I found these this morning and thought they’d make an outstanding reference if they were simply co-located and in order. Be sure to read my final comment after the six images…
Did you read the multiple notices disclaiming they only used the Vostok ice-core data from East Antarctica prior to 1958 and they only used data from Mauna Loa, Hawaii, afterwards?
THERE’S A PROBLEM WITH THAT!
Please watch the video below to discover why there’s a problem with that, keeping in mind, this video was put out by those who fully support the idea of anthropogenic global warming:
When the video begins, on January 1, 2006, the levels of CO2 are near their lowest levels of winter subsidence. There’s almost no areas of red at all, which indicates levels of around 384 ppm and higher. What you do see is concentrated along fronts, where air from both populated areas as well as fires can concentrate. The red is spotty, and light. Mauna Loa is located in the Pacific Ocean, along the same longitude as the middle of Alasks and the latitude as the Yucatan Peninsula. Keep that area in view as the video progresses. Keep Antarctica in view, as well.
Speaking of fires, a great many people throughout North America, Europe, Russia and Asia use wood to heat their homes during the winter months. Their use pales, however, compared to forest fires, which rage for weeks and burn far more woody material in a week than is burned by residents in the surrounding areas of heat their homes all winter. Fires are also used for cooking.
By March, the light and spotty traces have bloomed into raging red, and you can spot a few pinpoint sources, like those from heavily populated areas in California, as well as the raging inferno that is Asia.
However, the red is absent along the southern half of South America, Africa, and most of Australia! It’s also absent from Antarctica, the source of the pre-1958 Vostok ice core data. Hmm…
By late June, when the temperature in the Northern Hemisphere has warmed up enough to preclude the use of fires for heating, CO2 levels have again subsided.
By July and August, during the coldest months for the Southern Hemisphere, we begin to see carbon monoxide levels increase. CO is often associated with inefficient combustion (not enough oxygen) of forest fires, and the narrator even admits it. I strongly suspect we’d see the same in the Northern Hemisphere, if only so many people didn’t live there…
“Demographics. The Northern Hemisphere is home to approximately 6.57 billion people which is around 90% of the earth’s total human population of 7.3 billion people. “
“90% Of People Live In The Northern Hemisphere – Business Insider”. Business Insider. 4 May 2012. Retrieved 10 November 2015.
“GIC – Article”. galegroup.com. Retrieved 10 November 2015.
NINETY PERCENT. 9 out of 10. No WONDER the Northern Hemisphere is painted red while Southern Hemisphere is relatively clear…
But wait… What about Mauna Loa, where CO2 data has been monitored since 1958? As it turns out, it’s a really poor location as it sits on a fair sharp border between the Northern Hemisphere containing a lot of Carbon Dioxide and more Southern winds which do not. In fact, you can observe how relatively minor fluctuations in the position of that border create dramatic changes in the CO2 levels being measured by Mauna Loa.
Woody plants first appeared about 370 million years ago. Interestingly enough, that’s precisely when CO2 levels plummeted from their early Paleozoic levels of around 2,240 ppm to less than 200 ppm, where it remained, more or less, ever since. Levels did spike to near 500 ppm at the J-C boundary, around the same time temperatures plummeted. Asteroids? Excessive cooling due to volcanic activity? Both would have dramatically affected the ability of woody plants to continue sequestering CO2.
Hypothesis I: The mean position of that border is moving downward, thereby causing dramatic increases in the CO2 levels being measured at Mauna Loa.
Hypothesis II: Shifting sources from relatively CO2-free Antarctica to Mauna Loa, which borders on the CO2-drenched areas in the Northern Hemisphere, and is particularly affected by the rapidly rising industrialization of China and other Asiatic countries, is the principle cause of the discrepancy between pre-1958 CO2 levels and those taken after 1958.
Hypothesis III: Scientists are either incredibly stupid, or they’ve intentionally done this in order to support the global warming, climate change claims in order to secure government funding to “fix” what’s not actually broken, thereby securing life-long employment at public expense.
Do the layers in the Vostok ice core data provide enough resolution to even discern a 60-year spike in CO2 levels? Perhaps recent ones, yes, but what about during the interglacial CO2 maximums roughly 120k, 240k, 310k, and 410k years ago? 60 years is only 0.0146%, or 1 part in 6,833. Is there really that much resolution in the ice core data? Or is more along the lines of about 500 years per pixel on your monitor, and not much better resolution than that with respect to sharp CO2 spikes like what we appear to be experiencing today. In other words, we could very well have experienced 100-year peaks in CO2 levels during each of the last four interglacial periods over the last 400,000 years and we’d never know it because the resolution in the ice core data is just not there.
Is the J-C boundary a BIG, FAT, CLUE that what might really be going on, here, has nothing to do with man’s production of CO2, but rather, man’s interference in the ability of woody plants i.e. un-touched forests to sequester the CO2?
Then there’s this: