According to the late Freeman Dyson, computer models help you understand the climate, but they do a very poor job of predicting it.

Freeman Dyson (1923–2020) was a British-born American theoretical physicist and mathematician, known for his work on quantum field theory, astrophysics, random matrices, the mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics, the physics of matter. condensed, nuclear physics and engineering. He was one of the most famous figures in XNUMXth century physics.

In 2006, Dyson published “The Scientist as Rebel,” in which he questioned the role of human activity in causing climate change. In a 2008 interview with Physics World, he said that money spent on fighting climate change should instead be targeted at "other more pressing and important problems, such as poverty, infectious diseases, “public education and health”. He also said that thinking about the potential benefits of climate change “won’t do us any harm.”

In 2015 he joined Stuart McNish, host of Conversations that Matter. “There is human-caused climate change,” he said. “The question is how much and whether it’s good or bad.”

“First of all, we don't understand the details. "It's probably a lot less than is commonly claimed and the most important thing is that carbon dioxide has enormous non-climatic effects that are extremely favorable [and] that are not taken into account," he said. declared. As measured by satellites, “the entire Earth is becoming greener because of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”

Dyson began studying the effects of carbon dioxide (CO2) present in the atmosphere on vegetation "37 years ago", that is to say around 1978.

He explained that increased CO2 leads to increased agricultural yields, forests and all kinds of growth in the biological world. “And that’s more important and more certain than the climate effects,” he said.

When he began studying the effects of CO2 on plants, he thought the effect might be around 10%. But 35 years later, he found that figure was about 25 percent. CO2 increased by about 40% and “about half of that went to vegetation,” he said. “It’s extremely beneficial both for food production, but also for biodiversity, species preservation and everything good.” This comes from observable evidence, he added.

Regarding the idea that models are good predictors, he recalled what Japanese climate expert Suki Manabe, who developed the first climate model in the 1960s, linked warming of Earth's climate to increasing of carbon dioxide, always said and always says: “These climate models are excellent tools for understanding the climate, but they are very poor tools for predicting the climate.

The reason they fail to predict climate is simple, Dyson explained. “These are models that contain only a few factors, but there are many things they forget: The real world is much more complicated than the models.”

“I don't think any of these models can really be predictive,” he added, because climate change is too complex and involves too many factors. “You just can't model everything, it's really out of reach,” he said.

Some climatologists claim that the Sun has no effect because its temperature does not change. “It is true that the temperature of the Sun does not change,” Dyson said. “But its activity is changing.”

By activity, Dyson refers to sunspots and magnetic storms. “They fluctuate very strongly with the 11-year cycle and we see an effect on the climate,” he said.

Nir Shaviv has studied the effects of the Sun's activity: "He's finding a direct effect of this solar cycle, this sunspot cycle, on climate," Dyson said. “It is clear that this activity of the Sun is having an effect.”

“There was an important additional piece of evidence, namely the Little Ice Age, which occurred in the 17th century, and which also coincided with when the Sun went to sleep for about 70 years,” said Dyson. “There was a thing called the Maunder Minimum, when sunspots just didn't appear and at the same time there was a very cold climate in Europe. So that's pretty strong evidence of correlation. But there is now direct evidence and challenge from modern observations.

The other trick of the climate alarmists is to take water vapor “out of the equation.” Water vapor makes up about 90% of the atmosphere. So you can't take water vapor out of the equation, Dyson said. "It's fine [to neglect water vapor] if you want to talk about Mars," Dyson said with a laugh, because there is no water vapor on Mars.

“CO2 is so beneficial in other ways that it would be foolish to try to reduce it,” Dyson said. “The fact is that carbon dioxide will increase, we will continue to burn oil and coal and that will probably do us good – the Earth will become greener. »

“As measured from space, the entire Earth is becoming greener from carbon dioxide, so this increases agricultural yields, forests and increases the growth of the biological world, and this is greater and more certain than the effects on the climate. »

Freeman dyson

read the article