
Physicist Darwin Throne’s Hoax! Why Burning Fossil Fuels Doesn’t Cause Climate Change summarizes recent developments in climate science, including satellite data from NASA’s CERES program since 2000, and presents a new thermodynamic climate paradigm that aligns with reality—unlike the theories and models promoted by the UN’s IPCC.
There are countless books about climate, most claiming that burning carbon-based fuels like coal, oil, and gas—and the resulting rise in CO2, a vital plant nutrient—will drive changes in global temperature and climate.
This “greenhouse gas theory” is the focus of books such as Professor Koonin’s Unsettled. However, Koonin argues that trying to reduce CO2 is futile and that we should focus on adapting to climate change instead.
But what if the very hypothesis that CO2 drives climate is not just wrong, but a “hoax”, or bluff, as physicist Darwin Throne claims in his new book Hoax!?
The book begins by examining the greenhouse theory, highlighting errors and weaknesses that stretch back to its origins with Svante Arrhenius in 1896. Throne traces these flaws through to the work of 2021 Physics Nobel laureates Manabe and Wetherald, whose models, he argues, continued Arrhenius’s mistakes—errors also pointed out by Dr. Roy Clark (at SCC).
Unsurprisingly, the UN’s IPCC receives significant scrutiny. Its work is based on the greenhouse effect, where heat radiation from greenhouse gases is said to drive global warming—a concept called “radiative forcing.” Throne argues that this violates the laws of thermodynamics. Nobel laureate John Clauser even calls the greenhouse theory “pseudoscience.”
The book makes a clear case that CO2 does not control the climate, a position also echoed by leading atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen, even though Lindzen otherwise supports the greenhouse theory.
When it comes to climate predictions, many scientists hedge their bets, suggesting that various consequences of assumed man-made global warming could trigger extreme weather and climate changes.
Throne documents that these claims are largely unsupported—something even the IPCC acknowledges in AR6 WG1, Chapter 12, where most extreme future weather changes are rated with “low confidence.”
Despite this uncertainty, politicians and the press continue to hype alarming climate scenarios. More realistic information, Throne notes, can be found from organizations such as CFACT, CO2coalition, and Clintel.
One important chapter highlights the work of Dr. Nikolov and Dr. Zeller, who show that the IPCC has misrepresented satellite measurements (CERES) since 2000 in a way that obscures their significance. The change in solar radiation reflected by clouds is presented in reverse, inflating the values of a decreasing anomaly.
In reality, reflection (albedo) has decreased, allowing more sunlight to reach the Earth’s surface as absorbed solar radiation (ASR). Throne argues that this increase in ASR can explain all warming since 2000—and possibly the last 45 years, according to other researchers like Nelson & Nelson.
Throne also reviews alternative explanations for global temperature. In chapters 3 and 4, he discusses the Ideal Gas Law (PV = nRT), showing that increased atmospheric pressure raises air temperature when volume is constant. This principle helps explain phenomena like the Foehn wind, where air descending into valleys from mountains heats up.
Higher pressure leads to more frequent molecular collisions, increasing temperature—a kinetic process that plays a major role in global circulation systems such as the Hadley cells.
Professor Holmes has shown that the temperatures of all planets with atmospheric pressure above 0.69 kPa (0.0068 atm) can be explained using the molar-mass version of the gas law (T = PM/Rρ) combined with the planet’s solar irradiance—completely without invoking the greenhouse effect.
Holmes notes, however, that temperature changes (anomalies) are not accounted for by the gas law and that albedo is underestimated in this framework.
One error in the book appears on page 109, where albedo is incorrectly defined. Full reflection (100% albedo) should have a value of 1, not 0, while zero reflection is correctly 0. Throne acknowledges the mistake and apologizes for the oversight.
Hoax! challenges the IPCC’s claim that Earth’s 15°C average temperature results from a 33°C greenhouse effect. Throne points out two major errors: first, the Earth is round, not a flat disk; second, comparisons must be made with the Moon, which has no atmosphere. Accounting for these factors, the actual atmospheric effect could be as high as 90°C.
Researchers Dr. Nikolov and Dr. Zeller have conducted extensive analyses that refute the greenhouse theory, instead proposing a thermodynamic climate paradigm in which albedo, atmospheric pressure, and solar radiation are key to accurately calculating global temperature.
Chapter 7, which covers Dr. Nikolov and Dr. Zeller’s (N&Z) new thermodynamic climate paradigm, is the most important part of the book.
Here, they thoroughly review how they applied dimensional and regression analysis to published official data from sources like NASA on celestial bodies with atmospheres. The result is a three-part mathematical equation accounting for 1) the Sun’s influence, 2) atmospheric pressure, and 3) albedo (reflection).
Greenhouse gases on the planets were included in the analyses, but the best results came without them, meaning any effect is so small it is irrelevant. The N&Z model matches 100% of global warming since 2000 and 83% of annual temperature changes, leaving no need for any “greenhouse theory.”
According to Throne, the recent rise in global temperature is primarily due to less cloud cover and more sunlight reaching Earth (ASR), a finding confirmed by NASA CERES satellite measurements. As the book concludes: “There is no global climate change due to the burning of fossil fuels!”
The book also briefly considers possible causes of changes in cloud cover, though no good explanation exists to date. It discusses the theories of Danish scientist Dr. Henrik Svensmark, who links cloud variations to cosmic radiation and solar wind.
Hoax! exposes errors in the “greenhouse theory” and offers an alternative, logical, and scientifically sound explanation for global temperature in a fairly straightforward way—though some background in physics helps. We cannot control global temperature or climate change; we can only adapt with better infrastructure, as Professor Koonin recommends in his book Unsettled.
“Hoax!” is available on Amazon as both an e-book and a 187-page paperback. The e-book costs $9.95 and is immediately available on PC or tablet. Highly recommended—well worth the ten bucks.

















There has never been anything that demonstrates the existence or even the possibility of a radiative greenhouse effect in a greenhouse. How could anyone believe there could be such an effect in the open atmosphere?
Well, according to the esteemed (in his mind) Richard Greene 99.9% of “scientists” (don’t know who they are though) are certain that there are greenhouse gases.
99.9% of scientists have said there is a greenhouse effect since the late 1800s.
In my 28 years of climate science reading, I have only discovered one scientist who denied the greenhouse effect.
Greenhouse effect is downwelling infrared radiation and it is measured every day of the year.
CERES does not say what the Hoax author says it does.
Norman Loeb has described an “unprecedented” increase in Earth’s energy imbalance, the difference between the energy absorbed from the sun and the energy radiated back to space. In a 2021 study, he noted that this heating has doubled over the past 15 years.
Norman Loeb:
Title: Senior Technologist for Radiation Sciences
Technical Focus Area: Climate Science
Mission/Project: CERES
Study Topics: Earth Radiation Budget, Climate Variability, Clouds, Climate Model Evaluation, Aerosol Radiative Forcing
A much better article:
5 forecasts early climate models got right – the evidence is all around you
https://theconversation.com/5-forecasts-early-climate-models-got-right-the-evidence-is-all-around-you-263248
https://theconversation.com/5-forecasts-early-climate-models-got-right-the-evidence-is-all-around-you-263248
How long did it take you to read it, cover to cover? I’m not a ‘speed’ reader.
Gee, that book contains much of what I’ve been stating for a very long time…
https://www.patriotaction.us/showthread.php?tid=2711
… to Ritard Greene’s strident but futile and oh-so-hilarious protestations, because he wishes he was smart enough to even slightly grasp any of this, rather than his usual shilling for the AGW narrative, and his carrying out of his published vow to attack conservatives.
Of course, Ritard Greene hasn’t read the book… and even if he had, he wouldn’t be able to understand the physics. His entire goal is to cosplay as a conservative while shilling for AGW in hopes of incrementalizing legitimate climate realists over to warmism, in further hopes of further incrementalizing them over to leftism. That’s why Ritard Greene attacks conservatives, and leaps to the defense of leftists… one must look at a leftist warmist’s actions, not their words… because leftist warmists lie. It’s what he does. LOL