Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (15370)	12/16/2009 4:05:09 PM
From: russet	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86355

Perhaps you should reread my original post. A correlation exists on a 10000 year scale in your charts but changes on the 100 year time scale referred to in my post are subject to much variation and not statistically significant. Expanding the scale on your chart over 400000 years would prove my assertion as both temperature and CO2 levels become much more variable. A real statistician would question if plus or minus 0.008 percent CO2 in air shown in your referenced 400000 year chart would have any causation effect on anything in the atmosphere at all. Clearly temperature rises and several thousand years later CO2 goes up. As temperature goes up more glaciers melt revealing rotting vegetation and animals which fungi and bacteria eat which produces a lot of CO2 and fauna and flora proliferation. The number of plants and animals increase as the glaciers continue to melt and still more land is revealed a lot more CO2 is produced by the animals eating the plants and each other,..belching, farting, rotting. The oceans warm up and that decreases the soluability of CO2 gas in water which increases the levels of CO2 in the air. Given your charts the CO2 levels went from around .020% to .028% (a thundering 0.008% or practically nothing) over those cycles of cooling and warming over 400000 years while the temperature oscillated over 12 degrees C. Twelve degrees in temperature is significant physically, but 0.008 gas concentration percent is not. The current evidence of temperature increases over the last hundred years of half a degree (remember we have warmed up about 12 degrees in the last 10000 years) are in dispute due to data manipulation and faulty sampling techniques. Even the CO2 measurements are in dispute because of methodology errors and I note your graph of CO2 concentration for the last four hundred years needs to be shown as a log derivative to make it look big in absolute and percentage terms, when it is not. So I say again, statistical correlations of CO2 and temperatures taken over a period of 100 years are subject to too much noise to be statistically significant.