Ocean News

Quote
http://www.southwestclimatechange.org/figures/icecore_records

CO2 Concentrations and Temperature Have Tracked Closely Over the Last 300,000 Years: As ice core records from Vostok, Antarctica show, the temperature near the South Pole has varied by more than 20º F during the past 350,000 years in a regular pattern that constitutes the ice age/interglacial cycles. Changes in carbon dioxide concentrations (blue) track closely with changes in temperature (red) during these cycles, but carbon dioxide levels are now higher than at any time during the past 650,000 years.

 

CO2 doesn't drive temperature but is driven BY it!


http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
Carbon dioxide follows temperature in the Vostok Ice Cores

"In the 1990′s the classic Vostok ice core graph showed temperature and carbon in lock step moving at the same time. It made sense to worry that carbon dioxide did influence temperature. But by 2003 new data came in and it was clear that carbon lagged behind temperature. The link was back to front. Temperatures appear to control carbon, and while it’s possible that carbon also influences temperature these ice cores don’t show much evidence of that. After temperatures rise, on average it takes 800 years before carbon starts to move. The extraordinary thing is that the lag is well accepted by climatologists, yet virtually unknown outside these circles. The fact that temperature leads is not controversial. It’s relevance is debated.

It’s impossible to see a lag of centuries on a graph that covers half a million years so I have regraphed the data from the original sources, here and here, and scaled the graphs out so that the lag is visible to the naked eye. What follows is the complete set from 420,000 years to 5,000 years before the present.

NOTE 1: What really matters here are the turning points, not the absolute levels.
NOTE 2: The carbon data is unfortunately far less detailed than the temperature data.
Beware of making conclusions about turning points
or lags when only one single point may be involved.
NOTE 3: The graph which illustrates the lag the best, and also has the most carbon data
is 150,000-100,000 years ago.

The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor."

Many expanded graphs this site, too many to post. Visit and see them yourself.

data here
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/temp/vostok/vostok.1999.temp.dat
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/trends/co2/vostok.icecore.co2

AND.....

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ice-core-data-help-solve/
"Frédéric Parrenin of the Laboratory of Glaciology and Geophysical Environment in France and a team of researchers may have found an answer to the question. His team compiled an extensive record of Antarctic temperatures and CO2 data from existing data and five ice cores drilled in the Antarctic interior over the last 30 years. Their results, published February 28 in Science, show CO2 lagged temperature by less than 200 years, drastically decreasing the amount of uncertainty in previous estimates."
They measured the concentration of an isotope, nitrogen 15, which is greater the deeper the snowpack is. Once they were able to determine snowpack depth from the nitrogen 15 data, a simple model can determine the offset in depth between gas and ice and the amount of time the difference represents. The researchers then compared results from multiple locations to reduce the margin of error.

“Our method takes into account more data and shows that the age difference in Antarctic temperature and CO2 levels is less than we previously thought,” Parrenin says. “I think this could help to change the tone of discussions about climate change.”



Less, but temperature still precedes CO2 rise!
CO2 has NEVER driven climate, except in the imaginations of AGWers.
"

 

CO2 was higher levels than now in some ice ages.

But CO2 level matters only if it drives up temperatures. 400 parts per million isn't a high concentration. There is probably a higher concentration of fecal matter in your drinking water!

According to charted data, I don't see temperature following CO2 levels, instead staying pretty level, or a tenth of a degree Fahrenheit average rise per recent year.


I can't upload charts right now. ????


But open the chart myark posted top this page. The blue CO2 line headed for the moon and the temperature left far behind.
And in that post, he claims temperature follows CO2.

Like a turtle following a jet airplane, maybe?

 

Ah, upload solved.


Clearly in this graph, temperature follows CO2. Not!
uh, actually it appears.....Seems apparent CO2 doesn't drive temperature.

So what difference is high CO2 levels? Inconsequential, AND probably CO2 is high mostly because of natural warming, not causing the warming or contributed by man. Man's contribution is miniscule.

Ice cores indicate warming elevates CO2.
Exactly matches what we observe.

We have warming...and elevated CO2. Most likely due to the warming.

 

CO2 has always lagged behind rises in average surface temperature. This is because CO2 is a feedback. That is, when average surface temperature goes up, more CO2 is released, driving the temperature up even further that CO2 is also a forcing temputures, which means that it acts as a greenhouse gas. So releasing massive amounts of it in the air would be expected to have some marked result. The fact that the rises in the past have had no human influence acts only to further cement the idea that this particular trend is something new.

 

Quote

What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

This is an issue that is often misunderstood in the public sphere and media, so it is worth spending some time to explain it and clarify it. At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to rise about 800 years (600-1000 years) after Antarctic temperature during glacial terminations. These terminations are pronounced warming periods that mark the ends of the ice ages that happen every 100,000 years or so.

Does this prove that CO2 doesn’t cause global warming? The answer is no.

The reason has to do with the fact that the warmings take about 5000 years to be complete. The lag is only 800 years. All that the lag shows is that CO2 did not cause the first 800 years of warming, out of the 5000 year trend. The other 4200 years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data.

The 4200 years of warming make up about 5/6 of the total warming. So CO2 could have caused the last 5/6 of the warming, but could not have caused the first 1/6 of the warming.
It comes as no surprise that other factors besides CO2 affect climate. Changes in the amount of summer sunshine, due to changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun that happen every 21,000 years, have long been known to affect the comings and goings of ice ages. Atlantic ocean circulation slowdowns are thought to warm Antarctica, also.

From studying all the available data (not just ice cores), the probable sequence of events at a termination goes something like this. Some (currently unknown) process causes Antarctica and the surrounding ocean to warm. This process also causes CO2 to start rising, about 800 years later. Then CO2 further warms the whole planet, because of its heat-trapping properties. This leads to even further CO2 release. So CO2 during ice ages should be thought of as a “feedback”, much like the feedback that results from putting a microphone too near to a loudspeaker.

In other words, CO2 does not initiate the warmings, but acts as an amplifier once they are underway. From model estimates, CO2 (along with other greenhouse gases CH4 and N2O) causes about half of the full glacial-to-interglacial warming.

 

CO2 = the major cause of global warming
Present global warming is been caused by the emission of greenhouse gases , 72% of the totally emitted greenhouse gases is carbon dioxide (CO2), 18% Methane and 9% Nitrous oxide (NOx). Carbon dioxide emissions therefore are the most important cause of global warming.
CO2 is inevitably created by burning fuels like e.g. oil, natural gas, diesel, organic-diesel, petrol, organic-petrol, ethanol, coal.

 

You didn't read my post and certainly not the article.

You can believe anything you want to.
But you can't and won't force the rest of us to your philosophy.
That translates you had better hope you are wrong.
Because without the entire world believing as you do, and acting somehow to solve it, then you think the planet is doomed!

It's not.
AND, we aren't joining your philosophy.

 

I do not bother wasting my time to read your motivations and causes of denialism include religion and self-interest which are 1. Conspiracy theories — Dismissing the data or observation by suggesting opponents are involved in "a conspiracy to suppress the truth".

2.Cherry picking — Selecting an anomalous critical paper supporting their idea, or using outdated, flawed, and discredited papers in order to make their opponents look as though they base their ideas on weak research.

3.Moving the goalpost — Dismissing evidence presented in response to a specific claim by continually demanding some other (often unfulfillable) piece of evidence.

4.Other logical fallacies — Usually one or more of false analogy, appeal to consequences, straw man, or red herring.

 

So you persist in repeating error even when I post more recent research contrary to your doctrinal spoutings.
Fine.
Makes it easier to show your errors.
Of course I never hoped to convince YOU of anything.

I only hope to enlighten others who might otherwise be taken in by your misrepresentation of the data and facts.

 

Quote
Oscar-nominated director, Josh Fox, brings his new documentary on climate change to https://www.kickstarter.com/project... 21&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter100 cities world wide on the LET GO AND LOVE Tour.

LET GO AND LOVE Tour. Working with local grassroots groups, we will take the film and the knowledge I’ve gained fighting fracking to 100 cities and towns that are currently threatened by dangerous fossil fuel infrastructure projects like fracked-gas pipelines and power plants. We will not only raise awareness by sharing the film FOR FREE, but will also bring on tour with me scientists, community organizers and tangible resources to help communities lead a renewable energy revolution, one community at a time.

Offer 100 screenings across the world for FREE.

•Create and distribute resources to all screening attendees to put the power in the hands of the people.
•Host guest expert speakers so folks like you and I are better educated and inspired to be game-changers in addressing climate change.
•Run grassroots marketing campaigns to get as many people as possible to see the film and be a part of the larger conversation.

 

In the USA, we don't have to sell everybody on the truth AGW is a scam.
We just need to keep a majority of voters.
That prevents AGW socialists from taking over our country.
I would hope other people in other countries are as wise.
But, it wouldn't matter if the USA stood alone.
We'd just cut off everyone's foreign aid, and stop immigration.
Sit back and watch nations collapse! Economic meltdown.
The economic meltdown from draconian carbon taxes and other energy restrictions we won't adopt!
USA is big enough to be self contained.

 

quote
The Ocean Collection - Recycled Fishing Net Sunglasses
https://www.kickstarter.com/project...ion-recycled-fishing-net-sunglass/description

Finding an innovative solution to one of the most harmful forms of ocean plastic, the Ocean Collection prevents discarded fishing nets from entering the ocean through the creation of premium eyewear. The collection contains three unique frame designs with a modern take on a classic look.
We started Bureo to protect a place we love, the Ocean. Through the tremendous support we received on Kickstarter just over a year ago, we successfully launched ‘the Minnow’, the first skateboard made from recycled fishing nets. Overwhelmed by a global outpouring of encouragement and support for our mission, we have continued the expansion of our recycling program, collecting 20,000 kg of fishing nets to date.

We are excited to announce a new collaboration with our friends at Karün Eyewear in Chile, a progressive company focused on producing the best quality eyewear from natural and noble materials. We set out to make the 'Ocean Collection', first sunglasses made from recycled fishing nets collected along the coast of Chile.

 

now THAT is something I approve of. ;D
Positive, individual action instead of "WOE,WOE!"

 

quote
More plastic than fish in the sea by 2050, says Ellen MacArthur
http://www.theguardian.com/business...fish-in-the-sea-by-2050-warns-ellen-macarthur

Plastics production has increased twentyfold since 1964, reaching 311m tonnes in 2014, the report says. It is expected to double again in the next 20 years and almost quadruple by 2050.

Despite the growing demand, just 5% of plastics are recycled effectively, while 40% end up in landfill and a third in fragile ecosystems such as the world’s oceans.

“In a business-as-usual scenario, the ocean is expected to contain one tonne of plastic for every three tonnes of fish by 2025, and by 2050, more plastics than fish [by weight].”