Climate alarmists always like to claim that there is a link between CO2 and global warming because of the apparent coincidence of corresponding trends, never mind that even the CRU’s Phil Jones admitted that CO2 production lagged the warmth by 800 years.
But what else is there that has a similar corresponding pathway? Population.
Here’s global warming…..
And here’s population growth…..
Very similar trajectories and time scales……when the West’s population was falling the third world’s was booming and they all needed heating and fires to cook on [using coal or wood from forests cleared to also provide more agricultural land to feed the multitude] never mind their own use of vehicles and industrialisation…ala China.
Just as viable to blame the third world and developing nations for global warming as the West….but that wouldn’t fit the Left’s agenda of stripping industry from the West and robbing the West of its wealth to hand out to the third world.
Amused to see the Catholic Church wanting birth control and a say in the science of climate.…why oh why isn’t Harrabin sneering at the Pope as he did to a Republican climate sceptic who also happened to be a believing Christian who didn’t accept the theory of evolution….presumably something the Pope must also be somewhat sceptical about?
“Climate alarmists always like to claim that there is a link between CO2 and global warming”
Surely atmospheric trace-gas CO2 doesn’t avoid central England?
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0168e57ca107970c-pi
Its worse than that. This should show how much scientific censorship is needed to construct this fraud.
A Random correlation is 25 percent: The Hale magnetic Cycle from 1976 to 1996 was the shortest cycle since the 18th Century. Two years shorter than average. This caused the warming. See the work by scientists Henrik Svensmark, David Archibald, Ed Fix, Carlo Tosti, Nicola Scafetta, Paul Vaughan, Tim Channon, Rick Salvador, Ian Wilson and Piers Corbyn.
The 800 years correlation with carbon dioxide levels rising, was caused by the Medieval Warm period. A wave of warm water falls due to gravity in the deep Ocean which is separate from the convection currents in the upper Ocean. This wave travels down in the same way as it does in boor hole data, and eventually travels through the solid sea bed. Then the Oceans will get cooler and the carbon dioxide levels in the Atmosphere will fall, but I could not guess if this will happen within the next 100 years, or after this time.
Man-made carbon dioxide cannot be more than 5 percent of the current Atmospheric levels, that is 20 parts per million, proving that at least 80 parts per million of the increase was caused by the Medieval warm period. Also you should look at the evidence that shows that the carbon dioxide levels fell from 540ppm in 1822 to 300ppm in 1882.
Click to access analyse-dioxyde.pdf
This proves Jaworowski, that the IPCC graph is fraudulent. This is because over the first 80 years that Ice Cores are formed CO2 is absorbed by cold water. This means that from 1810 to 1930 we have both Ice core and direct measurements of CO2 in the Atmosphere. This shows that ice cores have CO2 levels about 40 percent lower than the original atmosphere. Also man-made carbon dioxide emissions are diluted by the Oceans, so that only two percent of emissions stay in the Atmosphere. So even the carbon dioxide levels before 1960, have undergone a Hockey Stick fraud.
“…a Republican climate sceptic who also happened to be a believing Christian who didn’t accept the theory of evolution….presumably something the Pope must also be somewhat sceptical about?”
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2014/10/31/pope-franciss-comments-on-the-big-bang-are-not-revolutionary-catholic-teaching-has-long-professed-the-likelihood-of-human-evolution/
Yet again, Alan brings religion into an otherwise interesting debate on climate change. The Vatican accepts evolutionary theory as fact along with Big Bang theory. Anyone who refuses to accept evolution as a viable theory does not warrant any amount of respectable airtime.
In that respect, I declare NO BIAS HERE folks – move on…
Maybe… start a petition?
I believe it was Harrabin who brought religion into the mix in order to smear a sceptic….which is pretty funny when you think about it, Harrabin relying mostly on faith alone to make his reports about climate change rather than scientific evidence.
Not unusual that you avoid the very clear statement that the Church believes in Creation….which is what Harrabin defines as a sign of mental instability. The Pope clearly believes in Creation…as well as a mysterious omnipresent, all-powerful father figure who lives in the sky…..? Rational, scientific, worthy of ‘respectable airtime’? The BBC respectable airtime? LOL.
How did you miss this from your chosen ‘proof’?..
‘It must be pointed out – the Pope’s declaration on either theory has not broken with established Catholic belief in the slightest.’
or this….
“evolution of nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation because evolution pre-supposes the creation of beings which evolve.”
or this?…
‘The implicit suggestion that Pope Francis has somehow brought about a radical change in the Vatican worldview is a misleading one. ‘
Misleading? You Edward? Never!
Bias? Oh yes. Lots of.
According to Dr Patrick Moore, one of the leading authorities in the world on the issues surrounding climate change, tells us that without any doubt that CO2 is the building block for all life on earth, and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our publics are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees. Dangerous human-caused propaganda & went onto state that human emissions of CO2 have already saved life on our planet from a very untimely end. That in the absence of our emitting some of the carbon back into the atmosphere from whence it came in the first place, most or perhaps all life on Earth would begin to die in less than two million years from today. Apparantly CO2 was higher for the first 4 billion years of Earth’s history than it has been since the Cambrian Period until today and it has been shown that temperature and CO2 are in an inverse correlation at least as often as they are in any semblance of correlation. Two clear examples of reverse correlation occurred 150 million years and 50 million years ago. At the end of the Jurassic, temperature fell dramatically while CO2 spiked. During the Eocene Thermal Maximum, temperature was likely higher than any time in the past 550 million years while CO2 had been on a downward track for 100 million years. This evidence alone is sufficient to warrant deep speculation of any claimed lock-step causal relationship between CO2 and temperature. Life could come close to exstinguishing itself due to a shortage of CO2 which is essential for life on earth. Climate alarmists persist in insisting that CO2 is causing the change in temperature, despite the illogical nature of that assertion. As Dr Moore says- All life is carbon-based, including our own. Surely the carbon cycle and its central role in the creation of life should be taught to our children rather than the demonization of CO2, that “carbon” is a “pollutant” that threatens the continuation of life. We know for a fact that CO2 is essential for life and that it must be at a certain level in the atmosphere for the survival of plants, which are the primary food for all the other species alive today. Should we not encourage our citizens, students, teachers, politicians, scientists, and other leaders to celebrate CO2 as the giver of life that it is?
A question for a possibly learned mathematician / scientist on here.
If you, say, increased the scale division representation on the left by 10% and reduced those on the right by 10% presumably the “correlation” depicted would be somewhat “altered”.
Just who decides on the relative scales used on each side when publishing such graphs.
The suspicion must be those trying top prove a point!