## Overall topic/titleThe Week That Was: 2025 01-11 (January 11, 2025)### First subtopic**Clarifying a Cloudy Issue? In the No Tricks Zone, Kenneth Richard briefly discusses a new paper by Atomic, Molecular, and Optical (AMO) physicists William van Wijngaarden and William Happer estimating the role of clouds in a varying climate.****Abstract of the paper:**"We briefly review the dominant role of clouds in Earth's climate. The earliest observational studies of heat transfer through Earth's atmosphere, for example, those of John Leslie around 1800, showed that clouds have a large effect on radiative heat transfer from Earth's surface to space. Greenhouse gases also affect heat transfer, but much less than clouds. For example, "instantaneously doubling" CO2 concentrations, a 100% increase, only decreases radiation to space by about 1%. To increase solar heating of the Earth by a few percent, low cloud cover only needs to decrease by a few percent. The first half of this paper reviews observational facts about how clouds affect heat transfer. The second half gives a brief summary of the new 2n-stream radiation transfer theory for quantitatively analyzing how clouds scatter radiation incident from outside the cloud, and how they emit thermal radiation generated by their particulates."### Second subtopic**Methane and Climate: The CO2 Coalition has issued a report by van Wijngaarden and Happer, Methane and Climate.****Abstract of the Methane and Climate paper:**"Atmospheric methane (CH4) contributes to the radiative forcing of Earth's atmosphere. Radiative forcing is the difference in the net upward thermal radiation from the Earth through a transparent atmosphere and radiation through an otherwise identical atmosphere with greenhouse gases. Radiative forcing, normally specified in units of W m^-2, depends on latitude, longitude, and altitude, but it is often quoted for a representative temperate latitude, and for the altitude of the tropopause, or for the top of the atmosphere. For current concentrations of greenhouse gases, the radiative forcing at the tropopause, per added CH4 molecule, is about 30 times larger than the forcing per added carbon-dioxide (CO2) molecule. This is due to the heavy saturation of the absorption band of the abundant greenhouse gas, CO2. But the rate of increase of CO2 molecules, about 2.3 ppm/year (ppm = part per million), is about 300 times larger than the rate of increase of CH4 molecules, which has been around 0.0076 ppm/year since the year 2008. So, the contribution of methane to the annual increase in forcing is one tenth (30/300) that of carbon dioxide.The net forcing increase from CH4 and CO2 increases is about 0.05 W m^-2 year-1. Other things being equal, this will cause a temperature increase of about 0.011 \u00b0C year-1. Proposals to place harsh restrictions on methane emissions because of warming fears are not justified by facts."### Third subtopic**Atmospheric Window: There are specific ranges of frequencies (or of wavelengths) in which incoming solar radiation and infrared radiation emitted by Earth to space pass through the atmosphere without any or with little interruption (blocking) from greenhouse gases. These are called atmospheric windows. The most pronounced one is for visible light. A smaller one exists for outgoing infrared radiation.****A paper by Japanese energy researcher Kyoji Kimoto asserts that many modelers ignore the atmospheric window.**### Fourth subtopic**CO2 Regulating Temperatures? For years leaders of organizations such as NASA-GISS and NOAA have been carefully selecting data to claim that CO2 has been regulating Earth's temperatures for millions of years. A new technique is now claimed to provide evidence, CO2 concentration based on boron isotopes.**### Fifth subtopic**Santa Ana Winds: The climates of warm, semi-arid places such as southern California have a common characteristic: when its wet, vegetation grows; when its dry, vegetation dries. This drying is particularly severe for non-native species.**### Sixth subtopic**Number of the Week: ZERO: A few years ago, the UN Environmental Programme showed off a list of financial institutions that were parties to the Net Zero Banking Alliance that included the six major banks in the US, the major world economy. Now there are zero, with the departure of JP Morgan.**### Seventh subtopic**Challenging the Orthodoxy**Numerous scientific societies, organizations, and researchers have published papers and written articles either criticizing the current orthodoxy on climate change science or presenting alternative viewpoints. These include the:- NIPCC Report on the Scientific Consensus- The Role of Greenhouse Gases in Energy Transfer in the Earth's Atmosphere by W.A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer- Methane and Climate by W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer- Scientists: Increasing CO2 By 100% Only Reduces Radiative Cooling To Space By An Imperceptible 1% by Kenneth Richard- Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate by S. Fred Singer- Japanese Scientist: The IPCC's Climate Models Are Fundamentally Flawed, Use False Assumptions by Kyoji Kimoto- Scientific Societies Err on 'Climate Change' by Wallace Manheimer- Physicists: Increasing CO2 by 100% Only Reduces Radiative Cooling To Space By An Imperceptible 1% by Kenneth Richard- Methane and Climate by W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer- Carbon dioxide has been regulating Earth's climate for hundreds of millions of years \u2013 new study by Hana Junikova### Eighth subtopic**Defending the Orthodoxy**Numerous scientific societies, organizations, and researchers have published papers and written articles defending the current orthodoxy on climate science. These include:- Floods, droughts, then fires: Hydroclimate whiplash is speeding up globally by Daniel L. Swain- UN Climate Rapporteur: \u201cClimate change has created impossible conditions for one of the most resilient people in the world\u201d by Eric Worrall- Climate extremes in 2024 \u2018wrecking havoc\u2019 on the global water cycle by Press Release, Australian National University### Ninth subtopic**Questioning the Orthodoxy**Numerous articles and papers have been written expressing skepticism about the current orthodoxy on climate science. These include:- Worse than the worst thing ever by John Robson- Why California Wildfires are NOT Climate Driven: A Historical and Meteorological Perspective by Anthony Watts- The National Weather Service Warns of a Catastrophic Windstorm in Los Angeles. Massive Preemptive Power Outages Planned by Cliff Mass- Did the LA Fire Disaster Have to Happen? by Cliff Mass- Just frustrating… such good weather predictions and still such unfortunate outcomes. We need to do better. by Cliff Mass- Where and how did the Palisades Fire start? by Cliff Mass- Why Los Angeles Is Burning by Keely Covello- How the Indigenous practice of \u2018good fire\u2019 can help our forests thrive by Paul Homewood- Although the University of California feels obliged to partly blame climate change for wildfires, they then devote the rest of the article to the real reasons by John Robson- Cambridge Scientists: Climate Change Is Not The Cause Of Megafauna Extinctions by Kenneth Richard### Tenth subtopic**Problems in the Orthodoxy**Numerous examples exist that call into question various aspects of the current orthodoxy on climate science. These include:- JPMorgan becomes last of the Big-6 U.S. banks to quit Net-Zero Banking Alliance by Marc Morano- BlackRock departs climate investment group by Rachel Frazin- Independent journalism, thorough fact-checking, and data-driven analysis that holds the government, corporate America, and the powerful accountable. by CNBC