Climate Fakes: Why the Montreal Protocol will never close the ozone hole

By Dora Werner

A few years ago, Dr. Steven Koonin, who served as a senior scientist at the US Department of Energy under Barack Obama’s administration, made a sensational claim that the public is being misled about what science is actually saying about the current climate change. Key facts are missing from media coverage and even summaries for decision-makers, he announced.

What facts are you talking about? According to Koonin, the authoritative assessments of the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the key scientific body that should be devoted to global climate research, do not provide any scientific basis for the widespread notion that climate change will lead to a global catastrophe.

In his book Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, And Why It Matters, Koonin writes:

“Both the scholarly literature and government reports reflecting the state of the Summarizing and evaluating climate science make it clear that US heat waves are no more common today than they were in 1900 and that US maximum temperatures have not increased in the past 50 years.
…
Humans have had no discernible impact on hurricanes over the last century, the Greenland ice sheet is shrinking no faster than it was eighty years ago, and the economic impacts of human-caused climate change will be minimal for at least the remainder of this century.”

In an interview with Jonathan Tennenbaum, the newspaper’s science editor AsiaTimes, Koonin said in 2021: The rate of warming from 1910 to 1940 was about the same as from 1980 to 2000 – with much less human impact in the early 20th century. That means the climate system has internal rules, the scientist said, adding:

“We know simple phenomena. We know, for example, the so-called El Niño, which occurs about every five years, and we kind of understand the phenomenon. But there are clearly longer-term and longer-lasting phenomena, like the Atlantic Decadal Oscillation, the North Atlantic Oscillation , the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, etc. They are certainly present in the observed temperature record, but they are difficult to calculate.

When creating a climate model, the question arises as to whether these phenomena are taken into account at the correct strength, time and frequency. If not, there is no reason to expect this model to reflect real temperatures in this area.”

None of the climate models now being used by proponents of green energy and any climate action are accurate – and therefore should not be the basis for policy decisions, Tennenbaum concluded after speaking with the former US Department of Energy scientist.

It may not – but it still serves as a basis for political decisions that have a negative impact on hundreds of countries and plunge millions of people into a crisis. How could that happen?

It all started more than 30 years ago with a hypothesis by North American chemists Mario Molina from Mexico and Sherwood Rowland from the USA, who claimed that the fluorocarbons (Freon) used to manufacture devices contribute to the destruction of the Earth’s ozone layer. For this they received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1995 together with the Dutch atmospheric chemist Paul J. Crutzen.

Again: This was and is only a hypothesis. Both the causes of climate change and the question of whether and – if so – how it can be corrected are still hypotheses that have never been scientifically confirmed, stresses scientist Igor Masurin in his contribution to the news agency REGNUM. “There is still no experimental confirmation of this hypothesis – but reliable refutation in the form of a record-breaking ozone hole over Antarctica and a similar hole over the Arctic,” he says, adding:

“In addition, for almost 30 years it has been assumed that the main culprit for global warming lies in the anthropogenic, i.e. man-made, emissions of greenhouse gases. In the temperature calculations of the climate scientists, however, other natural sources of thermal energy are not taken into account. In their calculation models, the Climatologists describe the Earth as a rocky asteroid with no energy sources of its own, despite the fact that geologists and seismologists have claimed the opposite for 40 years, according to which the Earth is not a fossilized asteroid but a multi-layered planet with high-density solid and liquid phases in its interior . It constantly emits greenhouse and combustible gases into the atmosphere at levels far in excess of those produced by humans.”

Since Soviet times, research has been carried out in Russia that proves that man is not to blame for climate change. No one paid serious attention to these studies since the energy departments were headed by liberal-minded US university graduates, but it was now more important to “voluntarily” join the Montreal and Kyoto Protocols, also because integration with the West required it.

However, independent research continued. For example, in recent years it has been found that the size of the ozone hole is related to the tectonic processes of the Earth. Simply put: In years with many earthquakes in the Arctic and Antarctic, the ozone hole increases many times over; in years with fewer than five earthquakes it “shrinks”. Alexei Yuryevich Reteyum, professor of geography at Lomonosov Moscow State University (MGU), explains in an article for the agency REGNUM:

“An objective analysis of the geospheres within Antarctica shows that large atmospheric ozone anomalies are evolving in concert with a pulsatile mode of planetary function. The phase of their frequent occurrence coincides with a period of global tectonic activation.”

Therefore, there would be no chance that measures to comply with the Montreal Protocol would make any difference – no matter how hard humanity tries.

As with the Freon hypothesis on ozone depletion, bans and restrictions on emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are also unfounded, explains scientist Igor Mikhailovich Masurin of the National Research University Moscow Energetic Institute (NIU MEI):

“The water vapour, which is mainly responsible for the greenhouse effect, is deliberately forgotten, although it accounts for at least 78 percent of this effect. Otherwise, the European nuclear power plants would have to pay fines for the release of water vapor from their cooling basins. Carbon dioxide as the cause of global warming was almost ideal, and it was ‘assigned’ a lifespan of 100 to 1000 years.”

According to the scientist, the results of heat and mass exchange processes, which have been the basis of political decisions for decades, cannot be reliable as they are only hypotheses relating to an open thermodynamic system, namely the earth. The inaccuracy of such calculations is 200 to 400 percent and can in no way be accepted as “absolute truth”.

But there is still a “little thing”, as both the American Koonin and the Russian scientists found out: The results of the projections for the climate models are calculated by the UN Committee on Climate Change (IPCC) in its reports in the form of several Scenarios, or more precisely versions, are presented. “However, in the brief summaries of the IPCC reports, policymakers are presented with the most unlikely scenarios of climate change as an inevitable and virtually unstoppable global threat,” says Igor Masurin. He believes that the IPCC, along with the political sponsors of these panic-inducing summaries, should bear full responsibility – including criminal penalties – for this “blatant misinformation of the world community” “because the fantasies of these climate scientists are causing very real economic damage.”

The introduction of bans in the name of supposedly “green energy” is more about a new redistribution of national markets, believes Igor Masurin. In a post for REGNUM he emphasizes:

“Without the scientific falsifications of the 1980s and 1990s, on the basis of which the Montreal and Kyoto Protocols were adopted, such a development would simply not have been possible. Such a massive distortion of the scientific picture of natural phenomena was made possible by the monopoly of the International Committee on Climate Change of the United Nations on the methods for calculating the heat and mass balances in the earth’s atmosphere, on which the projections of climate change are based.The IPCC is not responsible for the validity of the underlying physical models, by the way, because it allegedly does not carry out its own research, but in only summarizes publications from peer-reviewed scientific journals in its reports.”

The commitments of countries around the world under international climate agreements are therefore based on hypotheses and deliberate scientific falsifications. That’s why it’s time to check them out and not hold on to them desperately. Professor Igor Masurin sums it up:

“The world must rid itself of the ‘green’ obsession, recognize all international climate agreements as legally void under Article 48 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on International Treaties, as the US did with its withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol, and finally deal with the actual environmental problems.”

More on the subject – Ozone hole over Antarctica reaches maximum extent