CO2 LEVEL AT 650,000-YEAR HIGH!!!
Roger Coppock
According to the Earth System Research Laboratory of the
US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, the April
monthly mean CO2 concentration measured at Mauna Loa was
387.19 ppmv. This is a new maximum for this data set,
the longest term and most frequently referenced CO2 data.
Also, according to the IPCC WG1 AR4 list of robust findings:
"Current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4,
and their associated positive radiative forcing,
far exceed those determined from ice core
measurements spanning the last 650,000 years."
Please see:
CO2 RISE: A 6 Degree of Freedom CURVE FIT
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/CO2-6DegreesFreedom.jpg
Clearly, the atmospheric CO2 concentration is rising
exponentially. To see this, compare the trend of the
red colored points on the graph I have provided with
a straight line.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
These data may be found at:
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt
The yearly means of the 588 points of monthly data follow:
YEAR CO2_ppmv
1958 315.33 8 months of data
1959 315.98
1960 316.91
1961 317.65
1962 318.46
1963 318.99
1964 319.20 9 months of data
1965 320.03
1966 321.37
1967 322.18
1968 323.05
1969 324.62
1970 325.68
1971 326.32
1972 327.46
1973 329.68
1974 330.17
1975 331.14 11 months of data
1976 332.06
1977 333.78
1978 335.40
1979 336.78
1980 338.70
1981 340.11
1982 340.98 11 months of data
1983 342.84
1984 344.20 11 months of data
1985 345.87
1986 347.19
1987 348.98
1988 351.45
1989 352.89
1990 354.16
1991 355.48
1992 356.27
1993 356.96
1994 358.63
1995 360.63
1996 362.37
1997 363.47
1998 366.50
1999 368.14
2000 369.41
2001 371.07
2002 373.16
2003 375.80
2004 377.55
2005 379.75
2006 381.85
2007 383.72
2008 386.05 4 months of data
[Watch the fossil fools dust off an ancient archive of
pseudo-science and arcane mathematics in a lame attempt
to challenge these basic facts. That's entertainment!]
Tunderbar
> CO2 Level at 650,000-Year High
>
> According to the Earth System Research Laboratory of the
> US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, the April
> monthly mean CO2 concentration measured at Mauna Loa was
> 387.19 ppmv. This is a new maximum for this data set,
> the longest term and most frequently referenced CO2 data.
>
> Also, according to the IPCC WG1 AR4 list of robust findings:
>
> "Current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4,
> and their associated positive radiative forcing,
> far exceed those determined from ice core
> measurements spanning the last 650,000 years."
>
> Please see:
what happened to the warming? it ain't there.
mrbawana2u
> CO2 Level at 650,000-Year High
>
> According to the Earth System Research Laboratory of the
> US National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, the April
> monthly mean CO2 concentration measured at Mauna Loa was
> 387.19 ppmv. This is a new maximum for this data set,
> the longest term and most frequently referenced CO2 data.
>
> Also, according to the IPCC WG1 AR4 list of robust findings:
>
> "Current atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4,
> and their associated positive radiative forcing,
> far exceed those determined from ice core
> measurements spanning the last 650,000 years."
And yet 387.19 ppmv is still insignificant.
Funny that.
zdzis1
> CO2 RISE: A 6 Degree of Freedom CURVE FIT
Still don't know what degrees of freedom are?
> [Watch the fossil fools dust off an ancient archive of pseudo-science
> and arcane mathematics in a lame attempt to challenge these basic facts.
> That's entertainment!]
OK
updated:
http://zdzis1.eu.interia.pl/Roger.pdf
your exponential model now works slightly worse than it used to
z
hanson
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> CO2 Level at 650,000-Year High
>
That only seems to you to be this way, Roger.
All that data you cut and pasted is useless since it is
governed by the rules & edicts of the green bible that says:
>
= "It doesn't matter what is true ... it only matters what people
= believe is true. -- Paul Watson, Sea Shepard/ex-Greenpeace, &...
= "A lot of environmental [sci/soc/pol] messages are simply not
= accurate. We use hype." -- Jerry Franklin, Ecologist, UoW, and...
= "If you don't know an answer, a fact, a statistic, then .... make it
= up on the spot ... for the mass-media today ... the truth is irrelevant."
= -- Paul Watson in Earthforce: An Earth Warrior's Guide to Strategy.
= "We make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
= mention of any doubts we may have [about] being honest."
= -- Stephen Schneider (Stanford prof. who first sought fame as
= a global cooler, but has now hit the big time as a global warmer)
= "It is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presen-
= tations" -- Al Gore, Chairman, Gen. Investment Management Bank
>
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/f56a295a28d506f2
>
The Green shits instituted, on all industries, permits charges,
user fees, operating burdens, enviro-levies, recycling add-ons,
which are nothing but taxes by another name that did produce
nothing but filling the wallets of the regulatory green shits....
>
(...but not the wallets of the little green idiots we see in these
NGs. They are merely the unpaid and unrewarded enablers
and facilitators for the eviro turds who rake in the dough)
>
Needless to say industries reacted, learned from the green
bible and went "green" too... by inflating and passing on to
the consumers all these green burdens... and used the green
hammering to get rid local employees... by out-sourcing their
production into India and China... ahahahaha....
>
So, with the green pestilence having infected & badly affected
the entire industrial base in the US... ....Guys, it will be a long
and hard way to come back to the good living standard we did
enjoy before the green thievery began... ... and produced this
ever growing chasm between the Rich and the Poor...
hanson
>
More in these links on rice-rationing & the Green cascade (1,2,3)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/ebc7cbaf0bc86342
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.global-warming/msg/f56a295a28d506f2
>
See Roger, you are a fool. You are poor. You fucked yourself.
BTW how is your brain malady/condition fairing?
ahahaha... ahahahanson
James
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
"Statistics are like a bikini bathing suit: what is revealed is
interesting,
but what is concealed is crucial." - Alvan Feinstein of Yale University
00ZBN
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
And no discernible effect on global climate!!!!!!!!
Coppcock you are totally hilarious!
ROTFLMAO
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
: "They don't tell you, that, in their computer models, it's assumed
that CO2 drives global warming. In other words, you assume the result
and say the computer model proves we were right. It's garbage in,
garbage out. If you don't program the computers to cause temperatures to
rise with CO2, then you have nothing." Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor
Emeritus Geology, Western Washington University
00ZBN
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
00ZBN
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
Roger Coppock
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/CO2-6DegreesFreedom.jpg
Every so often members of this forum arrive at the
misconception that global warming is not happening.
This little post will serve as a reading for Global
Warming 101, our introductory course on the subject.
Read the list below carefully, you will be tested
on this material.
That the surface of the earth has warmed over the
last several decades is a fact supported by many
independent sources . . .
-- A map of global temperature trends shows warming.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/do_nmap.py?year_last=2007&month_last=12&sat=4&sst=1&type=trends&mean_gen=0112&year1=1880&year2=2007&base1=1951&base2=1980&radius=1200&pol=reg
-- The global ground weather station network shows warming:
These data are from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
The yearly means of these data are graphed here:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Global%20Mean%20Temp.jpg
These data come from the UK's Hadley Centre:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
The yearly means of these data are graphed here:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadCRUT3gl.jpg
-- The Sea Surface Temperature, or SST, record
Here, from Hadley Centre, are the global sea surface
temperatures from 1850 to 2007. Please see:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadsst2gl.txt
The yearly means of these data are graphed here:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/HadSST2gl.jpg
-- The balloon record shows this same surface level warming:
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/temp/angell/angell.html
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/angell/global.dat
The global yearly mean ground data are graphed here:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/Angell-Balloon.jpg
-- The satellite record, in all its current interpretations,
shows that the air near the surface is warming too.
For background on the satellite temperature proxy please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_temperature_measurements
The URL below is one of the more conservative records
from the University of Alabama at Huntsville.
http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/public/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.2
The global data are graphed here:
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/UAH-MSU.jpg
The Remote Sensing Systems Lower Troposphere (TLT) analysis
shows a 0.17K/Decade rise over the land and sea.
http://www.remss.com/data/msu/monthly_time_series/RSS_Monthly_MSU_AMSU_Channel_TLT_Anomalies_Land_and_Ocean_v03_1.txt
The data from 82.5N to 70S are graphed here;
http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/RSS-MSU.jpg
-- The record of sea ice melting:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/n_plot.html
http://nsidc.org/news/press/2007_seaiceminimum/20071001_pressrelease.html
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/
-- The glacier retreat record:
http://nsidc.org/sotc/glacier_balance.html
-- The bore hole record:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/pollack.html
-- Rising sea level:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Recent_Sea_Level_Rise.png
Roger Coppock
V-for-Vendicar
"Tunderbar" <tdco...@gmail.com> wrote
> what happened to the warming? it ain't there.
Here are the global average temperatures over the last decade. "o" = trend
line.
==
1998 14.57 *********************o*****
1999 14.33 *****************=====o
2000 14.33 *****************======o
2001 14.48 ************************o
2002 14.56 *************************o**
2003 14.55 **************************o*
2004 14.49 *************************==o
2005 14.63 *****************************o**
2006 14.54 ***************************===o
2007 14.57 *****************************
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And the rate of increase is about 2'C per century.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs
V-for-Vendicar
"mrbawana2u" <mrbaw...@gmail.com> wrote
> And yet 387.19 ppmv is still insignificant.
Significant to cause a temperature rise of 1.3'C
Bruce Sinclair
To anyone interested in this 'debate' (I haven't seen much here :) ), I
suggest you get and read the summary of the stern report. He states his
assumptions and details his data. He is also an economist, and, using the
precautionary principle (as you should if the consequences could be
disasterous), suggests that if we do something now, it costs us almost
nothing (a small decrease in growth). If we wait 20 years, and there is a
problem, it will cost us heaps.
What is the clever response ? Read the summary at least before you answer.
:)
Peter Franks
> CO2 Level at 650,000-Year High
Do you dispute the basis that the Maunder Minimum was in part a cause of
the Little Ice Age?
Yes or No?
hanson
Stinkliar "Bruce Sinclair"
<bruce.s...@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz>
wrote in message news:fvoqfj$pql$1...@aioe.org..."VD-for-Vendicar" aka Scott Nudds nuddled:
Significant to cause a temperature rise of 1.3'C
>
To anyone interested in this 'debate' (I haven't seen much here :) ), I
suggest you get and read the summary of the stern report. He states his
assumptions and details his data. He is also an economist, and, using the
precautionary principle (as you should if the consequences could be
disasterous), suggests that if we do something now, it costs us almost
nothing (a small decrease in growth). If we wait 20 years, and there is a
problem, it will cost us heaps.
>
Stinkliar and VD-Scotty deserve each other as 2 brethren of
the same feather, both being class 3 enviros aka little green
idiots who feel doom with every breath they take... ahahaha...
because they do not want to accept that GW- & especially all
AGW data are based on the edicts of green bible which was
written by their role models and icons who said that:
so poor. ahahaha... ahahahanson
hanson
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> cranked himself and
weaseled & wrote in message news:4820D248...@adnc.com...
news:904f7e00-5a66-4b56...@z16g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>>>CO2 Level at 650,000-Year High
>>
>> hanson wrote:
>> That only seems to you to be this way, Roger.
>
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com>
> If you have better data on atmospheric CO2 concentrations,
> you are more than welcome to post them here, otherwise
> don't expect us to adopt your fantasies without evidence.
>
hanson wrote:
You may be getting on the right track by finally admitting that
YOUR icons and role models made you promote "fantasies
without evidence"... I'll take notice of your manufactured temp.
increases once they constantly exceed the local and global
differences between the day vs nite extremes which is some-
where in the wide range of 40-120°F which humankind is
used to effortlessly and without curtailing its activities.....
ahahahaha....
>
Till then know, Roger and all you other little green idiots, that
you have fallen victim to a con and that you are promoting a
scam like the world not seen since they invented the bible.
>
Here again is what you base your silly doom & gloom on which
you carefully snipped to avoid embassarssment.
>
It said: GW- & especially all AGW data are based on the edicts
of green bible which was written by the role models and icons
of the green shits who said that:
so poor. ahahaha... ahahahanson
V-for-Vendicar
"00ZBN" <00...@ddooo.com> wrote
> And no discernible effect on global climate!!!!!!!!
Really? Here is the data....
View with mono spaced font.
Correlation between Atmospheric CO2 concentration and
Global Average temperature. 1958 -> 2007
| *
|
| * * *
| * * o
| o
| * o *
| o
| o o
^| * oo
T| * * o
e| * oo **
m| * o o *
p| ooo
e| * * * o o
r| o *
a| oo *
t| * oo
u| * * ooo * *
r| o o *
e|* ** * o o * *
| * oo * *
| * *o *
| * *o oo*
| o*o*
| ooo *
|oo *
| * *
|
| *
| *
+---------------------------CO2->----------------------------------------
* = Data
0 = Computed Regression
V-for-Vendicar
"Roger Coppock" <rcop...@adnc.com> wrote
> http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/CO2-6DegreesFreedom.jpg
That is an exceptionally good fit.
250.67 + 53.887 * exp(0.01684*(year-1958)) = smoothed signal.
Subtracting the sinusoidal component from the raw data to smooth it, how
does the result compare with the global emissions history?
By eye, it looks like variance in the data from the smoothed function
correspond roughly to
various economic periods. 60's economic boom followed by a 70's economic
slump, followed by the 80's economic boom, followed by the 90's economic
slump that continues in AmeriKKKa to today But with the chinese economy
booming.
V-for-Vendicar
"Peter Franks" <no...@none.com> wrote
> Do you dispute the basis that the Maunder Minimum was in part a cause of
> the Little Ice Age?
Unknown. We do know that there is no correlation between sunspot counts
and global surface
temperature over the last several decades.
The data below shows a complete lack of correlation.
View with mono spaced font.
No correlation between sunspot number and global average temperature
1958 -> 2007
|
|
| *
|
| * * *
| * *
|
| * *
|
^|
T| *
e| *
m| *
p| * *
e|
r| * *
a| *
t| o o
u| oo oooo o ooo o oo o oo oooo oo o ooo
r| * * * *
e| *
| * * * *
| * *
| * * *
| * * *
| * *
| *
| *
| * *
|
| *
| *
+-----------------------CO2->----------------------------------------------
* = Data
0 = Computed Regression
Y = Mx+B
M = 4.976998E-05 B = 14.18044
Correlation Coefficient .01161709
V-for-Vendicar
"00ZBN" <00...@ddooo.com> wrote
> And no discernible effect on global climate!!!!!!!!
> Coppcock you are totally hilarious!
Really? You must be living in an alternate universe.
Here are the global average temperatures since 1958. "o" = trend line.
Look at all those "o"'s lined up there. The trend is up, Up, UP.
And most recently the rate of increase is about 2'C per century.
View with mono spaced font.
1958 14.08 *******************o***************
1959 14.06 ********************o************
1960 13.99 *********************o******
1961 14.08 **********************o************
1962 14.04 ***********************o********
1963 14.08 ************************o**********
1964 13.79 **************===========o
1965 13.89 *********************====o
1966 13.97 **************************o
1967 14.00 ***************************o*
1968 13.96 **************************==o
1969 14.08 *****************************o*****
1970 14.03 ******************************o
1971 13.90 **********************=========o
1972 14.00 *****************************===o
1973 14.14 ********************************o******
1974 13.92 ***********************==========o
1975 13.95 *************************=========o
1976 13.84 ******************=================o
1977 14.13 ************************************o*
1978 14.02 ******************************=======o
1979 14.09 ***********************************===o
1980 14.18 ***************************************o**
1981 14.27 ****************************************o*******
1982 14.05 ********************************========o
1983 14.26 *****************************************o*****
1984 14.09 ***********************************=======o
1985 14.06 *********************************==========o
1986 14.13 **************************************======o
1987 14.27 *********************************************o**
1988 14.31 **********************************************o****
1989 14.19 ******************************************=====o
1990 14.38 ************************************************o*******
1991 14.35 ************************************************o****
1992 14.12 *************************************============o
1993 14.14 ***************************************===========o
1994 14.24 **********************************************=====o
1995 14.38 ****************************************************o***
1996 14.30 **************************************************===o
1997 14.40 ******************************************************o**
1998 14.57
*******************************************************o*************
1999 14.33 ****************************************************===o
2000 14.33 ****************************************************====o
2001 14.48 *********************************************************o*****
2002 14.56
**********************************************************o*********
2003 14.55
***********************************************************o*******
2004 14.49 ************************************************************o**
2005 14.62
*************************************************************o**********
2006 14.54
**************************************************************o****
2007 14.57
***************************************************************o*****
Correlation Coefficient .8529209
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMu14mBXAs
V-for-Vendicar
"00ZBN" <00...@ddooo.com> wrote
> And no discernible effect on global climate!!!!!!!!
> Coppcock you are totally hilarious!
Bonzo doesn't live in the Reality based community.....
Here is the data showing him to be a liar.