Increases in CO2 - Causes Cooling

Science shows CO2 lags change in ocean temps.. see the peer reviewed paper below.

"The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes."

See: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.008

 

Yes jerm you lying sack of shit. The earth breathes. Tell us something we don't know.

 

here is the chart and peer reviewed paper..
in fact every paper on the subject ackowledges change in air temps also leads change in co2.
(yet somehow the pyschotic troll calls me a liar. he does not even read his own agw nutter team's papers )


By the way it makes sense that change in ocean temps leads change in co2.
as oceans warm they release co2.
as air warms it can hold more water vapor and co2.







"The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes."

See: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.008

[/QUOTE]

 

another paper on it not being CO2.
its the sun and cosmic rays.
---
Others have guessed that cause. Inthe words of Dr. Antonino Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists:

“In the last half billion years, earth has lost, four times, its polar caps: no ice at the North Pole and none at the South Pole. And, four times, the polar caps were reconstituted. Man did not exist then, only the so-called cosmic rays, discovered by mankind in the early twentieth century. The last cosmic ice age started 50 million years ago when we entered into one of the galaxy arms.”

A non-coincidental match between a climate cycle of near 140 million years and the time it takes the Solar System to pass between spiral arms of the galaxy was observed by Dr. Shaviv after reconstructing past cosmic ray variation from iron meteorites:


Source: http://sciencebits.com/files/pictures/climate/crcFig5.jpg
Everything from ozone change to volcanoes, human activities, and ocean cycles has a non-zero effect on climate, but much of temperature history fits together well if changes in cosmic rays and solar activity have a major effect on climate. The preceding contrasts with those who would assume CO2 to be the primary climate driver and who, in practice, predominantly simply entirely ignore the effect of cosmic rays (aside from the occasional attempt at rebuttal to justify continuing to ignore them), acting as if solar activity variation only mattered for direct irradiance alone.

However, claims about massive forcing from CO2 variation have always been based not on its direct observed spectral effect but upon hypothetical major net positive feedback from water vapor vastly amplifying CO2′s small direct effect. Evidence supports rather a climate system with low climate sensitivity, with predominantly negative feedback.


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/...les-in-the-context-of-the-shakun-et-al-paper/

 

Funny you should refer to WUWT.

 

"I had previously reviewed peer-reviewed scientific articles from 2013 with the topics, or keyword phrases, "global warming" and "global climate change," [see here]. They numbered 1,911. I have now also reviewed articles from 2013 with the keyword phrase "climate change," finding 8,974. Combining the searches, 2013 saw 10,885 articles under one or more of the three phrases. Only two articles [see here and here] in my judgment rejected anthropogenic global warming. Download the chart above here or from Wikipedia Commons here.

Combining this result with my earlier studies (see here and here), over several years I have reviewed 25,182 scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals. Only 26, about 1 in 1,000, in my judgment reject anthropogenic global warming. I describe my methodology here.

Instead of coalescing around a rival theory to anthropogenic global warming, the rejecting articles offer a hodgepodge of alternatives, none of which has caught on. The dissenting articles are rarely cited, even by other dissenters. A groundswell this is not. The 26 rejecting articles have had no discernible influence on science.

Very few of the most vocal global warming deniers, those who write op-eds and blogs and testify to congressional committees, have ever written a peer-reviewed article in which they say explicitly that anthropogenic global warming is false. Why? Because then they would have to provide the evidence and, evidently, they don't have it.

What can we conclude?

1. There a mountain of scientific evidence in favor of anthropogenic global warming and no convincing evidence against it.

2. Those who deny anthropogenic global warming have no alternative theory to explain the observed rise in atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.

These two facts together mean that the so-called debate over global warming is an illusion, a hoax conjured up by a handful of apostate scientists and a misguided and sometimes colluding media, aided and abetted by funding from fossil fuel companies and right wing foundations.

On the one side, we have a mountain of scientific evidence, on the other, ideology and arm-waving. On that basis, we are endangering our grandchildren’s future and pushing humanity toward the destruction of civilization."

http://www.jamespowell.org/

 

and if you go to the website... and search the papers he searched... very few if any state man made co2 causes warming either.
go on I dare you... go to the website like did ... look at say the first 200 papers... and come back an tell us which ones say man made co2 causes warming.

we can then all read all of them. it wont take long. here is the link... click on excel spread sheet...

http://www.jamespowell.org/DIY/diy.html

 

by the way there are hundreds of papers that state there sun and the tides cause the majority if not all of the warming and cooling.

and here is a website with dozens of papers concerned we are in global cooling...

http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/06...e-public-debate-seems-to-be-moving-away-from/

 

Funny that you refer to climatedepot. As a lying sack of shit of course it is a source for you.

"ClimateDepot.com founder Marc Morano has been called "the Matt Drudge of climate denial ," the "king of the skeptics," and "a central cell of the climate-denial machine ," and he revels in these descriptions. Although he has no scientific expertise, he is adamant that manmade global warming is a "con job " based on "subprime science." Morano gained prominence working for two of the most vocal climate deniers in the U.S.: Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), who notoriously called climate change "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," and Rush Limbaugh, who we named Climate Change Misinformer of the Year in 2011 for his steadfast denial of climate science and wild conspiracy theories about the climate change "hoax."

These days Morano is paid by an industry-funded group to run the climate denial website ClimateDepot.com. At Climate Depot, Morano serves as the de facto research department for the right-wing media's attacks on climate science, and mobilizes his readers to target individual scientists and reporters for telling the public about climate change threats. The site was instrumental in manufacturing the 2009 "Climategate" controversy, which Morano incorrectly claimed exposed "deliberate manipulation of facts and data" by climate scientists. Morano is a darling of the organization most committed to climate denial, the Heartland Institute. He regularly speaks at their conferences and defended their controversial billboard comparing those who accept climate science to "murderers, tyrants, and madmen" including the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski.

Due to his history of smears and lies, Morano's media influence is usually confined to Rush Limbaugh , Fox News, and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. But in December, CNN invited him to "debate" Bill Nye on climate science, and in doing so elevated his marginal views to the mainstream press for the first time all year[B]. For all this, Marc Morano has earned the distinction of 2012 Climate Change Misinformer of the Year."[/B]


http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/12/27/climate-change-misinformer-of-the-year-marc-mor/191878