Debunking "Anthropogenic Climate Change & Global Warming": Presenting the Lake Vostok Antarctic Ice

For any of you still perpetrating the anthropogenic "Climate change" lie , please refer to the Russian and French Ice experiments below. This knocks down the whole house of cards on the "global warming" falsehood. Tell all your friends. (this is not new research) Amazing so many people are still duped..


J.-M. Barnola, D. Raynaud, C. Lorius
Laboratoire de Glaciologie et de Géophysique de l'Environnement,
CNRS, BP96,
38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex, France


N.I. Barkov
Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute,
Beringa Street 38, 199397,
St. Petersburg, Russia

Ice core samples from Lake Vostok, Antarctica
420,000 ft. depth (2 miles down)
Period of Record: 417,160 - 2,342 years BP

What did the Ice Core samples teach scientists?
Increases in carbon dioxide always accompanied increases in temperature, But the increases in temperature always came first.

What does this mean? The increases in carbon dioxide consistently lag behind temperature increases by about 800 years.

This proves: Increased levels of carbon dioxide did not cause warming if it didn’t happen until after the warming.

They also learned that 325,000 years ago the global temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were higher than they are today.

cdiac.ornl.gov...


cdiac.ornl.gov...

This proves: Increased levels of carbon dioxide did not cause warming if it didn’t happen until after the warming.

No.
It demonstrates that natural warming leads to increases in atmospheric CO2. That's a known effect. The warmer the ocean is the less CO2 it can contain.

The thing is, now, both atmospheric and oceanic CO2 levels are rising. Is that effect seen in the historic data?

They also learned that 325,000 years ago the global temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were higher than they are today.

No. CO2 levels are higher than they have been in more than 500,000 years. The current level is about 400 ppm.

Regarding your source (Barnola):

The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows the present-day levels of CO2 are unprecedented during the past 420 kyr.

cdiac.ornl.gov...

a reply to: Phage

Refer to the research Phage.

The samples did show that increases in carbon dioxide always accompanied inreases in temperature, but the increases in temperature always came first.

The increases in CO2 consistently lagged behind temperature increases by about eight hundred years.

That proves increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere didnt cause the warming.

In fact, right now we are near the end of another warm interglacial. And those of us who are educated in science know we're actually heading into another glacial cooling period where global temperatures will drop and ice will again form heavily at the poles. it's already happening.

The Antarctic has just had the greatest growth of ice in a very long period of time.

They also learned that 325,000 years ago the global temperatures and carbon dioxide levels were higher than they are today.

The extension of the Vostok CO2 record shows the present-day levels of CO2 are unprecedented during the past 420 kyr.

www.collective-evolution.com...


Did you not get any of this while at Columbia learning to become an agitator? ;-) As joe Martino reports, 325,000 years ago, global temps and CO2 levels were higher than they are today. "420,000 years of datat suggests global warming is not entirely manmade" Collective Evolution www.collective-evolution.com

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

That proves increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere didnt cause the warming.

No. It doesn't. It proves that, as expected, warming will produce higher CO2 levels because warmer water cannot contain as much CO2. That does not explain why, currently, both oceanic and atmospheric CO2 levels are rising.

The Antarctic has just had the greatest growth of ice in a very long period of time.

Are you sure?
www.sciencedaily.com...

Did you not get any of this while at Columbia learning to become an agitator? As joe Martino reports, 325,000 years ago, global temps and CO2 levels were higher than they are today.

I did not attend Columbia. Who is Joe Martino? I quoted the link you provided in the OP.

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

What does this mean? The increases in carbon dioxide consistently lag behind temperature increases by about 800 years.

This was a natural cycle, right now we are the ones adding CO2 not the temperature or the innate ability of the oceans to absorb CO2 in a warmer climate, you have to add the human impact variable.

a reply to: Phage

No.
It demonstrates that natural warming leads to increases in atmosopheric C02.

So wait... Did natural warming lead to increased C02? Or did increased C02 lead to natural warming?

Explain the natural part.

a reply to: muSSang

Dr. Arthur B. Robinson, publisher and editor of the newsletter Access to Energy, and other scientists confirmed that climate change and temperature variations are related to sunspot activity and water vapor. “A sixfold increase in hydrocarbon use since 1940 has had no noticeable effect on atmospheric temperature or on the trend of glacial length,” according to Dr. Robinson. The CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by 2 percent in the past fifty years but is unrelated to temperature changes. It has been shown that higher CO2 levels will cause plants to grow faster and larger with less water.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Phage

No.
It demonstrates that natural warming leads to increases in atmosopheric C02.

So wait... Did natural warming lead to increased C02? Or did increased C02 lead to natural warming?

Explain then natural part.

Increases in carbon dioxide always accompanied increases in temperature, But the increases in temperature always came first.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

Explain then natural part.

Variations in Solar insolation lead to warming. Warming leads to warmer oceans. Warmer oceans leads to dissolved CO2 being released into the atmosphere.

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

But the increases in temperature always came first.

Until people started pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

The CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by 2 percent in the past fifty years but is unrelated to temperature changes.

What is the basis of this claim?

Arthur Robinson is a biochemist (not a climatologist) and is employed by the Heartland Institute.
www.desmogblog.com...

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

Not quite up to date but gives you an idea .



No warming going on here , sarc



Sorry i couldn't link the page

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: knightsofcydonia

The CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by 2 percent in the past fifty years but is unrelated to temperature changes.

What is the basis of this claim?

Arthur Robinson is a biochemist (not a climatologist) and is employed by the Heartland Institute.
www.desmogblog.com...

www.oism.org...

There are no experimental data to support the hypothesis that increases in human hydrocarbon use or in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing or can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperatures, weather, or landscape. There is no reason to limit human production of CO2, CH4, and other minor greenhouse gases as has been proposed (82,83,97,123).
We also need not worry about environmental calamities even if the current natural warming trend continues. The Earth has been much warmer during the past 3,000 years without catastrophic effects. Warmer weather extends growing seasons and generally improves the habitability of colder regions.

As coal, oil, and natural gas are used to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe, more CO2 will be released into the atmosphere. This will help to maintain and improve the health, longevity, prosperity, and productivity of all people.

The United States and other countries need to produce more energy, not less. The most practical, economical, and environmentally sound methods available are hydrocarbon and nuclear technologies.

Human use of coal, oil, and natural gas has not harmfully warmed the Earth, and the extrapolation of current trends shows that it will not do so in the foreseeable future. The CO2 produced does, however, accelerate the growth rates of plants and also permits plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon plants, also flourishes, and the diversity of plant and animal life is increased.

Human activities are producing part of the rise in CO2 in the atmosphere. Mankind is moving the carbon in coal, oil, and natural gas from below ground to the atmosphere, where it is available for conversion into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of this CO2 increase. Our children will therefore enjoy an Earth with far more plant and animal life than that with which we now are blessed.

a reply to: Phage

The warmer the ocean is the less CO2 it can contain.

How close are oceans to being CO2 saturated?

a reply to: knightsofcydonia

Nothing to say? Just a link?
Good night.

a reply to: Phage

Did you just validate the argument that solar winds dictate the (natural) change of climate?

a reply to: Vector99

Not close.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: Phage

Did you just validate the argument that solar winds dictate the (natural) change of climate?

No.

a reply to: Phage

I'm asking you to educate me. So please reiterate with more than 'no.'