Shock New Evidence Showing No Link Between CO2 and Temperature Over Last Three Million Years Stumps Net Zero Activists

The climate science world (‘settled’ division) is in shock following the discovery in ancient ice cores that levels of carbon dioxide remained stable as the world plunged into an ice age around 2.7 million years ago. Levels of CO2 at around 250 parts per million (ppm) were said to be lower than often assumed with just a 20 ppm movement recorded for the following near three million-year period. In addition, no changes in methane levels were seen in the entire period. Massive decreases in temperature with occasional interglacial rises appear to have occurred without troubling ‘greenhouse’ gas levels, and this revelation has caused near panic in activist circles.

The assumed level three million years ago of CO2 was around 400 ppm, a convenient mark that has been used to explain the subsequent ice age and a drop to 250 ppm. Due to the recently published paper, this explanation has become more problematic and natural climate variation is correctly noted to have occurred with the temperature changes. Alas, similar explanations are mostly ignored in discussing today’s climate changes in the interests of promoting the Net Zero fantasy. Some cling desperately to a dominant CO2 role, including one of the authors of the findings published in Nature. The co-author states that the results suggest even greater climate sensitivity to the warming effect of CO2. In short, there is a great deal of applying the laws of physics and chemistry to one era, but failing to extend the same courtesy to another.

The title of the paper, produced by 17 America-based scientists, was enough to set alarm bells ringing in the ‘settled’ science, Net Zero-obsessed community: ‘Broadly stable atmospheric CO2 and CH4 levels over the past three million years.’ A related paper examining ocean heat content derived from the ice core record was also published. Carrie Lear, Professor of Past Climates and Earth System Changes at Cardiff University, claimed that the papers “don’t rewrite the role of CO2, they underline how sensitive the climate system is… that is why today’s rapid  CO2 rise is so alarming”.

Ah, yes. Even if CO2 movements are minimal, probably within a margin of potential error, they are still responsible for large variations in temperature. The laws of climate science are ‘settled’ – if the trace atmospheric gas CO2 is rising, falling or generally stable, it is almost wholly responsible for large movements in global temperature. Under this rather shaky assumption, humans must stop burning hydrocarbons and return to a neo-Malthusian pre-industrial age.

Study lead author Julia Marks-Peterson noted: “We definitely were a bit surprised. If correct, the findings may suggest that even small changes in greenhouse gas levels could trigger major shifts in climate.” That’s a little bit of a scary thought, she added, possibly with an eye on future grant funding. “May suggest” is doing a lot of the work here, and it may also be suggested that more plausible opinions are available.

Quoted in New Scientist magazine, Tim Naish, Professor of Earth Science at Victoria University in New Zealand, said it was “way too early to thrown the baby out with the bathwater”. Perish the thought that baby should be given its marching orders, ending a science-lite 40-year demonisation of CO2 and related promotion of a hard-Left Net Zero dream.

The latest Nature-published research gives a snapshot from ancient Antarctica ‘blue’ ice drilled in the Allan Hills area. It looks back further in time past the usual 800,000 ice core records. The key finding is that over the last three million years, when sea levels fell and ice periods intensified, the level of the main ‘greenhouse’ gases remained remarkably stable. For the first time, the work has pushed the direct gas measurements back into the late Pliocene era. Over the last three million years moving into the Pleistocene, global temperatures showed a long-term cooling trend of several degrees Celsius, interrupted by increasingly large interglacial oscillations. Interglacial temperature swings, as in the current Holocene, often see temperatures rise by 5°C and more.

Critics seeking to downplay ice core evidence often suggest it is too imprecise to provide a wholly accurate record of gas levels and temperature. But it is accurate enough to give a broad cyclical insight. It remains the source of some of the best data we have on the past climate. It is undoubtedly more accurate than most proxy evidence from millions of years ago. But whatever the evidence used, it is hard to detect any obvious and continuous link between CO2 and temperature across the entire geological record going back 600 million years to the start of abundant life on Earth. Certainly none to justify the political notion that humans control the climate thermostat by burning hydrocarbons.

In fact the evidence is so slim that Les Hatton, Emeritus Professor in Computer Science at Kingston University, was recently able to determine from ice core records that 100-year rises of 1.1°C in the current interglacial, which started 20,000 years ago, have occurred in one in six centuries. Going back 150,000 years, the frequency was around one in six to one in 20 centuries. None of these findings suggest that current warming is either unusual or primarily caused by human activity. Needless to say, none of these findings trouble the headline writers in narrative-addicted mainstream media.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

27 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
LadbrokeGrove
LadbrokeGrove
18 days ago

A religion will never be challenged with facts, true believers will always believe.

DiscoveredJoys
DiscoveredJoys
18 days ago
Reply to  LadbrokeGrove

…and the greater the contrary evidence the harder the believers will double down in their beliefs.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
18 days ago
Reply to  DiscoveredJoys

But they will eventually be made to look so very, very stupid.

Frances Killian
Frances Killian
18 days ago
Reply to  Tyrbiter

We have to hope to live that long!

NeilParkin
18 days ago
Reply to  Tyrbiter

I doubt it. They will pick up- some other ‘existential’ threat, and leave the whole CO2 thing at the kerb like a tatty old sofa that everyone farted in. It is not, and has never been about establishing the facts, rather it has been about providing forward momentum to the gravy train.

Andy A
18 days ago
Reply to  DiscoveredJoys

Clinate change, not science but religion

huxleypiggles
18 days ago

Which will prove to be the biggest scam ever pulled on humanity, the C1984 or the climate change bollox?

It’s a close one.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
18 days ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

The whole post WW2 socialist construct?

Clactonite
Clactonite
18 days ago

I am shocked at these findings!

Clactonite
Clactonite
18 days ago
Reply to  Clactonite

I’m not. I was playing with you hee hee

Covid-1984
Covid-1984
17 days ago
Reply to  Clactonite

NOT

JXB
JXB
18 days ago

Evidence has no place in the religion of Environmentalism – Climate Cult Branch.

Heretic! Anathema! Denier!

Heretic
Heretic
18 days ago

Excellent! Speaking of ice, I hope to learn more on here from Chris Morrison about the real possibility that we are already entering a Little Ice Age, as Professor Valentina Zharkova has been warning for decades, and the severe cold will start around 2030.

It seems that something else to keep an eye on is the North Atlantic Oscillation involving the Azores High and the Icelandic Low, because when both the Azores High and the Icelandic Low pressures are very strong (as they are now), lots of high winds, storms and rain sweep over Northern Europe and the UK. Then when the two are weak, all the rain goes south to the desert lands while freezing polar air from Russia comes sweeping down over us. If I understand it correctly, when these two patterns become “locked” for long periods, and the pack ice starts moving south, and the glaciers increase in size (as some are now), we begin to enter the next Ice Age.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
18 days ago
Reply to  Heretic

Electroverse is a great resource, Cap has a wide knowledge of how the weather patterns are changing.

Heretic
Heretic
17 days ago
Reply to  Tyrbiter

Yes! I’ve urged people on here to visit his website, even though it’s paywalled, because we can learn a lot just by scrolling through the photos and captions, and also from that comments section.

It’s great that Cap has taken up the banner after the untimely demise of Robert W. Felix, author of “Not By Fire, But By Ice”, and founder of the “Ice Age Now” website. Felix resisted getting the Covid Clotshot, but said his wife persuaded him, and he died suddenly soon afterwards. Now he’s been nearly consigned to the Memory Hole by Google search engines featuring others named Robert Felix, so it’s important to search using his middle initial “W.”

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
18 days ago
Reply to  Heretic

Look for a plot of the solar system barycentre over the next 50 years, it spends long periods close to or within the sun’s surface. This means that the outer planets’ driving of the solar dynamo reduces and that leads to reduced solar activity and especially lower UV atmospheric heating of the earth. Yes, it is likely to get cold, and solar cycle 25 is now beginning to show a very significant activity reduction, it’s happening now!

Heretic
Heretic
17 days ago
Reply to  Tyrbiter

Thanks for that— I’ll look it up later. I do agree with you that it is actually happening now. And the Globalists know it, as Valentina Zharkova said… which gives a deeply sinister meaning to their Net Zero extremist measures, in addition to trying to collapse the infrastructure by Mass Third World invasion.

They really do want us to freeze and starve to death.

Cotfordtags
18 days ago

This is all very encouraging to us who believe that temperature and climate are self-volatile and need no encouragement from man to change in whatsoever way they will. We must be careful, however, at pointing at one dataset and screaming aha at the climate cultists. Chris’ claim that plant food levels were lower and remained lower undermines our joy that increased levels of CO2 are leading to pre-mankind levels of greenery. The truth, none of us knows the truth.

shred
shred
18 days ago

The last time that the warmists were challenged by ice core detail they argued that the evidence that CO2 increased after warming was because of the way that snow was deposited. It was a long shot but it’s gone quiet.
If you want to see the debate go to Euan Mearns website. It was about 15 years ago.

Adethefade
Adethefade
17 days ago

I have a packet of salted peanuts placed on my front lawn which acts as a very effective mole repellant. The proof of this is that you’ll rarely see any moles on my front lawn, and if you do, it’ll be far fewer than you’d see if that packet of peanuts wasn’t there.

Covid-1984
Covid-1984
17 days ago

I make no apologies for reposting this:

We are 40 glaciations into the Quaternary ice age, the coldest period on earth since the Karoo ice age 255m years ago. We have the Vostok ice cores showing co2 lagging temperature for the last 800k year as predicted by Henry’s law. Anyone who is worried about slight warming (much of which is the urban heat island effect) threatening a species evolved in the tropics is an abject moron who should be in charge of nothing.

edmh
17 days ago

Wind and Solar “Renewables” aren’t effective power sources:  they are only ever intermittent fuel-savers. Anyone who thinks that is a good idea to replace power generators working consistently at ~90% productivity 24/7/365 with technologies that are unreliable and intermittent must be in error or malign.  The measured, Weather-Dependent “Renewables productivity” is less than ~18%.  The low productivity of Weather-Dependent “Renewables” means that installations must be about 5-6 times bigger to contribute the same power to the Grid.  Were their installation costs were equivalent, (they are not), the cost of their power is more than conventional gas, coal and even nuclear technologies. They are dependent on massive subsidies and are very destructive of the environment and wildlife.   Burning fossil fuels produces Carbon Dioxide CO2, but its warming effectiveness radically diminished at higher concentrations.  Any future Man-made CO2 can now only make a minor contribution to Global temperature.  Were CO2 important, Gas-firing has half the CO2 emissions of Coal and about a quarter of imported biomass.   https://edmhdotme.wpcomstaging.com/minimal-future-warming-from-co2-ch4-n2o/ CO2 is essential Plant Food, its rise in the atmosphere has resulted in a massive increase in crop productivity worldwide.  So, rising CO2 levels reduces the need for agricultural land.   Having damaged its industrial base, the UK only produces ~0.8% of Global… Read more »

varmint
17 days ago

This has actually been known for a very long time. We saw way back in 2007 on Martin Durkin’s Documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” that evidence from Ice Cores showed the opposite of what Al Gore claimed in his “An Inconvenient Truth” where he said that “when there is more CO2 the temperature gets warmer”——–In Durkin’s film we saw that in actual fact there is a relationship between CO2 and temperature and that temperature comes FIRST, and CO2 comes SECOND. There is a big gap between the temperature rising and CO2 increasing of about 800 years, simply because when the earth is heated up by the sun (who would have guessed) that the oceans being very big and deep take hundreds of years to emit all the CO2 they contain This is very important because when people think they are seeing changes today as regards temperature and climate etc what they are likely seeing is changes that are a result of what happened hundreds of years ago and nothing to do with things happening today. —-eg about 800 years ago we were in the middle of the Medieval Warming Period which lasted several hundred years, and that we are… Read more »

CrisBCTnew
17 days ago
Reply to  varmint

Al Gore’s film actually switched the colours of temperature and CO2 between one slide and the next. Then he kept on with his mendacious talk. Gore actually proved the opposite of his claims. I wish I had kept a reference to the point in the film.

Then there’s:
https://www.iceagenow.com/Our_glaciers_are_growing_not_melting.html/

rdhjr
rdhjr
17 days ago

“…if the trace atmospheric gas CO2 is rising, falling or generally stable, it is almost wholly responsible for large movements in global temperature.”

It’s hard not to laugh when you read this. If only the stakes weren’t so high, though. In any other field, this would be a clear indication that the factor in question was likely NOT having a significant role/impact on the thing being studied.