Global Warming, Carbon Dioxide, And The Solar Minimum

Authored by Renee Parsons via Off-Guardian.org,

Since Climate Change (CC) has been a constant of life on Gaia with the evolution of photosynthesis 3.2 billion years ago and has more complexities than this one essay can address; ergo, this article will explore co2’s historic contribution to global warming (GW) as well as explore the relationship of Solar Minimum(SM) to Earth’s climate.

Even before the UN-initiated Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) formed in 1988, the common assumption was that carbon dioxide was thekey greenhouse gas and that its increases were the driving force solely responsible for rising climate temperatures.

At that time, anthropogenic (human caused) GW was declared to be the existential crisis of our time, that the science was settled and that we, as a civilization, were running out of time.

And yet, in the intervening years, uncertainty remained about GW’s real time impacts which may be rooted in the fact that many of IPCC’sessential climate forecasts of consequence have not materializedas predicted.  Even as the staid Economist magazine recently noted:

Over the past fifteen years, air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse gas emissions have continued to soar.”

Before the IPCC formed, NOAA’s Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii registered co2 levelsat under 350 ppm (parts per million) with the explicit warning that if co2 exceeded that number, Mother Earth was in Big Trouble – and there would be no turning back for humanity.  Those alarm bells continue today as co2 levels have risen to 414 ppm as temperatures peaked in 1998.

From the outset, the IPCC controlled the debate by limiting its charter

to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.”

In other words, before any of the science had been done, the IPCC’s assumption was that man-made activity was responsible and that Nature was not an active participant in a process within its own sphere of interest. 

As an interdisciplinary topic of multiple diversity, the IPCC is not an authority on all the disciplines of science within the CC domain.

While there is no dispute among scientists that the Sun and its cyclical output is the true external force driving Earth’s energy and climate system as part of a Sun-centered Universe, the IPCC’s exclusion of the Sun from its consideration can only be seen as a deliberate thwarting of a basic fundamental law of  science, a process which assures a free inquiry based on reason and evidence.

It is the Sun which all planets of the solar system orbit around, that has the strongest gravitational pull in the solar system, is the heaviest of all celestial bodies and its sunspots in relation to Earth’s temperatures has been known since Galileo began drawing sunspots in 1613.

Yet the IPCC which touts a ‘scientific view of climate change’would have us believe the Sun is irrelevant and immaterial to the IPCC’s world view and Earth’s climate; hardly a blip on their radar.

In the GW debate, co2 is dismissed as a colorless, odorless pollutant that gets little credit as a critical component for its contribution to life on the planet as photosynthesis does not happen without co2.  A constant presence in Earth’s atmosphere since the production of oxygen, all living organisms depend on co2 for its existence.

As a net contributor to agriculture, plants absorb co2 as they release oxygen into the atmosphere that we two- and four-leggeds depend on for sustenance and oxygen as necessities for survival on Earth.

There are scientists who believe that Earth has been in a co2 ‘famine’ while others applaud Earth’s higher co2 levels in the last three decades as a regreening of the planet.

While An Inconvenient Truth (2006) and An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power (2016) stage managed the climate question as a thoroughly politicized ‘settled science’ with former veep Al Gore declaring the drama a ‘moral’ issue, there is no room for any preference that does not depend on a rigorous, skeptical, independent investigation based on evidentiary facts rather than the partisan politics of emotion and subjective opinion.

Given the prevalence of weather in our daily lives, it would seem elementary for engaged citizens and budding paleoclimatologists to understand Earth’s ancient climate history and atmospherein order to gain an informed perspective on Earth’s current and future climate.

As a complicated non-linearsystem, climate is a variable compositionof rhythmic spontaneity with erratic and even chaotic fluctuations making weather predictions near-impossible.  

Climate is an average of weather systems over an established long term period while individual weather events indicative of a short term trend are not accurate forecasts of CC.  While ice core readings provide information, they do not show causation of GW but only measure the ratio between co2 and rising temperatures. It is up to scientists to interpret the results.  And that’s where this narrative takes, like ancient weather and climate patterns, an unpredictable turn.

It might be called an inconvenient truth that ‘skeptic’ scientists have known for the last twenty years that the Vostok ice core samples refute co2’s role as a negative and even question its contribution as the major greenhouse gas.  

It is no secret to many climate professionals that water vapor with co2at 3.6%.

Located at the center of the Antarctica ice sheet, the Vostok Research Center is a collaborative effort where Russian and French scientists collected undisturbed ice core data in the 1990s to measure the historic presence of carbon dioxide levels.

The Vostoksamples provided the first irrefutable evidence of Earth’s climate history for 420,000 year including the existence of four previous glacial and interglacial periods. 

Those samples ultimately challenged the earlier premise of co2’s predominant role and that carbon dioxide was not the climate culprit once thought.  It is fair to add that IPCC related scientists believe Vostok to be ‘outliers’ in the GW debate.

The single most significant revelation of the ice core studies has been that GW could not be solely attributed to co2 since carbon dioxide increases occurred aftertemperature increases and that an extensive ‘lag’ time exists between the two.

Logic and clear thinking demands that cause (co2) precedes the effect (increased temps) is in direct contradiction to the assertion that carbon dioxide has been responsible for pushing higher global temperatures.  Just as today’s 414 ppm precedes current temps which remain within the range of normal variability.

Numerouspeer-reviewedstudies confirmed that co2 lags behind temperature increases, originally by as much as 800 years.

That figure was later increased to 8,000 years and by 2017 the lag timebetween co2 and temperature had been identified as 14,000 years.   As if a puzzlement from the Quantum world, it is accepted that CO2 and temperatures are correlated as they rise and fall together, yet are separated by a lag time of thousands of years.

What is obscure from public awareness in the GW shuffle is that geologic records have identified CC as a naturally occurring cyclewith glacial periods of 100,000 year intervals that are interrupted by brief, warming interglacial periods lasting 15,000-20,000 years.

Those interglacial periods act as a temperate respite from what is the world’s natural normal Ice Age environment.  Within those glacial and interglacial periods are cyclical subsets of global cooling and warming just as today’s interglacial warm period began at the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age about 12,000 years ago.   Since climate is not a constant, check these recent examples of Earth’s climate subsets:

200 BC – 600 AD: Roman warming cycle

440 AD – 950 AD: Dark Ages cool cycle

950 AD – 1300 AD: Medieval warming cycle

1300 AD – 1850 AD: Renaissance Little Ice Age

1850 – Present: Modern warming cycle

In addition, climate records have shown that peak co2 temperatures from the past are relative to today’s co2 level without the addition of a fossil fuelcontribution.  For instance, just as today’s measurement at 414 ppm contains a ‘base’ co2 level of approximately 300 ppm as recorded in the 19th century, any co2 accumulation over 300 ppm would be considered anthropogenic (man-made) and be portrayed as “historic” or ‘alarmingly high’ and yet remain statistically insignificant compared to historic co2 norms.

During the last 600 million years, only the Carboniferous period and today’s Holocene Epoch each witnessed co2 levels at less than 400 ppm.

During the Early Carboniferous Period, co2 was at 1500 ppm with average temperatures comparable to 20 C; 68 F before diving to 350 ppm during the Mid Carboniferous period with a reduced temperature of 12 C;54F. In other words, current man-made contributions to co2 are less than what has been determined to be significant.

Contrary to the IPCC’s stated goal, NASA recognizes thatAll weather on Earth, from the surface of the planet into space, begins with the Sun” and that weather experienced on Earth’s surface is “influenced by the small changes the Sun undergoes during its solar cycle.”

Solar Minimum(SM) is a periodic 11 year solar cycle normally manifesting a weak magnetic field with increased radiation and cosmic rays while exhibiting decreased sunspot activity that, in turn, decreases planetary temperatures.

Today’s solar cycle is referred to as the Grand Minimum which, according to NOAA, predicts reductions from the typical 140 – 220 sunspots per solar cycle to 95 – 130 sunspots.

As the Sun is entering “one of the deepest Solar Minima of the Space Age,” a NASA scientist predicted a SM that could ”set a Space Age record for cold” but has recently clarified his statement as it applies only to the Thermosphere.

In October 2018, NOAA predicted “Winter Outlook favors Warmer Temperaturefor much of the US,” as above-normal precipitation and record freezing temperatures were experienced throughout the country.

As of this writing, with the Sun noticeably intense, Earth has experienced 22 consecutive dayswithout sunspots for a 2019 total of 95 spotless days at 59%. 

In 2018, 221 days were spotless at 61%. Spaceweather.com monitors sunspot (in)activity.

With the usual IPCC and Non-IPCCsplit, the SM is expected to be at its lowest by 2020 with a peak between 2023 and 2026 as it exhibits counterintuitive erratic weather anomalies including cooler temps due to increased cloud cover, higher temps due to solar sunspot-free brilliance, potential electrical events,  heavy rain and flooding and drought, a shorter growing season, impacts on agriculture and food production systems or it may all be a walk in the park with shirt sleeves in January.

While there is clearly an important climate shift occurring even as the role of co2 and human activity as responsible entities remains problematic, the elimination of co2 and its methane sidekick would be exceedingly beneficial for a healthy planet.  It is time to allow scientists to be scientists without political agendas or bureaucratic interference as the Sun and Mother Earth continue in their orbit as they have for eons of millennia.

As Earth’s evolutionary climate cycles observe the Universal law of the natural world, the Zero Point Field, which produces an inexhaustible source of ‘free’ energy that Nikola Tesla spoke of, is the means by which inter stellar vehicles travel through time/space.  The challenge for ingenious, motivated Earthlings is to harness and extract the ZPF proclaiming a new planetary age of technological innovation with no rapacious industry, no pollution, no shortages, no gas guzzlers and no war.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
15 Comments
doug
doug
June 22, 2019 6:03 pm

That last paragraph is a bit of a non sequitur isn’t it.

Anonymous
Anonymous
June 22, 2019 6:22 pm

The first day of summer and I had to light a fire!

Vixen Vic
Vixen Vic
  Anonymous
June 24, 2019 4:56 am

I live in the Deep South and we never hit 100F. where I live last summer. That’s the first time in my lifetime that has ever happened and I’m now over 50 years old. The heat index was over 100 due to humidity but the actual temp never hit 100.
This year, I didn’t even use the air conditioner for several weeks in June. That is unheard of !
We are already in a cooling period but nobody wants to admit it.

Gryffyn
Gryffyn
June 22, 2019 6:48 pm

This article could use some serious editing. However, the basic message seems valid. CO2 rises after, not before planetary warming. We are learning this from ice core samples, ocean core samples and sedimentary rocks. The sun does not have a constant thermal output. Scientists believe the earth has been both totally ice covered and ice free in its billions of years orbiting our star. When CO2 was at 1500 ppm plants flourished and laid down the coal, oil and gas that we mine and drill for today. CO2 is now relatively low, only a couple of percent of our atmosphere, 400+ ppm. At 150 ppm plants die. We are still learning. When the sun gets hotter plants spread toward the poles. They die and decay, releasing CO2 through slow oxidation, feeding their successors and life goes on.

grace country pastor
grace country pastor
  Sam Fox
June 23, 2019 9:16 am

Thank you Sam.

“Since Climate Change (CC) has been a constant of life on Gaia with the evolution of photosynthesis 3.2 billion years ago ”

I stopped after the first sentence. Some people are beyond help.

RiNS
RiNS
  grace country pastor
June 23, 2019 9:56 am

Why?

Vixen Vic
Vixen Vic
  Sam Fox
June 24, 2019 5:02 am

From what I’ve read, I agree that fossil fuels are renewable. If I remember correctly, they are generated deep within earth and rise toward the surface of the earth’s crust.

yahsure
yahsure
June 22, 2019 10:47 pm

I think soon all the scientist will be found to be full of crap. The Backpedaling should be interesting. A common theme is we need a new tax and new ways to control people.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  yahsure
June 23, 2019 8:21 am

See Oregon senate walk out to stop a vote on cap & trade carbon credit taxation and the governor assuming the role of dictator attempting to use the state police to force the republicans back in session to allow a quorum to force thru a bill the republicans are against due to a purely leftist agenda

Vixen Vic
Vixen Vic
  Anonymous
June 24, 2019 5:04 am

Don’t forget the false reports of a “militia” terrorizing Democrats to make them seem sympathetic figures. It’s all B.S. Good for the Republicans in Oregon. I hope they stay out of state until the next election is over.

gatsby1219
gatsby1219
June 23, 2019 6:44 am

Without co2 we all die.

SmallerGovNow
SmallerGovNow
June 23, 2019 8:43 am

“the elimination of co2 and its methane sidekick would be exceedingly beneficial for a healthy planet. ”

BULLSHIT! CO2 IS PLANT FOOD! Chip

TC
TC
  SmallerGovNow
June 23, 2019 9:39 am

It’s gotta be a typo. The author states above that how critical CO2 is.

Vixen Vic
Vixen Vic
June 24, 2019 4:50 am

As I’ve said before, the IPCC doesn’t allow scientists who receive grants to discuss the sun in it’s estimates on effects of climate change. They are only allowed to look at the human action that could cause a change in climate. There have been ice ages and maximum warming periods higher than present highs but nobody cares to look into that if they get grants. It’s all a shame and embarrassing that people accept this un-scientific science (consensus science, which is not scientific).
The Farmer’s Almanac uses the sun to make predictions of weather for the entire year, and they have been correct every year that I’ve been following them, over 10 years now.
In other words, it’s the sun, stupid.