Top 10 Reasons Humans Are Not Causing Global Warming

Climate Models Overreact
Climate Models Overreact

Global warming has been the crisis of the last few decades.  After a period of global cooling in the min 20th Century, the Century as a whole saw a global temperature rise between 1-1.4°F.  Over the same time the volume of greenhouse gasses (Carbon Dioxide and Methane amongst others) increased to 389 parts per million against a background fluctuation between 180-300ppm in the previous 650,000 years.

Climate change proponents such as the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change),  NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) believe that the rise in greenhouse gasses comes from human activities.  Burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere – at the same time the reduction in forested land through logging or clearing for agriculture results in a loss of the natural carbon sink (trees absorb Carbon Dioxide).  Man made global warming – they would have us believe – will be single handedly responsible for rising sea levels, melting glaciers, species extinction and any severe weather from tornadoes to ice-storms.

This view, supported by the mainstream media, has become the orthodox belief.  Only a few scientists now admit to being sceptical about man’s role in global warming.  Is the orthodoxy right?  Here are the Top 10 Reasons Humans Are Not Causing Global Warming…

10.  Global Warming Is Big Business

The Business of Global Warming
The Business of Global Warming

In the 10 years to 2009 the US Federal Government allocated $25bn to research on climate change.  In 2013 the EU announced that at least 20% of its budget for 2014-20 would be spent on climate issues.  Climate science has become politicized which has had the unfortunate effect of shutting down debate on the issue.  Scientists who want research money and the respect of their peers must agree with global warming or loose their grant funding.

                Al Gore famously said that ‘the science is settled’.  Science is, however, never settled, there is always something more to learn.  To assume that science on any one particular issue has gone as far as it can when grants are one sided and debate is shut down is both arrogant and dangerous.

9. There Have Been Warm Periods In The Past 

It's Been Warm in the Past
It’s Been Warm in the Past

Anecdotally we know that there have been times in the past when it was warmer.  In mediaeval times it was so warm (approximately 1.8°F warmer than today) that Vikings were able to colonize and live in Greenland and even travel to the Americas.  This Mediaeval Warm Period, as it is known, occurred at a time when the human contribution to greenhouse gasses was negligible (burning fires was about the only fossil fuel activity).  Scientists have studied ‘proxy’ data such as tree ring samples or ocean cores to establish that this mediaeval warming did, in fact, take place.  If there have been warm periods in the past it must surely be a fallacy to suggest that the global warming (if it exists) of the last few decades is down to human agency.

8. There Have Been Cold Periods In The Past 

It's Been Cold in the Past
It’s Been Cold in the Past

At the end of the Mediaeval Warm Period the earth experienced a period of prolonged cooling that has been colloquially termed the Little Ice Age.  The Thames in London froze regularly between 1607 and 1814, the Golden Horn and part of the Bosporus in 1622 and New York Harbor in 1870.  The Vikings left Greenland by the 15th Century, the cold making their way of life impossible.  While the IPCC has said that they doubt the Little Ice Age was a global phenomenon and was limited to the Northern Hemisphere only, recent research has shown corresponding cold periods in the Southern Hemisphere.  The Little Ice Age came to an end around 1900, it is not, therefore, surprising that global temperatures have risen.  There is no reason to assume that they are connected with human activity.

7. Temperatures Today Are Not Unusual

Today's Temps are Normal
Today’s Temps are Normal

Following on from points 9 and 8 you can see that there is a large natural fluctuation in world temperatures.  Research using multiple different proxies for temperature (tree rings, boreholes, ocean sediment samples) has shown that temperatures in the past have varied more than previously thought – particularly when compared to research that used a single proxy.  Temperatures today sit well within the temperature variations shown to have existed over the last 2,000 years before humans started to use fossil fuels.

6. Oceans Are Getting Colder  

Brrr!! The Ocean is getting colder.
Brrr!! The Ocean is getting colder.

The apparent correlation between an increase in temperature and an increase in Carbon Dioxide levels meant that it was easy to assume that man is responsible for global warming.  As such much of the research on global warming has been designed to investigate this with comparatively little invested in research on potential natural causes.  However, correlation is not causation – just because something looks like it is related it does not mean it is.

In 2008 it was shown that both the Atlantic and Pacific oceans will be ‘cold’ for at least the next decade.  Oceans go through periods when they are warm and when they are cold.  Because they cover so much of the surface of the Earth (70%) what happens to the oceans has a big impact on global temperatures.

Ocean currents are powerful forces -the warm and cool periods of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (a change in atmosphere and ocean currents in the Pacific) seem to coincide with warm and cool periods over the last 100 years.  The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation has been shown to be responsible for the warming and cooling periods experienced in the Arctic over a similar timescale (warm from 1910-40 and 70-2008 with a cool period in-between). NOAA has stated that changing weather patterns such as the rise in severe hurricanes like Katrina is down to changes in ocean currents and not global warming.

5. Water Vapor Not Carbon Dioxide Is The Atmosphere’s Most Plentiful Greenhouse Gas

Water Vapor not Carbon Dioxide is Most Prevalent
Water Vapor not Carbon Dioxide is Most Prevalent

Carbon Dioxide and Methane are not the only greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere – they are not even the most abundant (although they are the ones that have increased most dramatically over the past decades).

Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas and is released into the atmosphere by natural not man made processes.  The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere decreased after the year 2000 (which coincided with a stall in global warming.  Figures show an increase in atmospheric water vapor in the final two decades of the last century which correlates to a period of warming.  Indeed water vapor has been shown to be responsible for 30% of the temperature increase over that time.  The amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is driven by natural oceanic processes.

Even a doubling of human created greenhouse gasses would have only a negligible impact on temperature increase (less than 10% of that predicted by models).  This is because the models assume a positive feedback (ie as human created greenhouse gasses increase water vapor will increase) when instead observations show a decrease in water vapor.

4. Higher Concentrations Of Carbon Dioxide Are Not Unknown In The Past And The Earth Has Developed Mechanisms To Cope With It

The Earth can balance out Carbon Dioxide
The Earth can balance out Carbon Dioxide

As global temperatures increase carbon stores such as forests or the ocean release Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere.  In depth analysis of ice-core samples show that increases in Carbon Dioxide levels in the atmosphere increased markedly after an increase in global temperature.  If increases in Carbon Dioxide were a cause of warming it should precede not come after a warming period.

Carbon Dioxide is a natural constituent part of our atmosphere and as such our atmospheric processes will eventually balance any human related increases through an increase in the activity of natural carbon sinks such as forests and oceans.  Carbon Dioxide makes plants grow so any increase will result in a corresponding increase in plant life both on land and in the sea – these plants subsequently absorb the excess Carbon Dioxide.  50% of all Carbon Dioxide released by the human use of fossil fuels, deforestation or other human based causes has already been absorbed.

3. Climate Models Are Wrong 

Climate Models Overreact
Climate Models Overreact

We experience weather on a day to day basis – with all the advances in recent decades meteorologists still struggle to predict weather outcomes more than five days in advance with any accuracy.  Climate is measured over much longer periods – typically 30 years.  The IPCC has adopted the Mann, Bradley and Hughes ‘Hockey Stick’ graph that shows a long term reduction in global temperatures over the previous 1000 years followed by a sharp increase in the last century.

The accuracy of this graph has been hotly disputed by ‘climate change sceptics’ for many of the reasons set out below including the use of flawed statistics that did not give sufficient recognition to  previous warm periods and analytical algorithms that were weighted to produce hockey sticks.  The data used to produce the model came from tree ring analysis which placed too much emphasis on samples from a species (bristlecone pine) known to give unreliable results.    The models also overestimate the sensitivity of the Earth’s climate to Carbon Dioxide leading to exaggerated levels of warming.

Perhaps most worryingly was the  revelation in emails leaked from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research unit (one of the world’s leading climate change research institutes) stating that they used tricks to ‘hide the decline’.  In essence they substituted tree ring data that did not match their required results for temperature data that did.  That temperature data is alleged itself to be cherry picked to give the required result.

The models are, quite simply, unreliable.  They fail accurately to predict changes in ocean circulation patterns.  When the models are applied to the past they make considerable mistakes and fail to model previous known changes in climate with any accuracy.  If models have been shown to be wrong we should not be relying on them to predict future changes in climate.

2. Ozone, Solar Activity And Other Agencies Are More Likely To Have A Long Term Impact On Global Warming 

The Sun and other factors play a large part in global warming
The Sun and other factors play a large part in global warming

The level of solar activity is an important and often misunderstood factor in global temperature, this activity increased over the 20th Century.  When the arctic air temperature was measured against solar activity (solar irradiance) for the period 1880-2000 the two measurements correlated very closely.  When global fossil fuel use was measured against arctic air temperature for the same period the two did not correlate.

There is a school of thought that links warming to ozone depletion.   This suggests that the period of warming seen in the latter 20th Century was due to the loss of ozone through use CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) of and not to greenhouse gasses.  Ozone problems were of course, man made, but are in the process of being fixed with pre 1970 levels of CFCs are expected to return by 2050.  The relative stability of ozone levels since 1997 coincides with a stalling in global temperature increases over the same period.

An in-depth study of the role of greenhouse gasses such as Carbon Dioxide and Methane in climate change both in the past and for the future states that manmade global warming should be put in context as a medium term effect as opposed to the long term natural effects (such as water vapor, glacial cycles, ice albedo and Milankovic cycles (changes in the Earth’s orbit) that may prove just as significant in the long term.

1. The Temperature Record Is Unreliable

The Temperature Record is not reliable
The Temperature Record is not reliable

Temperature graphs from land based weather stations show a rate of temperature increase that is not supported by data from weather balloons and satellites measuring the temperature in the upper atmosphere.

A study of temperature increase relies on access to reliable temperature data.   However, a study in 2009 by the Heartland Institute showed that almost 90% of all US weather stations as set up by the National Weather Service are in urban heat islands.  Urban areas are, on average warmer than rural areas.  Asphalt absorbs and subsequently radiates a lot of heat, urban buildings generate a lot of heat.  This trend is repeated in countries around the world.

                Worldwide it is almost impossible to guarantee the accuracy of data – poorer countries do not keep complete records.  Two thirds of the weather stations operating in the 1970s are still working today (the collapse of the Soviet Union shut down half the weather stations in the world).  This means that it is impossible to create an accurate comparison of temperature records today and temperature records in the past.   To deal with these problems climate change scientists apply adjustment algorithms but as we have seen above climate algorithms are notoriously unreliable.  Tests have shown that these adjustments are ineffective and fail to remove ‘contamination’ in the results.

Richard Linzden of MIT wrote in 2008 that there had been ‘no global warming since 1997 and no statistically significant warming since 1995’.  However, Global Warming (or climate change as it has increasingly been referred to in order to combat the problem of a recent stall in the warming trends) has been politicized to such an extent that it is a multimillion dollar industry.  It is accepted by most mainstream media as fact – dissenting views are marginalized with ‘health warnings’ if they are allowed at all.  Scientific debate is often shut down with personal attacks made on scientists who speak out against the orthodox climate change.

The global temperature and carbon dioxide levels have fluctuated in the past and the current temperature is not unusual in a historical context.  While the rate of temperature rise may correlate with the atmospheric levels of Carbon Dioxide correlation is not causation and no research to date has been able to prove a causal link.  Solar activity also correlates almost precisely with global temperature rises for recent decades – this activity is completely independent of human activity.

The results of much of the research into global warming through history and its potential causes today show that the Earth regulates its temperature through a complex interrelationship of many different processes.  From the levels of water vapor to ocean currents, orbital oscillations to solar activity these are processes over which man has no control.  We do not, as yet, have the technology to model these effects with any accuracy.  We can predict weather for up to five days in the future but all attempts to predict any longer term changes in weather or climate have proved futile.

The models used to predict climate change in the future have been shown to have been developed using unreliable proxy data and flawed temperature records.  When these models are applied to scenarios we know in detail from the past they fail to give the correct results.  These models quite simply don’t work and any research based on them is subsequently just as flawed.

The science on global warming is not ‘settled’.   What is needed is strong rigorous research on warming and all possible causes – such research should be without bias.  Science is only impoverished when it is politicized for specific goals.



  • Anonymous

    This is stupid

    • Rylan Vanauken

      you guys are all lair lair pants on fire

      • Grady Fisk

        more like plants for hire

        • Nathan Ruiz

          Yeah ya dummy dummy poopy heads >:(

          • Rylan Vanauken

            kys plz

            • Rylan Vanauken

              I love how big my wee wee gets off of global warming

              • Rylan Vanauken

                is this artical about the Holocaust

                • Rylan Vanauken

                  so ur black u racist

                  • Grady Fisk

                    ur gray

                    • Rylan Vanauken

                      Jewish people im your father

                    • Rylan Vanauken


                    • Nathan Ruiz

                      you’re a jew

                    • Nathan Ruiz

                      WHERE IS HITLER WHEN YOU NEED HIM?!

                    • Wtf?

                  • Nathan Ruiz

                    HITLER DID NOTHING WRONG

                    • Nathan Ruiz


                    • You’re bounced. Inappropriate.

                    • Dont post this stuff.

                  • Rylan Vanauken

                    did u know Barack and Obama are twin brothers

                    • Grady Fisk

                      i didnt know tat wow

                • Do you cats just hang out in the comments being crazy?

              • Grady Fisk

                thats racist

  • jj1738ay

    the reason you think its stupid is because your stupid that’s why you go to Jupiter to get more stupider and we go to Mars to become superstars

  • youareanidiotWAKEUPAMERICA

    No I got too college to get more knowledge you go to Jupiter to get more stupider

  • the happypanda


  • DennisHorne

    Without the greenhouse effect Earth would be -18C not +13C. CO2 is the most important persistent greenhouse gas. It drives the warming; water vapour, which condenses, is the main feedback. More CO2 means more warming. Enough CO2 and Earth could get very hot, hot enough to melt all the ice. It would take time but it’s happened before. That is settled science. The IPCC is right.

  • Highinthesky

    The Arctic is actually melting again . Man-made global warming is actually real. :/

    • Peter

      There is zero demonstration of causation in that statement. I’m not even sure I see any evidence of correlation certainly not with those two sentences.

  • Olive Oh

    The second hit for “Global Warming is not caused by humans” on google is this list… written by… who? With what references?

  • john

    i like how this person says that oceans are getting colder, but it is scientifically proven that they are getting hotter due to the melting in polar ice caps. Also, water attracts more heat. Second, just because there was an ice age thousands of years ago, does not mean we don’t effect global warming. Actually 98% of the scientist who write about global warming say its caused by humans. Thirdly, the temperature scale is not unreliable and what does money have to do with us not causing global warming? Thank you but no thank you. I would like to know were you got your info on this stuff.

  • Michael Castro

    None of those – and a couple of them are downright WRONG – are reasons why humans are not responsible for global warming. It is articles like this that cause the “unscientifically minded” – esp. a few of our less intelligent members of Congress – to deny that we are causing it. Or even that global warming doesn’t even exist!

    • Mark Wynn

      Apparently “unscientifically minded” is your euphanism for folks that do agree with your agenda. Facts speak louder that words.

  • J4zonian

    I posted this quite a while ago; it’s been disappeared so I thought I would refresh the post:

    You’ve been lied to. Every single one of your 10 reasons is either factually wrong or logically irrelevant. You should research the subject, reading the actual science, apologize, and retract this article.

    Today’s warming is caused by human greenhouse gases and land use changes; if the richest few percent of humans weren’t emitting gases through burning fossil fuels, eating huge amounts of meat and cutting down forests, the world would be cooling. The heating is happening many times faster than at any other time in Earth’s history, and the only thing wrong with the models accepted by the IPCC is that they’ve dramatically underestimated the speed and direness of the changes and their effect on us–they’ve underestimated effects 20 times more than they’ve overestimated or gotten it exactly right. (It’s mostly because of more precise knowledge, and feedbacks that are accelerating the changes.)

    For example: www[dot]insideclimatenews [dot] org/news/25042017/arctic-sea-ice-climate-change-global-warming-sea-level-rise-ipcc?utm_source=Inside+Climate+News&utm_campaign=99cb7d265d-InsideClimate_News12_10_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_29c928ffb5-99cb7d265d-327831957

    We’ve already reached temperatures the world hasn’t seen in thousands of years. Human civilization has never had to deal with temperature and other changes of this magnitude and the destruction that is inevitable is staggering–hundreds of millions, even billions of refugees from sea level rise, droughts, heat waves, storms, floods, fires, crop failures, ecological disruptions, political and social collapse that we already see happening across what Christian Parenti calls the Tropic of Chaos. Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Egypt, Syria and other countries have already been disastrously affected, but the US is having trouble dealing with it, too. The evidence, the science, and scientists are virtually unanimous on the current existence, human-cause and danger of climate catastrophe. The science also says further heating is absolutely inevitable no matter what we do, but suggests we can still avoid the worst effects.

    The solutions are clear, too. Only an immediate US-WWII-type industrial mobilization will avoid exponentially rising risk of complete collapse of global civilization and the extinction of millions of species. We need that mobilization to implement efficiency, conservation, wiser lives and to replace at least 90% of fossil fuel use with clean safe resilient renewable energy. We need to reforest the planet and transform chemical industrial agriculture into local, low-meat, small-scale, organic permaculture.


    The Skeptical Science website is run by scientists; it’s a great place to answer the points raised above.

    Climate is changing faster than at any time on record.


    • Mark Wynn

      You seem to have agendas (other that “global warming”), and opinions unsupported by scientific evidence.

      • J4zonian

        You’ve been lied to. Of course, by paying attention to the wrong people you’re volunteering to be lied to, so you can find your courage and stop being their victim anytime you want. Koch, Exxon, ALEC and others have spent many billions buying government, setting up the system of denial also used by tobacco corporations and others. It uses false experts, cherry picking, straw person arguments, irrelevant nonsense to distract, and many other logical fallacies and manipulative rhetorical deceptions. People like this author spew the same oft-debunked lies over and over and over, disregarding the truth for their own ideological, financial and above all psychological reasons. You can learn about these and other common lies at skepticalscience [dot] com, and take the Denial 101 MOOC at U of Queensland.

        More than 97% of the scientists in the scores of fields involved agree; the same percentage of more than 150,000 studies agree; every national and major scientific organization in the world agrees. The truth of catastrophic climate chaos has been increasingly obvious for more than 30 years, denying it now is so ridiculous it’s beyond words. You should stop.

        And proofread.

        • Mark Wynn

          Please read the the “10 reasons” link. I know you didn’t, because true believers in “global warming caused by American evil rich white humans” don’t allow-in information that might make them uncomfortable. I, on the other hand, get information from wide sources. That’s why I don’t get “lied to.” Tanks … kn u rd ths? ahy ddnt prfreed, soury.

          • J4zonian

            The overwhelming weight of science and a virtual unanimity of scientists say one thing. You, an unknown…person posting on the internet who disagrees with the overwhelming weight of science and offers no scientific support whatever, say another. I don’t think anyone rational will be surprised when I go with sanity and reality instead of you.

            You have been lied to. We all have, but some of us have had the sense to pay attention to the hundreds of thousands of scientists who have done the actual work to understand Earth’s systems and confirmed their results through the peer review system. Others pay attention to the lawyers and PR toadies paid by psychotic psychopaths to deceive the vulnerable about tobacco, climate, evolution, ecological safety issues like acid rain, the ozone hole, and other issues. The size of crowds… the size of… egos, voter suppression efforts…everything, now. Rational people choose to believe rationality and reason. You should read the science and join us.

            • Philip Grimler

              Ohh!!! music to my ears! Just to say thanks for strongly disagreeing with this top 10 bull$#@!. I may not be a scientist, but I’ve seen scores of docs that the carbon footprints are undeniably ours.

              • J4zonian

                I just came across this page again (bizarrely, it seems to pop up a lot in certain searches, unfortunately) and I was drawn to a more complete reading than I bothered to give it before. I was actually astounded all over by the terribleness of it. The number of grammatical, typographical/spelling mistakes (11 separate ones; counting repetitions of those would more than triple that) alone was quite amazing for something published, even on the net. There were things I was pretty sure were false or deceptive but didn’t bother to check because, well, pointless. There were 7 of them.

                And then actual factually false or clearly, even blatantly deceptive statements……….a staggering 102 of them!

                All together, about 140 “mistakes” in an article of fewer than 2600 words. I’m guessing that’s more than 1 every other sentence. At this point, they’re not mistakes any more; the facts are so available and so unarguably overwhelmingly agreed on by scientists that only willful refusal to see reality can explain it.

                I’ve only counted mistakes/deceptions in a couple of short comments before, and annotated one. While this article is worse than most, I’ve read a fair number that probably come close in “wrongness”, though not in deception density–something we should probably start measuring in every denying delayalist utterance.

                Divine Defecation, we have terrible science education in the US…in addition to the many pervasive and serious psychological, political and media problems that have caused this denial industry to push us so relentlessly toward the end of civilization and the extinction of millions of species. We probably still have time to avoid utter catastrophe but as 1500 scientists have said yet again recently, not much time, and the actions required at this point are massive and radical. We need to ignore lunatics like the author of this article and especially shut out from all decision-making the psychotic psychopaths from whom the lunatics get their disinformation.