the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

The Changing Earth

Posted by Jeff Id on September 17, 2008

I didn’t feel very inspired today until I ran across an article on the violence of earths history. I want to write about that now. For those who read my blog regularly, you know that I feel it is clear that the world governments are the primary drivers behind the global warming rhetoric and science. Some day I will post on how the governments are using the scientists but that is a different subject.

The primary theory behind anthropogenic global warming AGW is that the earth is changing in an unprecedented fashion. This is absolutely false and that is one thing scientists can tell for sure. So when the rhetoric is reduced, they narrow it to unprecidented in recent history. The nearly 100% government funded AGW scientists then show graphs of the last 2000 years and say we are warmer than at any time in those 2000 years. This is heavily in question, but not that important considering the age of the earth.

Here is a temperature reconstructon from the famous Vostock Ice core.

And a zoomed in view of the last 15,000 years.

First, the 400,000 years reconstruction shows huge spikes in temperature, the low point nearest to the zero year on the first graph is the last major ice age 12000 years ago. But it was 9C colder than now or 16 Fahrenheit on average. Think about that, 16 degrees colder all summer long than average, an 80 degree F day today was normally 64. What else we can see is that it went on for a hundred thousand years. A hundred thousand years of 64 degree weather!!!! In the summer! I grew up in Michigan, the weather there is very cold in the winter, typically running 20 degrees F with 0 degrees fairly often. A 16 degree drop on average is unimaginable. Of course Michigan was under a mile thick glacier 15000 years ago.

What’s worse is, in the ice core data (top graph) there are 4 distinct up slopes and 5 peaks. Most of the time we are in a deep temperature valley. Most of the time we are much colder!! Not just a bit but a whole lot colder. And not just colder than the last hundred years but colder than the last 10000.

Now look at the first 4 peaks in temperature at the end of each ice age, each one is greater than where we are today. If you look at our recent recovery from the last major ice age, we are abnormally low by a significant amount! One clear thing you can see is that even at much higher temperatures which of course had to melt many ice caps and upset quite a few saber tooth polar bears, there was no TIPPING point. No POINT OF DOOM!! Where is the huge CO2 release from the arctic tundra, which drives climate to 5C hotter?

Look at the little tallest in the second graph, about 8000 years ago there was this little spike where temperatures jumped nearly 3 degrees C from -1 to +2 over a relatively short 400 year time frame. Compare that to our current ground based temperature is only about 0.5 C above the minimum temperature WE HAVE EVER MEASURED!! (Temperatures have been dropping since 1998). Or how about the satellite temperatures which are measuring NO INCREASE! AT EVEN 2 C HIGHER THERE WAS NO TIPPING POINT!! THE EARTH DIDN’T END!!

Ok, I’m calmer now. Check out this.

Melting ice has ‘provided’ us with frozen mammoths and even frozen people, like the famous Oetzi from the Alps, as if they were kept in a fridge. No wonder that melting glaciers in Western Canada, which recently reached a historic minimum, have unveiled 7,000-year-old tree stumps.

Now many readers of my blog are very savvy about AGW to the point that every nuance of the science is already understood, but for those of you who are ignorant like I was a while ago, think about what they are saying.

Only 7000 years ago the earth was warmer, a lot warmer. In fact it was enough warmer that TREES WERE GROWING OLD WHERE GLACIERS NOW LAY!!!!. When you first read most warming in 7000 years, it is shocking, . . . but taken in context it means that the Earth WITH NO PEOPLE MAKING CO2 will still MELT THE DAMN GLACIERS! They say Historic minimum, but melting of ice clearly happens naturally.

Ok, if you are not convinced about 7000 years how about this.

Alpine melt reveals ancient life. A glacier in the mountains retreats due to our evil cars and what do we find? People, living 3000 plus years ago where we couldn’t live now with modern technology. Only three thousand years ago people are living in what is no unimaginably cold, yet we can’t even explain how they were able to pull it off. LINK HERE.

The AGW guys say WORST ICE MELT IN RECORDED HISTORY!!!, yet we have numerous examples of ice melts much worse. Peer review has been turned into like minded friend review by the world governments controlling the science. But what is the real story. We need to look to my first paragraph for those answers.

While good scientists around the web are fighting over the minutia of the detail contained within the papers, politicians are wringing their hands over the new policies and controls they can inflict upon the population. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was formed in 1986, for the stated purpose of identifying the effects of man made climate change. This was before man made climate change was established. Look at the temperature curves, think about what this is saying. Think about what happens to the IPCC if the earth stops heating up!!

From Digital Diatribes of a Random Idiot – The best measured temperature trend site on the web. Completely unbiased!

The “Anomaly” axis is hundredths of a degree C or 40 = 0.4C. So the total temperature rise from this ground based measurement is about 0.7. Now without getting into the endless problems with ground based measurements this isn’t too much compared to what happens all the time.

This is a satellite measurement of ground temperature, free of all the errors which make ground stations unreliable.

When we look at the temperature rise over the 130 years we have physically measured, being not sophisticated enough as a species to measure and record temperature accurately only 130 F’N YEARS AGO!!!! (sorry lost my temper again). We see a total maximum peak min to max of 1C. Realistically, what does this mean in comparison with the huge spikes we see in the ice core record, and the fact that only 3000 years ago, people were living in animal skins where now we only have glaciers!!

Ok, I won’t get into the obvious methods the IPCC (intergovenmental panel on climate change) has used to take over this “alleged” science pushing away dissenters and manufacturing the “consensus!!!”, we need to keep in mind that the science is in question. In the meantime, remember no matter how we fight, the earth will eventually change climate. As far as I can tell, every scientist agrees about that!.

See the red line indicating a slight negative trend since 1997, cooling off while CO2 increases! Note one thing about this graph, satellite temperatures have reached 0 net anomaly this summer. What? zero, no global warming. Thats right none, nada, zip, ice at both poles has increased from last year and the antarctic ice has increased since 1970.

The point of this whole rant is that temperature changes… often. People and trees can’t live under glaciers. Scientists know that yet they continue to paint a false picture of no temperature change or flat temperatures in history.

If you wan’t to know why the science is dishonest, look no farther thant the UN and world governments who fund them.

It’s a rant so feel free to say what you want, I’m wrong a lot.

11 Responses to “The Changing Earth”

  1. LeeW said


    What’s the time frame they use to determine the temperature anomaly? My own personal little rant has to do with this business of using an anomaly at all. Using anomalies can introduce bias into the measurements (or so it would seem), so why not just graph the actual temperature? Or is that not possible the way reconstructions are compile??

  2. PeteS said

    I see that the BBC News programme referred to, reported that climate change was ‘due to the Earth’s orbital pattern, [but] now the driving force is green house gas emissions.’ I understood that solar activity, i.e. sunspots correlated well with cooling and warming periods, not orbital perturbations.

  3. LeeW said


    I agree with your thought on solar variability. As I understand it, when the sun goes quiet, this allows cosmic rays to freely enter our atmosphere. Cosmic rays aid in seeding clouds, which causes cooling.

    I am surprised so many learned people just dismiss this idea without a thought.

  4. Jeff Id said


    The time frame is different for each of the 4 main temperature measurements, but not by much. The word Anomaly is certainly in intentional choice by the IPCC, to imply the abnormality of the situation. Drives me crazy. I think the use of Anomaly data instead of temperature came about because it gives a zero to the statistical mathematics but if I’m wrong about that (which I might be) the only other reason would be to advertise to the public the temperature change in easy simple numbers.

    I never thought of my self as a conspiracy guy but every single piece of real information on global warming I can find points to intentional control of information for government purposes. The deeper I look the more obvious it becomes. I’m not saying all of the scientists are intentionally working with the government and they have dark meetings in basements. I am saying the governments have put a structure in place which has systematically defunded and segregated scientists by their conclusions.

    In my post “Mann 08 – Variable Data” I was just happily plotting the data to see what changes were made, I didn’t know what I would find. My discovery was that data was being added to the tree ring proxies to extend it into modern years. That’s bad enough except that they don’t know that tree rings measure temperature, the only way they can tell is if the tree ring plots are shaped like the temperature plots. If they add artificial shape to the tree ring plots before they compare them to temperature, how the hell can they claim the plots measure temperature.

    Very bad science that shouldn’t have passed peer review.

    I feel a bit like that post slipped under the radar, it is by far my best work on the subject and it clearly shows Mann adding a hockey stick on the end of the data, and then going to look for the hockey stick.

    I have to think of a way to make it more accessible to the public.

  5. LeeW said

    I agree that the Mann 08 post provides the best forencic evidence I’ve seen to falsify the entire paper.

    If I could make one comment, I would try to prepare this information a bit differently. Maybe in the form of a paper that you would pass out to middle school kids who are just now beginning to study climate change. Try to reach the lowest common denominator, in that you want to explain it so all people can understand it (not that it’s so difficult in the current form).

    Finally, just remember that Rome wasn’t built in a day. Attitudes take time to change, and websites take time to generate an audience. With that being said, I would think if you make this into a PDF that can be disseminated more easily, then you can reach more people (think of an email chain for simplicity sake). After all, if it works for the alarmists, and the emails I receive about those poor polar bears…!!

  6. Hud said

    Using “anomaly” is important for at least a couple reasons.

    1.) It makes the change seem big. Plot temp v. time using absolute temp and it’s all just noise.

    2.) Very closely related, it helps hide the solar connection. AGWarmongers assert that variability of solar irradiance is simply too small to account for temperature change. According to
    , over the past 26 years, irradiance has varied no more than 0.1%. That’s of course a short data set covering only two solar cycles during a period of warming. Nevertheless, taking the asserted claim that world temperatures have increased 1C over the past 100 years, that’s only a 0.35% change. 1C=1K Average world temperature ~290K (1/290)*100% = 0.35% Looked at that way, even neglecting the mechanisms that reach a new steady state (as well as the other feedback and consequences such as the cosmic ray cloud seeding), 0.1% irradiance variability no longer seems miniscule.

  7. Jeff Id said

    I have seen the plot of solar variance against temperature and it correlates a heck of a lot better than CO2. It has been shown so many times that I didn’t bother with a post on it. I kind of hope the sun stays calm for another year or so, it will do some damage to the AGW guys but they are already claiming the sun is just masking the global warming.

    Every time it doesn’t make sense, we need to remember that man made global warming is a hundred billion plus dollar industry.

  8. LeeW said

    When things like solar variability, or El Nino/La Nina lead certain groups to claim that they are able to mask or intensify the effects of AGW, in my mind, that only lends more credence to the idea that AGW (specifically CO2) is not a primary driver of the climate.

    My educated guess is that it MAY be a tertiary driver behind the oceans (primary) and the sun (secondary). But at the same time it wouldn’t surprise me if it were a quaternary driver lagging even land-use alterations.

    If CO2 forcing were the primary driver, you would suspect that it would overwhelm, or mask, other forcings. Of course, I should add the caveat that I may be entirely wrong about this since I would never want to paint myself into a corner (we’ve all seen where that can lead).

  9. Jeff Id said


    I agree, we all need to make sure that we keep open minds or we will turn into them. The AGW group makes it tough though.

  10. DADvocate said

    Anyone who has taken introductory geology in college knows that the Earth has undergone dramatic fluctuations in climate. What we’re seeing now isn’t even dramatic.

  11. nevket240 said

    Add Solar, Cosmic and Core, (S2C) together and you have Climate.
    KISS-Keep It Simple Stupid. I wonder if Al & Hank have heard of the KISS principle??
    Probably not, their making bucks out of the Precautionary principle, whatever that means.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: