in a comment ...
Philip Bradley says:
April 7, 2012 at 11:14 pm
Note how the Younger Dryas shows up clearly in the temperature proxies but merely causes CO2 levels to flatten. Thats persuasive that rising temperatures cause rising CO2 levels. When temperatures fell during the YD, CO2 just stopped rising.
This is the point I made in the last thread â the presence of the Younger Dryas makes the initiation of the present interglacial fair game for this kind of AGW trickery, since â as you point out, temperatures rose twice, while CO2 rose only once. The resultant smearing in the time direction of temperature proxies (assisted by the huge variability and error in such proxies) allows Skakun et al. to get away with this conjuring trick. Its enough to allow the MSM e.g. BBC to crow that this powerful skeptical argument â temp rise predating CO2 rise â has been falsified, when it clearly has not.
It is curious how CO2 flatlined during the Younger Dryas.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/07/shakun-redux-master-tricksed-us-i-told-you-he-was-tricksy/
-----
This paper âGlobal Warming preceded by increasing CO2â¦â in Nature
magazine and propagated by the BBC achieves this aim by:
1. Dishonest and absurd selection and lumping together of data for
different hemispheres which behave differently using the natural
delays in the North to HIDE the rises in the South which preceded
and drove CO2 out of the sea.
2. Delusional interpretation of their own concocted data to brazenly
argue absurdity.
âThe publication of this paper is a monument to the corrupt, secret,
unaccountable âpeer-reviewâ process which dominates modern science and if
Nature magazine has a shred of support for evidenceâbased science they would
withdraw it forthwith. The paper is Dangerous because it is being used by the
CO2 sect and its adherents in governments as a religious tome to justify CO2
tax robbery and the holding back of world developmentâ. Links:
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews12No20.pdf
That papers has more...
Extensive studies (2002) of The phase relationships between Antarctic and Greenland Climate records (3) show that the two
time series have a fundamentally different nature and while Greenland/Arctic LAGS about 1600 years after temperature
rises in the Antarctic/Southern ocean mathematical analysis alone cannot be sure which is the driver because of the quasi
periodic nature of the data which does not rule out (even if it is less convincing) the Arctic being the driver. However the
authors Steig and Alley point out that ârapid Greenland warmings almost always occur at times when Antarctica is
already warmingâ.
This is consistent with Antarctic changes being the driver and
facts of the structure of the world make that a necessity.
The Antarctic temperatures are a measure of the temperature
of the surrounding largest water mass in the world - the
Southern ocean and the south halves of the Pacific, Indian and
Atlantic Oceans. When this warms CO2 is slowly released
(and note the oceans hold 50 times more CO2 than the air)
with a delay of about 800 years (Pto for slide 7 of
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews11No5a.pdf ). General
Southern and equatorial ocean and land warming continues
and the Arctic (Greenland) warms up rapidly later in some
triggering process (eg perhaps involving Gulf stream shifts).
By lumping together the North and South hemispheres
(favouring North) the authors (Shakun et al) of the Nature
piece conceal the physical sequence of events and construct a
data set which they claim shows their average world
temperature might lag CO2 changes (although their own
graphs donât show that).
Their average data set HAS NO PHYSICAL MEANING.
It is a trick to âhide the riseâ of the Southern Ocean. The
logic of their position is that the whole of the Antarctic and
Southern Oceans warm up in response to increases in CO2
which have yet to take place 800 years in the future!
Philip Bradley says:
April 7, 2012 at 11:14 pm
Note how the Younger Dryas shows up clearly in the temperature proxies but merely causes CO2 levels to flatten. Thats persuasive that rising temperatures cause rising CO2 levels. When temperatures fell during the YD, CO2 just stopped rising.
This is the point I made in the last thread â the presence of the Younger Dryas makes the initiation of the present interglacial fair game for this kind of AGW trickery, since â as you point out, temperatures rose twice, while CO2 rose only once. The resultant smearing in the time direction of temperature proxies (assisted by the huge variability and error in such proxies) allows Skakun et al. to get away with this conjuring trick. Its enough to allow the MSM e.g. BBC to crow that this powerful skeptical argument â temp rise predating CO2 rise â has been falsified, when it clearly has not.
It is curious how CO2 flatlined during the Younger Dryas.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/07/shakun-redux-master-tricksed-us-i-told-you-he-was-tricksy/
-----
This paper âGlobal Warming preceded by increasing CO2â¦â in Nature
magazine and propagated by the BBC achieves this aim by:
1. Dishonest and absurd selection and lumping together of data for
different hemispheres which behave differently using the natural
delays in the North to HIDE the rises in the South which preceded
and drove CO2 out of the sea.
2. Delusional interpretation of their own concocted data to brazenly
argue absurdity.
âThe publication of this paper is a monument to the corrupt, secret,
unaccountable âpeer-reviewâ process which dominates modern science and if
Nature magazine has a shred of support for evidenceâbased science they would
withdraw it forthwith. The paper is Dangerous because it is being used by the
CO2 sect and its adherents in governments as a religious tome to justify CO2
tax robbery and the holding back of world developmentâ. Links:
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews12No20.pdf
That papers has more...
Extensive studies (2002) of The phase relationships between Antarctic and Greenland Climate records (3) show that the two
time series have a fundamentally different nature and while Greenland/Arctic LAGS about 1600 years after temperature
rises in the Antarctic/Southern ocean mathematical analysis alone cannot be sure which is the driver because of the quasi
periodic nature of the data which does not rule out (even if it is less convincing) the Arctic being the driver. However the
authors Steig and Alley point out that ârapid Greenland warmings almost always occur at times when Antarctica is
already warmingâ.
This is consistent with Antarctic changes being the driver and
facts of the structure of the world make that a necessity.
The Antarctic temperatures are a measure of the temperature
of the surrounding largest water mass in the world - the
Southern ocean and the south halves of the Pacific, Indian and
Atlantic Oceans. When this warms CO2 is slowly released
(and note the oceans hold 50 times more CO2 than the air)
with a delay of about 800 years (Pto for slide 7 of
http://www.weatheraction.com/docs/WANews11No5a.pdf ). General
Southern and equatorial ocean and land warming continues
and the Arctic (Greenland) warms up rapidly later in some
triggering process (eg perhaps involving Gulf stream shifts).
By lumping together the North and South hemispheres
(favouring North) the authors (Shakun et al) of the Nature
piece conceal the physical sequence of events and construct a
data set which they claim shows their average world
temperature might lag CO2 changes (although their own
graphs donât show that).
Their average data set HAS NO PHYSICAL MEANING.
It is a trick to âhide the riseâ of the Southern Ocean. The
logic of their position is that the whole of the Antarctic and
Southern Oceans warm up in response to increases in CO2
which have yet to take place 800 years in the future!
& said pork is big business, ''next question''