« Where's my Passport? | Main | I'm from the EU here to teach you democracy... »

Climate Change Consensus opens a can of worms

Woburn%20Sulphur.jpg

I have previously blogged about Sulphates and how they may have held down Global Warming in the 1970s - a common belief. Interestingly David Parker from the Met Office commented to my post and basically pointed out that my theory was rubbish, the Sulphate effect didn't seem to be responsible for the temperature differences.

Over at Climate Audit Willis Eschenbach has being having
MORE THOUGHTS ON SULFATES

I got to thinking about the theory that sulfate aerosols are the cause of the decrease in global temperatures from ~1945 - 1975.

After slicing and dicing the data in different ways they also seem to be saying the Sulphate effect theory doesn't hold water. So we have agreement between what might be called the two sides of the climate science debate.

So what did cause the temperature not to increase in line with the increasing CO2 levels if it wasn't all those smoky chimneys?

Comments

The first thing that sprang to mind was "Has anyone compared this with the number of pirates for the same period?" Then "When were atmospheric nuclear bomb tests stopped?".

Having seen how dodgy the likes of James Hansen's methods are how are we, the little people, to know what is or isn't accurate? Does the 1945-1975 period coincide with a change in measuring technology?(Or to put it another way, did something change in 1975 with the way we collect this data that might reverse a cooling trend (real or otherwise))

Just maybe, it's that the temperature moves in accordance with the only available source of energy, to whit ....The Sun... Taadaah.
The lino on the ground floor has nothing to do with it.

"So what did cause the temperature not to increase in line with the increasing CO2 levels..."

Um, maybe it was the fact that the temperature rises cause the C02 increase, and not the other way
round?

Post a comment