International Journal of Environment and Climate Change

Human activities releasing greenhouse gases are identified as dominant contributors to the observed climate change including global warming and its acceleration. The consequences for humanity are predicted to be severe. Therefore, to mitigate global warming, significant efforts are being devoted to reducing CO₂ emissions and stabilizing (or even reducing) atmospheric CO₂ concentration. This enormous endeavor of ‘decarbonization’ comes with substantial costs, running into trillions of USD in Western countries alone.

Fundamentally, the entirety of endeavors, actions, and outcomes hinges upon the central hypothesis stating that the increase of CO₂ concentration from approximately 0.03% to more than 0.04% causes a noticeable temperature rise. Given the paramount significance of this hypothesis, the generally accepted rules of science would necessitate rigorous scrutiny for substantiation. Such substantiation is typically provided by an experimental evidence.

Yet, surprisingly according to the results of this research, exactly this essential experimental evidence supporting the central hypothesis seems to be lacking, not fully adhering to fundamental principles of scientific analysis. Consequently, robust experimental evidence must be presented to substantiate the hypothesis, as the failure to do so would necessitate a reassessment of the emphasis on CO₂ emissions reduction as the primary solution to climate change.