An Inconvienient Truth, - Global Warming

[smithy]

@nadoom

I watched this film on the plane on a 24-hour flight recently.  So I admit I wasn't too fresh, but I noticed plenty predictions of the effects of climate change.  And it all looked very nasty.  Then there was plenty pictures of power stations and factories spewing out foul-looking gases.  But the link between the two, which is surely the linchpin of the entire film, was very weak indeed.

When Gore at last got to it, he showed the first graph you linked to (your link is broken btw).  He showed that over the last million years (or whatever it was) that CO2 and temperature were linked.  Then he got to the present day and showed that the CO2 level was far above anything in the last million years.  And this is recorded, not predicted levels.

Now, he glossed over this very quickly, and I was tired when watching it, but I swear he did not show the temperature for the corresponding current period where CO2 is way above anything theorized in the last million.  

Why didn't he show the current temperature?  The data is available.  Is it, perhaps, because the temperature for this recent period of record high CO2 levels does not rise in-line with the CO2 level?  The link between CO2 and temperature is not linear.

Nadoom, your first image (which ironically is broken as it disproves your own point) shows the logarithmic link between CO2 and temperature and debunks Gore's entire film.

[smithy]

nadoom wrote:
Are you telling me that global warming doesnt exist?

No, I didn't say that.  I do think some form of warming is currently happening inline with the Earth's natural cycle but I'm not concerned about it.

1. This is CO2 And Temperature over the last 600,000 years you can see what happens post industrial revolution. you can see the link between them, it is so clear to see.

http://www.huwnad.com/CO2Temp.png

This is the graph I meant.  You can clearly see the jump in CO2 levels on the graph (although the scale is such that it makes it seem more dramatic), and you can clearly see a similar jump in the temperature has not happened!  In fact, there is missing data on the temperature series:  the temperature on that chart does not extend to the present day.

This is because there is no dramatic jump in the temperature inline with CO2 levels.  The relationship is not linear, as can be seen in this graph despite the crucial data being missing or removed.  The more CO2 we pump into the air, the less it will affect temperature.  Al Gore's chart proves this.

The CO2/temperature link is circumstantial at best.  It's a bit like saying the sun rises every day, and we all age - the two things are happening together, so they must be related!

2. This shows the atmospheric temperature ovet time, its a screen shot so i couldnt grab the entire graph, suffice to say that the the rises on the right correspond to our recent history.

http://www.huwnad.com/atmosptemp.png

Because the film couldn't prove a CO2/temperature linear relationship then this is meaningless.

3. Hottest years on record, many are in the last 14 years

http://www.huwnad.com/hottestyears.png

Again, this is showing results without providing evidence linking them to any cause.

[smithy]

nadoom wrote:

This is the graph I meant. You can clearly see the jump in CO2 levels on the graph (although the scale is such that it makes it seem more dramatic), and you can clearly see a similar jump in the temperature has not happened! In fact, there is missing data on the temperature series: the temperature on that chart does not extend to the present day.

This is clearly due to the fact that the temperature reacts to the rise in CO2 in a slightly delayed manner, That makes perfect sense.

Your "slightly delayed" theory is contrary to the chart you're presenting as evidence.  Why does this delay only occur in the modern warming and none of the others?

You have no evidence to suggest that the rise in temperature will not occur. Whereas that graph which is based on hard facts shows a clear link.

I didn't say temperatures weren't rising:  I said they weren't rising in line with CO2 levels, which suggests that the current modern (slight) warming is not caused by man's activities.  Your chart proves this.  If you were right, the current temperature would be off the chart.  Instead the (conspicuously absent) current temperature does not remotely show any relation to the jump in CO2 levels.

Seeing as there is 600,000 years of precedent showing that there is a link, logic dictates that such a rise will occur, the link is too established to argue over it.

Just one paragraph earlier you refuted the chart's evidence by saying there's a "delay" to prove one point.  Now you're accepting that chart's evidence to prove another.  You can't have your cake and eat it!

As I said, I think the temperature rise will occur in line with previous natural, man-free, warmings.

The other 2 grabs show that in the short term the atmospheric temperature is heating.

There are other factors that suggest the world weather is getting more and more unstable, the weather in the uk has changed dramatically in my own life time! All this turmoil in the weather has to be attributed to something, and i think the graphs to a long way to explaining it.

They do indeed explain it.  They show that the Earth's climate works in cycles, and we are just living through the cycles.

In any case if u beleive the hype or not, is that we need to start living sustainably, we have the tools all we need is the willpower.

I agree with you here actually.  We need to get off the fossils and onto something renewable.  I don't like that we are dependent on middle eastern regimes (and in about a decade Russia) for energy.