Remember when climatards used to point out the Vostok ice cores as "proof" of anthropogenic global warming? Their argument was that the concentration of CO2 in the ancient ice samples is much lower than the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere today. Therefore, they concluded that warmer global temps must be the result of increased atmospheric CO2 from human emissions.
But in the words of Forest Gump..."and just like that" they stopped talking about Vostok. Why is that?
First off, the concentration of CO2 trapped in ice isn't an accurate reflection of the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
But the more significant issue is that correlation is not causation. Yes, there definitely is a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and global temps. But the Vostok ice core samples indicate the climatards have the cause and effect backwards.
The Vostok ice cores data in the graph below provides 400,000 years of evidence demonstrating that the rise of global temperatures precedes the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. In other words, it appears that global warming is causing the increased concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere - not the other way around.
And it makes total sense ..
The earth's oceans and wetlands are the greatest source of CO2. As the planet warms, ocean temps rise, evaporation increases and more dissolved CO2 is released into the atmosphere
I even read where one climate scientist actually agreed with the data and conclusion, but still clung onto the conclusion that CO2 was causing problems. I guess if my next paycheck depended on pushing a ridiculous narrative, I might continue clinging to it as well.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
