Close this search box.

Over 440 Scientific Papers Published In 2019 Support A Skeptical Position On Climate Alarm

By Kenneth Richard

In 2019,  more than 440 scientific papers were published that cast doubt on the position that anthropogenic CO2 emissions function as the climate’s fundamental control knob…or that otherwise serve to question the efficacy of climate models or the related “consensus” positions commonly endorsed by policymakers and mainstream media sources.

Image Source: Collins et al., 2019

Image Source: Lüning et al.,2019

Image Source:  Yan et al., 2019

Image Source: Pereira et al., 2019

Image Source: Duvat, 2019

Image Source: Gao et al., 2019

Over 440 scientific papers published in 2019 affirm the position that there are significant limitations and uncertainties inherent in our understanding of climate and climate changes, emphasizing that climate science is not settled.

More specifically, the papers in this compilation support these four main skeptical positions — categorized here as N(1) – N(4) — which question the climate alarm popularized in today’s headlines.

N(1) Natural mechanisms play well more than a negligible role (as claimed by the IPCC) in the net changes in the climate system, which includes temperature variations, precipitation patterns, weather events, etc., and the influence of increased CO2 concentrations on climatic changes are less pronounced than currently imagined.

N(2) The warming/sea levels/glacier and sea ice retreat/hurricane and drought intensities…experienced during the modern era are neither unprecedented or remarkable, nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.

N(3) The computer climate models are neither reliable or consistently accurate, the uncertainty and error ranges are irreducible, and projections of future climate states (i.e., an intensification of the hydrological cycle) are not supported by observations and/or are little more than speculation.

N(4) Current emissions-mitigation policies, especially related to the advocacy for renewables, are often ineffective and even harmful to the environment, whereas elevated CO2 and a warmer climate provide unheralded benefits to the biosphere (i.e., a greener planet and enhanced crop yields, lower mortality with warming).

In sharp contrast to the above, the corresponding “consensus” positions that these papers do not support are:

A(1) Close to or over 100% (110%) of the warming since 1950 has been caused by increases in anthropogenic CO2 emissions, leaving natural attribution at something close to 0%. “The best estimate of the warming due to anthropogenic forcings (ANT) is the orange bar (noting the 1 uncertainties). Reading off the graph, it is 0.7±0.2ºC (5-95%) with the observed warming 0.65±0.06 (5-95%). The attribution then follows as having a mean of ~110%, with a 5-95% range of 80–130%. This easily justifies the IPCC claims of having a mean near 100%, and a very low likelihood of the attribution being less than 50% (p < 0.0001!).”

A(2) Modern warming, glacier and sea ice recession, sea level rise, drought and hurricane intensities…are all occurring at unprecedentedly high and rapid rates, and the effects are globally synchronous (not just regional)…and thus dangerous consequences to the global biosphere and human civilizations loom in the near future as a consequence of anthropogenic influences.

A(3) The climate models are reliable and accurate, and the scientific understanding of the effects of both natural forcing factors (solar activity, clouds, water vapor, etc.) and CO2 concentration changes on climate is “settled enough”, which means that “the time for debate has ended”.

A(4) The proposed solutions to mitigate the dangerous consequences described in N(4) – namely, wind and solar expansion – are safe, effective, and environmentally-friendly.

To reiterate, the 440+ papers compiled in 2019 support the N(1)-N(4) positions, and they undermine or at least do not support the “consensus”A(1)-A(4) positions.  These papers do not do more than that.   In other words, it is not accurate to claim these papers prove that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) positions are invalid, or that AGW claims have now been debunked”.

Below are the three links to the list of scientific papers for 2019 as well as an outline to their categorization.

Skeptic Papers 2019 (1)

Skeptic Papers 2019 (2)

Skeptic Papers 2019 (3)

1. Climate Change Observation, Reconstruction (189)

A Warmer Past: Non-Hockey Stick Reconstructions (63)
No Net Warming Since Mid/Late 20th Century (25)
Lack Of Anthropogenic/CO2 Signal In Sea Level Rise (19)
Sea Levels Multiple Meters Higher 4,000-7,000 Years Ago (24)
Nothing Unusual Occurring With Glaciers, Polar Ice (46)
Mass Extinction Events Caused By Glaciation, Sea Level Fall (5)
Ice Sheet Melting In High Geothermal Heat Flux Areas (4)
Abrupt, Degrees-Per-Decade Natural Global Warming (3)

2. Natural Mechanisms Of Weather, Climate Change (131)

Solar Influence On Climate (73)
ENSO, NAO, AMO, PDO Climate Influence (11)
Modern Climate In Phase With Natural Variability (25)
Cloud/Aerosol Climate Influence (3)
Volcanic/Tectonic Climate Influence (2)
The CO2 Greenhouse Effect – Climate Driver? (17)

3. Unsettled Science, Failed Climate Modeling (121)

Climate Model Unreliability/Biases/Errors (26)
Urban Heat Island: Raising Surface Temperatures Artificially (8)
Failing Renewable Energy, Climate Policies (13)
Wind Power Harming The Environment, Biosphere (3)
Corals Thrive In Warm, High CO2 Environments (6)
Elevated CO2, Warmth, Does Not Harm The Biosphere (7)
No Effect Of Elevated CO2 (5000-15,000 ppm) On Human Cognition, Health (2)
Elevated CO2: Greens Planet, Higher Crop Yields (27)
Fire Frequency Declining As CO2 Rises (3)
Global Warming Reduces Mortality. Cold Kills. (7)
No Increasing Trends In Intense Hurricanes/Storms (3)
No Increasing Trend In Drought/Flood Frequency, Severity (4)
Natural CO2 Emissions A Net Source, Not A Net Sink (3)
Miscellaneous (9)