Climate History

Historically, CO2 does not correlate well with the climate at all (despite what Al Gore tells you). Historically, CO2 does not correlate well with the climate, it has never CAUSED warming, the Earth had iceages and 10x our current CO2, and warm spells with far less. CO2 averaged over twice current levels for the last 3M years and never had a "tipping point". Most of the CO2/Temp rise was BEFORE Man started putting out significant amounts of CO2 (pre-1950s). ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2017-04-01

If you can't answer/address these points, then you're not up for a fact based discussion, and if you could, you'd win the Nobel prize:

• Historically, CO2 does not correlate well with the climate at all (despite what Al Gore tells you).
• Historically, CO2 never caused warming: warming causes the oceans to release CO2. This may magnify warming, but it has never caused it. Why not?
• If CO2 caused warming, then why did the earth have ice ages (or cool down) when we've had up to 20x today's CO2 levels? (8,000 ppm)
• CO2 has averaged over twice current levels for the last 3M years, and it's only gone up a 30% over the last 200 years.
• Most of the CO2 and Temperature rise in the last 200 years was from BEFORE 1950's (when Man started putting out significant amounts of CO2).
• We’ve gone up from 300-400 PPM in the last 200 years -- however, half of that happened before man contributed much to the CO2 cycle at all (beginning around 1950 when man first crossed the 1 gigaton/year level), and much of the rest was due to the Oceans releasing CO2.
• Whether more is being captured than lost (and how much) is still in continuous debate, We aren't sure if there are positive or negative feedbacks. All we know is that the IPCC climate models are broken (we've fallen off the bottom of projections, and they failed and their predictions): the debate is over how wrong they are.
• People get confused here. Why isn't CO2 causes warming proven? They think CO2 causing our warming is a fact. Well, CO2 does catch wavelengths of light, and that's "warming", so that part is known and is what most scientists are asked about ("Q: does CO2 cause warming? A: Yes"). But there are many other things at play that cause cooling. Some other factors are:
  • As the climate warms, we release more water vapor: which becomes clouds, which reflect light (albedo effect), resulting in cooling, and it causes more rain (which scrubs more CO2 out of the air)
  • CO2 stimulates more plants, which absorb more CO2 (especially algae's), which sequesters CO2
  • CO2 converts light to heat (in the upper atmosphere) -- but if it didn't, most would get down into the lower/denser atmosphere where it's captured by water vapor and the the ground anyways. Even the biggest alarmist admit that a doubling of CO2 is at MOST worth 1-3° of warming (not very much), and that's based on the flawed simplification that is the IPCC models.

Temp v CO2 (100-year)

           Main article: Climate/Climate History/Temp v CO2 (100-year)

Temp History When you look at the temperature record for the last 100 years, you discover that man's CO2 and Temperature are not correlated at all: Temperature continued its warming trend up until about 1945: right when man first put out 1Gt (Gigaton) of CO2. Instead of spiking up, as the models predicted, Temperatures started dropping. This cooling from the 1950s into the 1970s started the Global Cooling Scare and the threats of the next Ice Age. Then the Temperature started warming until about 2000, when the IPCC exploited the Global Warming theory for political gain Then the Temperature went flat (the Climate Pause), with a slight spike for an El Nino year. These trends all completely contradicts the IPCC Climate Models, which predict a smooth trend up, starting the 1950's and compounding each year (no pauses). So in the short term, CO2 and Climate do not map well at all. (Some will do derivatives and averages to make the data fit better: we call that distorting the facts).

Temp v CO2 (500M-year)

           Main article: Climate/Climate History/Temp v CO2 (500M-year)

If you look at the bigger picture (the 500 Million year temperature v CO2 record), you can see that CO2 and Temperature have absolutely no correlation. It's been cooler with more CO2 (though we are near an all time cool period) It's been much hotter with less CO2 (though we are near an all time low in CO2) There's a reason that some political organizations don't show you the 500M year data: and that's because it shows you something they don't want you to see: the truth. This all gets back to the fact that CO2 is one of the weakest of the greenhouse gasses, which is one of the weakest of the forcing factors on Climate.

Hockey Stick

           Main article: Hockey Stick

In 1998 by Michael E. Mann and some colleagues used various tricks to take out past warm periods and defraud the gullible into thinking this is the warmest period in recent history. You could put just about any data into his "algorithm" and it would come out looking like a hockey stick. Since it made it appear like the Earth was getting lots warmer than at any time in the past (and reaching a "tipping point"), propagandists like the IPCC and Al Gore used this to scare-monger around 2000. It was thoroughly debunked by many folks (including real Scientist Tim Ball). Michael Mann sued Ball for defamation (the crime of telling the truth). But even in the hyper-liberal courts of Canada, Mann lost and had to pay court fees, because he wouldn't show his data like he was a real scientist. Even the far left and completely partisan IPCC pulled Mann's Hockey-stick from subsequent reports, because it made them look bad. Some FakeNews / Fake Fact Checkers try to pretend it's still good science. But nobody that puts science above leftist politics will agree. Parts of the fraud Different Measurements - One of the many flaws of Mann is they shifted between direct measurements and different temperature proxies, then put in their own fudge factors. Temperature proxies like icecores or tree rings, do a low pass filtering and averaging function (de-noising), which takes out spikes and anomolies. And the authors of both studies (tree rings and ice cores) warned NOT to use them to predict actual temps, exactly as Mann did. If you think different proxies might have different artifacts, then you're smarter than Mann and/or his defenders. Tree Ring Proxies - They idiotically overweighted tree ring data to mislead people. And not all tree ring data, but one in particular (Bristlecone pines), despite the author of the tree-ring research warning specifically that this was more indicative of precipitation than climate and NOT to use it as a Climate Proxy which is exactly what Mann did. The Mann Hockeystick smoothed out the the historical climate spikes and valleys, by mixing in historical droughts. But people that never read deeper than the headlines, don't realize how bad that piece of "science" was. IPCC stopped using it - The IPPC dropped using Mann in their reports because it was too bad of science, even for them. And that says a lot. Steven Goddard showed they doctored the data - This was has never been convincingly refuted... they just did new versions so that only the old version were "debunked"... yet they used the same doctored data.

NOOA Temp Fraud

           Main article: NOOA Temp Fraud

Mann and his faked Hockey Stick, is not the only group caught altering the historical record. NOOA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) was taken over by far left anti-Science polemics, and since they control some of the surface temperature measurements for the Country (and thus influences the world's records), and they got caught altering that record for political purposes. They wiped out the historical record of the hottest years being in the 1930s (not today), whether by accident or incompetence doesn't change the outcome. Of course Snopes got involved, didn't bother to contact the author of the refutation, then misrepresented the facts. Remember, they are the FakeNews site that Google and Facebook use as a prime source they use to filter stories: to decide what is a trusted source or change their search rankings. Nope to Snopes Snopes debunked Tony Heller of Real Climate Science debunked Snopes and explained his information on NOOA. Snopes claims that the Temperature record was altered but makes the following claims: "The largest adjustments are the time of observation debiasing" "The net of all five adjustments to the … record is a warming of about 0.3ºC" (about 0.5°F) This only "slightly increased warming trend" The facts? The ToO (Time of Observation) was a small fraction of the total change (and was often in the other direction) The total adjustment was about 1.5°F, not 0.5° as they claim This reversed a slight cooling trend into a significant warming one, completely flipping the conclusion and media buzz. Snopes got it all wrong. And the complaints against a "Science" organization altering experiments (Measurements) to make it fit better with their theory, do it silently, without showing their work, and getting caught by others, is a major issue for REAL Scientists, just not the polemics at NOOA or Snopes.

---

🔗 More

Climate The Climate is always change, the debate is over the cause and consequences. Where there's no debate, there's no science.

Climate The Climate is always change, the debate is over the cause and consequences. Where there's no debate, there's no science.

Tags: Climate Slides  Climate/tab