Vostock, Younger Dryas, Epica & Climate Nonsense
Most of you reading this enjoy science and I’m sure you’ll appreciate the link following. For a most erudite and eclectic source of science I suggest you go to You Tube – Professor Jim Al-Kahlili and enjoy his many fascinating presentations.
A recent program was titled ‘Everything’ and two sets of numbers were presented. The 1st was the age of ‘creation’ being the ‘Big Bang’ theory calculated at ~13.7bya and so earth started relatively quickly after that event, ~4.57bya. The 2nd was that astrophysicists calculate that the universe has billions of galaxies each containing trillions of stars. A Google number on steroids.
The preamble above is as such. It may be calculated that the number of words spoken re CAGW (Climate Anthropogenic Global Warming) is equal to the Google number above with well over 50{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} being pure nonsense or outright lies.
The three graphs below are hard paleoclimate facts. Their quality is within the 1st or 2nd percentiles. They are not computer climate models and those programmers either don’t know or ignore Lorenz’s ‘Chaos Theory’ or fractal science. The last count by Christy/Spencer was 31 of 32 – wrong!
There are 3 graphs below: Vostock ice cores re the last 400,000 years of the Pleistocene Epoch, Epica Ice Dome cores re the Holocene era and the Younger Dryas pollen proxies (Greenland) showing the very tail end of the Pleistocene and the entirety of the Holocene. These tell a tale that completely destroys the correlation/causation AGW theory.
Of course the Alarmists will absolutely dispute the information probably stating that this represents only the polar regions and not the entire world record. But then again their benchmark for atmospheric C02 is derived almost entirely from the Mauna Loa records, one location on earth.
In response both temperature and gases are circulated from Hadley and Ferrel convection cells and thus affect the Polar regions and it is the C02 content, the ‘Control Knob’ to be observed/understood below.
The entire Alarmist argument is based solely on the ratio of atmospheric C02 to atmospheric temperatures. An ‘X’ increase (or decrease, never mentioned) of C02 will create a ‘Y’ quantity of temperature. The AGW observations extend from the Industrial Age, about 1850 to the present.
The C02 rise was ~120ppm and the temperature rise was ~1°C (~ means approximately). Computer models and all future warming predictions run with that ratio. Let’s say 100ppm = 1°C for talking purposes. Next, the graphs. Vostock, top left, Younger Dryas, top right and Epica, bottom. Source accreditations are included.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
Peter Daley
| #
There is a mass of evidence against CO2 being the cause of climate change but has been suppressed by governments misled or with another agenda.
Reply
Charles Higley
| #
Unfortunately the CO2 line in the botton graph los a lot like our good friend the Hockeystick Graph by Mann..
Knowing that CO2 has been much higher than now during three times in the last 200 years (Ernst Beck’s work), and that it is known that ice cores are traumatized with microfractures during extraction from depth (Jaworowski’s work), more work needs to be done here. The latter has state that ice core samples one 30–50% of their CO2 during retrieval. If you back calculate 40% into the data, you get CO2 ppm values equal to higher than now. We a NOT on the blade of the hockey stick, but down on the handle, which should be drawn at a higher altitude on the graph, as more like 400+ ppm.
Of course, both Beck’s and Jaworowski’s work have been ignored by the AGW crowd, who like to assume that ice core CO2 data are empirical measurements of CO2 in ancient atmospheres. Wow.
They even discount Jaworowski’s observations by saying that coring methods have improved since then. However, there is no indication that they have gone back and redone the ice coring and measurements. Dollars to doughnuts, they are still using the old data as it suits their purposes.
Reply
Alan Stewart
| #
Charles,
Somehow the bottom half of this wasn’t posted. I specifically mention the 500 year old Hokey Shtick. [email protected] I’ll forward the post in it’s entirety if interested.
Cheers
Reply
Brian
| #
Nov 28, 2016 Weather is NOT Climate!
No, weather is NOT climate…even when it’s warm outside. But in case there’s a climate cultist in your life that insists otherwise, here are some facts about global warming and vaguely-defined “extreme” weather that you can use to talk some sense into them.
https://youtu.be/sT4133vfTmk
Reply