https://finance.yahoo.com/news/climate-policy-based-meaningless-number-163900719.html
Dec. 09, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Trillions of dollars are being spent for the ostensible purpose of keeping the earth’s global mean surface temperature (GMST) from rising more than 1.5 or 2.0 degrees Celsius above the “pre-industrial” baseline, but this is a meaningless number, writes Jonathan Cohler in the winter issue of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.
Fundamental thermodynamics taught in first-year physics shows the fallacy of averaging temperatures. For example, the “average” of the temperature of a cup of boiling water and the temperature of your bath water makes no sense, Cohler explains. Nor does the “average” temperature of a spot on Mount Everest and a spot in the Sahara Desert.
The target number for GMST—the “most important number in the world,” some say—was formally adopted by 196 nations in the Paris Agreement of 2015. But the International Standards Organization has declined to define it, Cohler states. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) gives a circular definition.
Rigorous mathematical proofs published in 2007 by Essex, McKitrick, and Andresen demonstrated that “there is no physically meaningful global temperature for the Earth in the context of the issue of global warming.” This paper has remained unchallenged for more than 18 years, Cohler notes.
True warming represents a net transfer of energy into a system, measured in joules or watt-seconds—not degrees Celsius, he explains.
Recent analysis by multiple frontier artificial intelligence (AI) systems, Cohler writes, has confirmed his conclusions. “When provided with the mathematical evidence, advanced AI platforms have characterized the situation as ‘the greatest mass delusion in scientific history’ and described IPCC methodologies as fundamentally fraudulent.”
“The exposure of this deception demands recognition that contemporary climate science is now primarily a political enterprise,” Cohler concludes. “When a field adopts physically meaningless metrics as its foundation, it has abandoned science for statistical theater designed to justify predetermined conclusions, not investigate physical reality.”
As George Orwell predicted, “The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.”
The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons is published by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), a national organization representing physicians in all specialties since 1943.
#
New Study Reopens Questions About Our Ability To Meaningfully Assess Global Mean Temperature
“Temperature is an intensive property that is defined only in equilibrium systems and cannot be meaningfully averaged across non-equilibrium systems.” − Cohler, 2025
A 2007 math proofs study that asserted a global mean temperature does not exist in reality (because a temperature average can only be defined in equilibrium systems) has never been disproved.
For example, determining whether a cup of coffee is warming or cooling – and by how much – is entirely dependent on the averaging formula one arbitrarily chooses. In the study 4 averaging methods were chosen to assess change in the average coffee temperature over time. All four were shown to yield different warming vs. cooling results.
Image Source: Essex et al., 2007
A new study reopens this debate by reasserting there are “infinite ways to average temperature.” The averaging method chosen in modern “climate science” is arbitrary, non-physical, and yields fundamentally different results vs. other methods.
BREAKING via Yahoo Finance
A peer-reviewed paper reveals that global climate policy is built on a meaningless number.
Not debated. Not controversial.
Meaningless.Trillions spent on a metric with no physical validity — the so-called “global mean surface… pic.twitter.com/vu6g2ZeJS6
— Jonathan Cohler (@cohler) December 10, 2025
