Is there a groundbreaking study confirming that human emissions have zero impact on climate change?

By September 12, 2024 Environment, Science

We came across a recent post on X claiming that a groundbreaking study has confirmed that human emissions have no impact on climate change. The post references an article from The People’s Voice (TPV), a self-proclaimed American news outlet site that purports to cover stories that mainstream media avoids.

However, TPV has a well-documented history of publishing misleading and inaccurate information. Multiple fact-checking organisations, including Black Dot Research, have repeatedly debunked their content.

Given the heightened focus on climate change in the media, particularly in light of the Pope’s emphasis on environmental concerns during his current Asia-Pacific tour, we decided to take a closer look at the validity of these claims.

 

What are human emissions?

Human emissions, also known as man-made fossil fuel emissions, refer to the production of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO₂) and methane through activities such as agriculture and the burning of fossil fuels for energy and transportation. These emissions have been widely recognised as major contributors to the greenhouse effect, which traps heat in the Earth’s atmosphere and leads to global warming.

Extensive research to date has consistently shown that human activities are the dominant cause of recent climate change, driving significant increases in global temperatures and altering weather patterns through rising levels of atmospheric CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.

However, the article cited by TPV discusses a recent study conducted by an independent researcher, Dai Ato, which challenges the prevailing consensus on climate change. Ato’s research suggests that sea surface temperatures (SST) play a far more significant role than anthropogenic (human-caused) factors in determining annual changes in atmospheric CO₂ levels.

According to the National Centres of Environmental Information in the US, the oceans are an important carbon sink and absorb roughly 30% of CO₂ emissions. In this vein, warmer SST  will impact the oceans’ ability to act as a carbon sink, as warmer water has a reduced capacity to dissolve gases, like CO₂.

Source: Office of Science

Ato’s study implies that the influence of natural oceanic processes on CO₂ levels may be greater than previously thought, potentially questioning the established link between human emissions and climate change. This raises questions about our current understanding of global warming and could have significant implications for strategies to mitigate it.

Analysing publicly available data from 1959 to 2022 from leading climate research and energy-related organisations worldwide, Ato’s study compares the impacts of SST and human emissions on atmospheric CO₂ concentrations.

Ato employed multiple linear regression, a statistical method used to assess how multiple factors (in this case, SST and human emissions) each contribute to changes in another factor (annual CO₂ increases) while holding the influence of other variables constant. His analysis revealed a strong correlation between higher SST and increased atmospheric CO₂ levels, while human CO₂ emissions appeared to have no significant impact on changes in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations.

The study concluded that SST are the primary driver of annual increases in atmospheric CO₂ concentrations, rather than human emissions, challenging the prevailing belief that human emissions are the main cause of rising CO₂ levels. According to Ato, this could imply that past efforts to reduce human CO₂ emissions have been ineffective in addressing global warming.

Digging deeper into the study

However, under further inspection, there’s a need to review Ato’s research and conclusions with caution. The study relies heavily on correlational analysis, which cannot prove causality—meaning the strong relationship between SST and CO₂ levels does not necessarily indicate that SST is the direct cause of atmospheric CO₂ increases.

Additionally, the study does not account for other important factors, such as volcanic activity or land-use changes, which could also influence CO₂ levels. The use of multiple linear regression, while valuable, can sometimes mask the complexities of real-world systems, especially if important variables are omitted or if the relationships between variables are more complex than the model assumes.

This selective approach may undermine the reliability of the findings, which stand in stark contrast to the broader scientific consensus that human activities significantly contribute to rising CO₂ levels.

Given the selective use of data and the methodological limitations of the study, it would be premature and potentially misleading to dismiss the impact of human emissions on climate change outright based on these findings.

Therefore, while a recent study claims to show that human emissions have no impact on climate change, the existing literature indicates that it is likely false to conclude that human emissions are entirely without effect on climate change.

Isolated scientific studies, particularly those that contradict the established scientific consensus, can impact public understanding and policy if not critically evaluated. These outlier studies often attract attention because they challenge prevailing views, but if their methodologies are flawed or data-selective, they can spread misinformation.

Furthermore, interest groups with specific agendas might use these studies to downplay important issues like climate change, and potentially damage trust in science and complicate decision-making. To avoid this, it’s important to carefully review outlier studies within the broader context of existing research to ensure accurate, evidence-based discussions and decisions.

Leave a Reply