To realise that the trace gas CO2 simply cannot be the main driver of climate change, all you need to do is take a look at physics. A new study uses sober figures to show why the net-zero climate fanatics are so fundamentally wrong.
Source: Report24.news, Heinz Steiner, 25 October 2025
For decades, politicians, climate fanatics and TV researchers have been telling us that the climate depends on CO2. A trace gas that makes up just 0.04 per cent of the atmosphere is suddenly supposed to heat up the entire earth, boil the oceans and disrupt the weather. A myth that only persists because billions in funding and entire political careers depend on it. However, a new study published by physicist Ad Huijser in Science of Climate Change entitled “Global Warming and the “impossible” Radiation Imbalance” shatters all the climate dogmas about carbon dioxide – with cool physics and uncomfortable figures.Huijser shows that it is simply impossible for CO2 to be the main driver of global warming. The alleged heating of the planet takes place almost entirely in the oceans anyway – 93 per cent of the observed increase in energy is in the water, not in the air or the land surface(see also our report here). The “global warming” that is presented hysterically in the weather reports is therefore essentially an ocean phenomenon. And it is precisely there that it becomes clear that the temperature trends do not follow the linear rise in CO2 in any form, but instead jump abruptly – sometimes up, sometimes down, sometimes not at all.
Between 1963 and 1970, for example, the system cooled noticeably, between 1970 and 1980 it warmed considerably, after which it was almost perfectly balanced. The oceans are therefore not reacting to the constantly rising CO2 level, but to natural fluctuations in the radiation balance. Huijser calls them by name: Changes in solar radiation caused by cloud cover and aerosol levels. More sun, fewer clouds – more energy. Less sun, more clouds – cooling. No witchcraft, no “tipping point”, but simple thermodynamics.
A few extra molecules of CO2 in the atmosphere cannot trigger sudden warm and cold phases. The real engine lies in the cloud and radiation dynamics, not in the additional carbon dioxide. And this is exactly what Huijser’s analysis of the satellite data since 2000 and the ocean measurements from the ARGO programme since 2004 shows: the Earth warms up when it receives more solar radiation – full stop.
Around three quarters of the increase in ocean heat since the 1950s is therefore natural. The remaining quarter could be generously attributed to greenhouse gases – if you want. But even that is uncertain. This is because cleaner air also means fewer aerosols and therefore less cloud formation. The often-cited climate models on which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies massively exaggerate the effect of CO2 and systematically ignore natural influences. They act as if the sun is a static background factor – which it is not.
The Earth fluctuates strongly in terms of energy – sometimes positive, sometimes negative radiation balance. The so-called anthropogenic forcing by CO2, on the other hand, is increasing at an almost constant rate. The two simply do not go together. If the energy fluxes change so abruptly, they cannot be triggered by a trace gas that is increasing evenly. But instead of taking note of these facts, climate institutes and the media cling to their narrative like drowning people to a lifebuoy. The interests are too big, the political investment in the myth of “man-made climate change” too deep. Entire branches of business now thrive on this story – from CO2 certificate trading to the zombie company subsidy bubble of “renewable energies”.
Huijser draws the logical conclusion from this: if most of the warming is due to natural processes, the climate sensitivity – i.e. the temperature change per doubling of CO2 – is also far lower than claimed. This means: no catastrophe, no tipping points, no apocalypse. Just a slightly fluctuating climate system that reacts to solar cycles, cloud formation and aerosol changes – as has been normal for tens of millions of years. Huijser sums it up soberly: “The natural fluctuations in solar radiation explain the warming far better than any CO2 model. The rest is propaganda.
