannot stop Agenda 21 then it will catapult the human civilization back into the stone age in many ways.
      Very well researched contribution odin2. Thanks.

      • I agree. Thanks . Have you ever investigated The Club of Rome (they have a website) or the book by David Shearman”The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy (available on Amazon)? This stuff sounds like it is out of a Dan Brown novel, but it is for real.

      • I agree. Thanks . Have you ever investigated The Club of Rome (they have a website) or the book by David Shearman”The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy (available on Amazon)? This stuff sounds like it is out of a Dan Brown novel, but it is for real.

        There is a new article today at WUWT on the Club of Rome.

        You can also go the the COR’s website and see their ideology expressed there – they don’t hide it.

    • “The world has not experienced any statistically significant global warming in the past 18+ years despite increasing CO2 emissions during this period.”
      Odin’s right. In fact, it has been COOLING a tiny bit, during that period.

      • You are right, but it is almost impossible to get the Believers to admit to any pause or lack of statistically significant increase in global warming. Believers think anyone who questions them is a heretic.

  2. Anyone who thinks that 7 BILLION people with BILLIONS of emissions sources are not heating up the planet doesn’t have the common sense or logic God gave a goose. The fossil fuel industry is filling your heads with chicken crap and convincing you its chicken salad.

    Your kids will have crappy lives as we turn blue planet Earth into hot house hell Venus. Enjoy morons your delusions….lol

    • Humans are only responsible for 3% of the CO2 output on earth. No sun light get anywhere near the surface of Venus. The Venus atmosphere is much cooler than the Venus surface. In my opinion is water the climate regulating force as it has unique properties to regulate the global temperature.

      • 3 percent? Citations I got to see that data! mean wile we’re cutting down the tree’s cranking out refrigerants with thousands of times the effect of co2 large scale methane production and a litany of other GHG’s but nice attempt at miss representing the issue.

      • Consider what happens when more CO2 is released from outside of the natural carbon cycle – by burning fossil fuels. Although our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year, it adds up because the land and ocean cannot absorb all of the extra CO2. About 40% of this additional CO2 is absorbed. The rest remains in the atmosphere, and as a consequence, atmospheric CO2 is at its highest level in 15 to 20 million years (Tripati 2009). (A natural change of 100ppm normally takes 5,000 to 20,000 years. The recent increase of 100ppm has taken just 120 years).

        Human CO2 emissions upset the natural balance of the carbon cycle. Man-made CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by a third since the pre-industrial era, creating an artificial forcing of global temperatures which is warming the planet. While fossil-fuel derived CO2 is a very small component of the global carbon cycle, the extra CO2 is cumulative because the natural carbon exchange cannot absorb all the additional CO2.

        The level of atmospheric CO2 is building up, the additional CO2 is being produced by burning fossil fuels, and that build up is accelerating.

        • Right. It doesn’t take much, relatively speaking, to upset that natural balance. That’s what’s alarming.

    • “common sense” would have suggested that denser or heavier objects fall faster, too. It also precludes virtually all quantum theory. Sorry, bub, but good scientific exploration doesn’t include “common sense”.

    • I think Venus might be stretching it a bit, but chances are the coming changes are going to be DRASTIC. I don’t think we have any idea just how FAST it’s going to be…talking about sea level rise. Scientists say it’s been MILLIONS of years since the Earth’s atmosphere had 400 PPM of CO2. Higher in the polar region. Also, plateaus are always part of climate graphs, and mean nothing in the long-term. If world AIR temps haven’t been doing much for 15 years, then maybe it’s ocean temps we should be looking at…they’ve been going up…a warm ocean and jet stream anomalies combined to give the Northeast US some incredible snow this past winter.

  3. Human caused climate change is a fact. Denier bot paid to post opinions to the contrary never provide anything credible for support. And for good reason!

    Join the efforts to change course. Too many Congressmen/women are on the koch payroll. They put our future generations at risk by blocking efforts to shift away from burning fossil fuels. They need to be confronted and replaced. Our future generations are worth the effort.

    Learn more and get active… ExhaustingHabitability(dot)org

    • Science is not like a religion. Scientific prove is what can be scientifically proven and there is no prove that CO2 has or will have a major impact to produce Global Warming; now called climate change as there was no global warming for more than 18 year.

      • No the name was changed due to small minded idjits who couldn’t grasp that Global warming all so amplified cold spells and storms and other weather phenomena like your self.

        CO2 is part of a feed back cycle, it is amplifying the original cycles out side of their normal operating window. (This includes temperatures!)

        FYI there is NO PAUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! See how the ice is melting faster? It takes 944btu per pound to melt ice, that melting the ice does not warm up that is just for it to go from solid phase to liquid phase at 0c (Look up latent heat).

        IE We’re fueling the melting once that melting stops, and the ocean currents are shifted it will be burn baby burn, and frankly if we as a society can produce science illiterates like you good riddance to bad rubbish our species deserve to go away for good!

        Hope fully the Racoons do a better job of running the planet then we did

        • A bit of climate science from a real scientist and not a green fanatic.

          “The derived Specific Heat of Carbon Dioxide is 0.8 and Standard Air is
          1.0, an assigned value….meaning that CO2 heats and cools faster than
          standard air. Radiant heat is absorbed in three frequencies, based on
          emitting surface temperatures. CO2 absorbs in the following frequency
          bands and per Wien’s Law, these temperatures
          2.7 microns [800C], 4.3 microns [400C] and 14.7 microns [-80C]

          The Sun gets hot enough to emit in three bands, Earth only 14.7 band,
          therefore, ‘filtering’ more incoming than outgoing would be more
          cooling. Radiant energy absorption elevates electrons to a higher orbit
          for a billionth of a second, followed by an emission of longer
          wavelength, lower energy photons. A body cannot be warmed by a colder
          body; second law of thermodynamics. Everything about climate alchemy is
          fraud, so there can be NO ‘back radiation warming’. The Kinetic Energy
          from absorption is immediately transferred to the adjoining Nitrogen and
          Oxygen molecules and rapidly rises as a convective wave to the upper
          atmosphere where it is dissipated by Altitude Convective Attenuation.
          Proper Earth science is empirical, obvious and logical.”

          • We both know that what you stated about CO2 and the temperature trend is not true.

            Do they pay you to post such nonsense? If you, and it’s likely, I feel sorry for you. It must feel pretty bad thinking that your options are so limited that you’re forced to stoop to posting dishonesty, working to spread public doubt where no reasonable scientific doubt exists. Yea, working for a cause that would people people at risk is pretty low.

            But I’d love to read your story; how you got involved and who it all works. Visit my website. There’s an email address for your use. ExhaustingHabitability

  4. odin2 – take a look at the latest research (empirical anyone?) on the thawing permafrost in science journal Nature. This topic is not simple or easy to capture by inflammatory statements and demands for ‘evidence’. The simple truth is humans are the only species to roam this planet that alter their environment to suit themselves in ways that are destructive and toxic. We take and give nothing in return. When faced with the reality of our behavior, we square off in our corners and point fingers and accuse the other side of being ‘deniers’ or ‘alarmist’. The evidence is all around us. Yes, climate change is cyclical. Earth used to be wet and tropical. It will be again. But this time, rather than the cycle happening naturally, humans are speeding things up. We have a choice – accept that and continue to behave as we are or acknowledge that we are a part of the change and find ways to behave better. Open your mind and read the article. It won’t happen in our lifetime, but it will have soon.

    • If the climate would be that fragile to CO2 then life just would be not on earth or any other planet. There was more then 15% CO2 on earth before we has any oxygen on earth.Who made the oxygen?

      • Seriously? You can’t be bothered to learn such basics then criticize the real scientists?

        Bacteria will do fine in the new climate, just the rest of the complex life will have a very miserable time of it.

  5. You know, earth was warmer than it is now, once, and life did just fine. It has been cooler, and life did just fine. Cease your bellyaching, the earth isn’t going anywhere just yet. The seasons will continue on as long as the earth stands. There will be water and plants and trees and animals. Get a grip. Haven’t we yet figured out the financial benefit of the fear of the masses?

  6. Thanks Prof. England for your reasearch and for trying to make your voice heard; Let’s hope that Cato or Heartland doesn’t try to “reinterprete” your findings for contrarian consumption, as they seem to be doing a lot lately… Stay tuned.

  7. Only God knows what’s gonna happen within those period of time. So arguing over people’s logical sense and get a life. End of discussion.

  8. What’s funny about this study is that its lead “scientist”, in an opinion piece published here:(link posting not permitted here, sadly)
    demonstrates that he is nothing more than a propagandist and true-believer, for whom no data will permit him to mitigate his faith.

    He utterly ignores the likelihood that the cornerstone of AGW hypotheses is that CO2 will overwhelm natural variability, and that despite being in a warming trend that started long before the first CO2 increases, the next time that trend resumesat its probable same pace, that time, it will be due to CO2.

    In other words, he’s saying “We didn’t understand things before … but this time we do. And that next warming phase, that one will be due to CO2. Wolf! Wolf!”

  9. who wrote this article? It reads like it was never edited.

    “Right now there are plenty of official, and government agencies that have done work in the field of global warming, so it’s important to collect a vast amount of data that can weed through all of the different layers of official data.”

    seriously? How is this crap being published?

    • It’s just one more lousy example of regurgitated talking points from the latest round of “teach-the-controversy” bs coming from energy corporations in advance of the worldwide climate summit.

    • An April 27, 2015 article from The Guardian called “Scepticism over rising temperatures? Lord Lawson peddles a fake controversy” explains that this “Global Warming Policy Foundation” is disingenuous, and are trolling in advance of the international climate meeting in Paris in November-December 2015.

      • That’s such a non-sequiter I can only assume you’re a bot pretending to reply.
        And the Guardian calling someone a fake is not evidence the person is a fake, it’s evidence the Guardian calls names.

        • I may be a bot, but I’m not such a bot as to throw a snowball inside the US Senate chamber in order to demonstrate my “scientific” bona fides to one and all.

          • APR 29 2015:
            SURVIVAL INFO FOR HUMANS (HUMOROUS): Funny or Die “Climate Change Denial Disorder”
            SURVIVAL INFO FOR HUMANS (LITERATE): The Guardian “Lord Lawson peddles a fake controversy”

          • kmedia mocks the editing failures of this article, and you ‘respond’ by parroting Bob Ward’s science-free ad hominem against Lord Lawson.

            That’s so far from kmedia’s point i seriously considered your ‘reply’ might be a software fault.

            You then made an obscure allusion to a previous post. I infer you were trying to mock it. You failed. Post the comment i was responding to, and what i actually said, and I stand by every word.

            But it’s hard to tell if my inference was correct. As I said at the time, that comment too was also gibberish.

            So then you post a ‘humorous’ article where the believers make a mockery of themselves by the soviet style tactic of alleging their opponents suffer from a psychiatric disorder. Seriously, this is your understanding of science or humour?

            But then you refer to Bob Ward’s Guardian piece again, as if you failed to comprehend that it had already been refuted mere name calling. What did he say was wrong with Lawson’s figures? Not a thing. But his critique is that ‘this is expected’, and ‘scientists point out that many of changes due to homogenisation tend to reduce the amount of warming shown in weather station records.’ But his evidence does not support what he claims. The Video by Cowtan admits that as much as ten percent of the warming in the last fifty years is possibly caused by the adjustments. My point is not that it is, or that Cowtan thinks so- in fact he doesn’t. The point is that Ward’s ‘evidence’ does not support his claim.

            What I’m trying to draw to your attention is that you are not responding to what people say. You are responding to whatever you start thinking about after they’ve said something. And what you think about is not necessarily related to what they said at all.

            It’s a common communication fault. If you care about sensible communication however, try quoting exactly what people said that you disagree with. At least that way we’ll be talking about the same thing.

          • APR 29 2015:
            SURVIVAL INFO FOR HUMANS (HUMOROUS): Funny or Die “Climate Change Denial Disorder”
            SURVIVAL INFO FOR HUMANS (LITERATE): The Guardian “Lord Lawson peddles a fake controversy”

  10. To most of the republicans in the U.S. Congress, none of the science matters. They cling to their fossil fuel sponsors’ interests or some political agenda despite the fact that delaying the shift to sustainable practices puts our future generations at risk. They need to be confronted and replaced. Please joint the efforts. Start with seeing if YOUR Congressmen/women are among those blocking progress.

    Learn more at… ExhaustingHabitability(dot)org

  11. C’mon, lets take bets.
    Just a few years ago, Professor England was still denying the reality of the pause that had gone on then for over thirteen years.
    His solution now includes the pause he used to deny, but is still wrong the same way and for the same reasons his earlier forecasts were wrong.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here