It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Seems to lack a vertical scale, I don't suppose you have access to the dataset used? Any idea what that 58.69º is supposed to represent?
Look at the plot of time temperature
So that means that the huge increase in CO2 concentrations due to the combustion of fossil fuels has no effect? Physics would seem to indicate otherwise.
Warm and cold periods were present long before the industrial revolution.
Yes. It has done so. Probably mostly because warmer seas release dissolved CO2 into the atmosphere. Two problems with trying to apply that notion to the current situation; CO2 levels are higher than any natural fluctuations over more than a million years, and instead of releasing carbon the oceans are absorbing it because the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased so much.
CO2 seems to trail warm periods.
And yet, CO2 levels rise, the global average temperature continues to rise, sea level rises, and ocean pH falls. But never mind any of that.
The good news is that the earth is "greening" according to NASA satellite data
Sure you could look at ice cores however personally i don't trust the chronology.
And what's wrong with that, exactly?
Once you get passed annual layers you have to depend on radiometric dating which to my understanding really depends on the isotopes half-life.
The simplest, most compelling evidence demonstrating that Scholander accurately foresaw the utility of ice as a bottle for old air is provided empirically. For the key atmospheric trace gases, such as CO 2 ,CH 4 and N 2 O, and for tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years we now have multiple records generated by different laboratories on different continents using cores from sites with different accumulation rates, temperatures and impurity loadings, often stored, handled and analyzed in different ways, yet yielding the same history within the combined analytical and dating uncertainties (e.g. see Jansen and others 2007, especially figure 6.4; Ahn and Brook, 2008). Furthermore, this record overlaps with the instrumental measurements of the free atmosphere, again with beautiful agreement (Neftel and others, 1985; Pearman and others, 1986). There is no plausible way that this agreement could be produced if there are significant problems with the entrapment, storage, recovery or reading of the atmospheric signal in the ice.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Phage
CO2 levels are higher than any natural fluctuations over more than a million years
So why not look at CO2 levels over the last billion years.
Why would that be relevant?