Mar 23 2009
The nation and world have been debating whether mankind is the driving force behind the global climate change we have been ‘experiencing’. There is a weak and unsubstantiated theory backed by the far left that mankind is driving the climate warmer through CO2 production. That teetering theory is the excuse many liberals use to cry for energy taxes and reductions in economic output which would cripple the world’s leading economies. It is the mythology hoisted by the UN/IPCC and Al Gore.
I call it a myth because this theory has never once been shown to be right. All predictions made based on the theory over two decades have failed. Most of the data this theory is based upon has been found wanting, and many of the mathematics used to derive have been proven wrong as well (see here for a great overview of this).
Now we have some nails to pound into the coffin of the myth that mankind’s CO2 production is driving the global climate. For the UN/IPCC myth to survive there cannot be evidence of higher temperatures prior to the explosion of the industrial age (early 20th century). Even worse, if the global climate change is not driven Â by human CO2 production the myth will also fall apart if the real source of global climate change is discovered and can accurately predict temperature changes. Both these conditions now exist to end the charade of the UN/IPCC and the doom and gloom cries of Al Gore.
The data was presented at a conference of scientists who gathered the other week in NY to show why global climate is not driven by CO2 – man made or otherwise (see here for documents – H/T Powerline). First is a chart showing that not only were there warmer periods than the current global climate levels since the last major ice age, the majority of that time since the ice age (12,000 years) was warmer than today:
This means today’s current levels are not any different than what has been experienced for 120 centuries prior to the industrial revolution. Therefore it is highly unlikely today’s climate has any connection to humanities CO2 production. What the data shows is a slowly rising temperature coming out of the last major ice age, which has periods of retreating temperatures (e.g., the Little Ice Age).
The second chart set of data how solar output and the pacific decadal oscillation have been driving a cycle of cooling and warming on top of this general warming trend from the last major ice age. What we find is an oscillation of warming and cooling that is easily linked to solar activity cycles, not CO2 levels:
And with this we have a model which can be tested to prove once and for all if global climate is driven by man made CO2 output or is actually being driven by the solar cycle laid on top of a centuries’ long warming from the last major ice age period.
The above chart shows the range of climate predictions from the UN/IPCC Â based on their assumption CO2 is the engine driving out climate. The oscillating curve is the more realistic hypothesis – mainly because it is the model the actual temperatures have been following. Note that green arrow and red dot outside the ‘observational data’ box – that is today’s reality. If the measurements continue to follow the cyclic line and not follow the UN/IPCC line, then we have our answer.Â
And so far the data shows that CO2 is not the driver Al Gore and the UN/IPCC claim. In fact, unlike the amazing alignment to the solar cycle model we see in the actual measurements, the CO2 driven model shows the most likely connection between CO2 and global climate is one where CO2 is a lagging indicator of temperature rise, not the other way around. That is why CO2 has been rising for a decade and temperatures have not, as seen in the final chart.
What is so fantastic about the first chart is we have an unambiguous measuring stick to figure out which model is accurate. If, as the data shows, climate is not driven by CO2 levels but is driven by the solar cycle then we know for sure whether we need to invoke economy-choking energy taxes and CO2 caps (or other ridiculous measures).Â
We should have a good indication before Obama’s first term ends.