Washington Post Accidentally Admits Earth at Coolest Point in the Last 485 Million Years
Arguably, the Earth can be considered in a C02 famine.
During my time at Legal Insurrection, I have stressed the importance of viewing climate through the scope of geologic history. For example, I have done posts on “extinction-level events” throughout history.
Norwegian scientists recently did the same thing, comparing global temperatures with carbon dioxide (CO2) levels. The researchers conducted statistical analyses of observed and reconstructed temperature series and tested whether the recent fluctuation in temperatures differs systematically from previous temperature cycles, potentially due to the emission of greenhouse gases.
For example, the researchers gathered all the data from various sources, including those related to the four previous glacial and inter-glacial periods. They did a statistical analysis to see how more recent Global Climate Models (GCMs) compare.
They concluded that there was no way to link man-made carbon dioxide levels to climate change.
[T]he results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.
But I was unprepared for The Washington Post to do the same thing, accidentally admitting that the Earth is at its coolest temperatures in 485 million years.
Can you spot the climate crisis on this graph published by the WaPost yesterday? 🔎🤔
Earth is at its coolest point in the last 485-million years, but alarmists are still complaining that it's too hot. pic.twitter.com/8V2pZrtMB9
— Chris Martz (@ChrisMartzWX) September 20, 2024
Granted, the article was intended to push the climate-emergency narrative.
An ambitious effort to understand the Earth’s climate over the past 485 million years has revealed a history of wild shifts and far hotter temperatures than scientists previously realized — offering a reminder of how much change the planet has already endured and a warning about the unprecedented rate of warming caused by humans.
The timeline, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the most rigorous reconstruction of Earth’s past temperatures ever produced, the authors say. Created by combining more than 150,000 pieces of fossil evidence with state-of-the-art climate models, it shows the intimate link between carbon dioxide and global temperatures and reveals that the world was in a much warmer state for most of the history of complex animal life.
But looking at the full picture, I believe people will find it hard to be afraid of global warming, given that the Earth is at historically cold levels.
This graphic reveals a startling truth: mammals have never faced temperatures as cold as what we’re experiencing now. Yet, we’re being told to fear warming? It's time to rethink the narrative. #ClimateCatastrophe #Climate #ClimateScam pic.twitter.com/WCK49eBAMy
— Dr. Matthew M. Wielicki (@MatthewWielicki) September 21, 2024
The Science article from which The Washington Post takes its information is here for those who wish to review it. Interestingly, one of my early works as a geology student was looking at oxygen isotopes to estimate ancient temperatures (one of the tools to reconstruct surface temperatures).
Clearly the publication stresses the role of carbon dioxide in Earth’s temperatures:
“This research illustrates clearly that carbon dioxide is the dominant control on global temperatures across geological time,” said Jessica Tierney, a paleoclimatologist at the University of Arizona and a co-author of the new paper. “When CO2 is low, the temperature is cold; when CO2 is high, the temperature is warm.”
Even if that is true, and I have my doubts, then increasing the levels of the life-essential gas should be a good thing.
https://twitter.com/_ClimateCraze/status/1678586726950793222?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Arguably, the Earth can be considered in a C02 famine:
1000 – 1500 ppm of carbon dioxide is optimum for plants…
CO2 underpins the entire food chain and is as important as water and oxygen.
Right now we are in a CO2 famine. pic.twitter.com/AXMCGVCTrf
— Darren of Plymouth 🇬🇧 (@wolsned) July 31, 2023
Finally, it’s good to remember none of the climate-hysteria predictions have come true.
“In five years, scientists predict we will have the first ice-free Arctic summer.”
John Kerry back in 2009. pic.twitter.com/yvAkSZ5mJr
— James Melville 🚜 (@JamesMelville) September 21, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The truth is that if we give government the power they need to fight climate change we will turn the USA into the left’s fascist utopia. We will become the great economic powerhouse that was the USSR.
Exactly this. Climate, race, gender, issue-du-jure. They’re all about Marxist control. Nothing more, nothing less.
Mankind evolved During an ice age.
Those glaciers have now retreated.
Surely it is not the coldest it has ever been because there is no ice age at the moment.
I find this graph hard to believe
Heads will roll
Right off the flat earth
We are better off suffering whatever consequences from global warming then risking the tyranny that fighting global warming would entail. Imagine if a company needs government approval for staying in business and that is refused because they have made donations to Republicans.
Russel Brand is fond of saying that the most heated political battles occur between people who think they are God and people who know they are not.
Climate CHANGES, you freaks. Get used to it.
“In five years, scientists predict we will have the first ice-free Arctic summer.” John Kerry 2009
Well, maybe they were scientists the same way Biden is president.
But then Obummer came along, and that was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal….
*/barf
WaPo stealth edit incoming! Challenges to the cult will not be entertained.
This graph is a refinement. Nothing really new. Very similar to Fig. 1.8 on page 43 of Steve Koonin’s book “Unsettled.” (updated and expanded edition 2024). Koonin’s graph also goes back approximately 500 million years with different panels, the last two giving fine resolution for last 1,000 years and 20 years. Message is the same. Starting about 3 million ago, the global average surface temperature started to decrease, stabilized (with a lot of variation) 10,000 years ago, and then started to increase 20 years ago. Been stable for the last ten years. Yes we are in a cool period, but the GW zealots will concentrate on recent small temperature increase. They will never give up. Too much money and power is at stake.
I took a quick look at the Science article. Nice that the article gives pointers to the data and the codes used so one can reproduce the results. They use Matlab with a code package Dash to implement a Kalman filter. Not a fan of Matlab because it failed some of my stress tests for numerical software. Mathematica is way superior in this respect although harder to use. But I don’t have the time, energy or interest to pursue this further. No matter what we do, we will never stop the global warming hysteria. GW has become the new state religion.
Finally I quote from Mel Brook’s History of the World, Part I. “Nice nice, not thrilling, but nice.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RlbYMVlq3k
Huge swings in earth’s temperature over aeons means that empirically the dynamics are towards stability rather than tipping point instability. Le Chatelier’s principle.
This.
The idea that humans putting CO2 into an atmosphere that has less of it than it should, is somehow going to ruin the planet, is cargo-cult insanity.
I think that a line graph of high temperatures on, as example, for every September 24 each year for the last five decades from the same recording station to see what if any change has occurred. If the seas are going to rise because of global warming, we should be able to see that warming trend on the graph.
Further, I posit that the Plymouth Rock, on the eastern shore of Massachusetts, that symbol of our first steps onto this continent, is still high and dry after 400 years and visited daily by many underwhelmed tourists, is a clear and convincing testament that the seas are not rising.
Heck, we should be able to see the sea level rising. Photos of landmarks that were right at sea level decades ago show them… right at sea level now.
if only we could do that. Most of the older recording stations are defunct or compromised. A station positioned outside of town on the edge of farmer’s field in 1975 is today has likely been moved, shut down or is surrounded by concrete and strip malls which act as heat sink artificially raising the natural temperature.
If sea level rise was a true threat, insurance on ocean front property would be rising in response to the amount of observed rise. Can anyone identify any ocean front property insurance that rose due to sea level rise? I’m unaware of any such increase if property insurance, and I’m sure if it was happening we’d be reading about it as “proof of climate change.”
Dumb question du jour:
Is the earth’s temperature the result of the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere or is the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere the result of the earth’s temperature?
After looking at it and taking it for granted, the fatuus forget that the yellow, shining globe in the sky is the major (and probably the only) controller of the earth’s temperature.
“…in 485 million years”?!
As if even “conservatives” are in thrall to Darwin. 🙄
The hoax, obvious to even an educated high school student, still marches forward.
We are, indeed, in a CO2 “drought.” Most plants experience optimum growth with more CO2 because they evolved in geologic periods with more CO2 than today. Relatively few plants (grasses come to mind) are so recently evolved that today’s CO2 levels are “normal” for them. A little less CO2 in the atmosphere and some types of plants will actually suffocate.
Wait, I’m missing something. We’re in an interglacial period that’s less than 12,000 years old, so how can it be the coldest it’s been in 485 million years? It’s a lot warmer than it was 12,000 years ago in the last ice age, or even 300 years ago during the Little Ice Age.
You beat me to it. I had the same question. If we’re the coldest we’ve been in 485 million years why isn’t North America covered in mile thick ice?
Or is that whole “Glaciation” thing BS too? I no longer have any idea what to believe so I’m just going to believe my own senses…which tell me the weather is pretty much the same as it’s always been….variable.
Some years it’s hot. Some years it’s cold. Some years it rains a lot. Some years it’s dry. All the rest is just the noise of the self-important “educated class” pretending like they have some sort of special insight that they flat out don’t have.
“Without education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously.”
–Gilbert Keith Chesterton
“If we’re the coldest we’ve been in 485 million years why isn’t North America covered in mile thick ice?”
The reconstructed temperatures are global averages. North America is not the globe. GMST stands for Global Mean Surface Temperature.
From the Science article:
“Earth’s climate is generally considered to oscillate between two dominant regimes: icehouse intervals, with unipolar or bipolar continental ice sheets and steep pole-to-equator temperature gradients, and greenhouse intervals, which lack widespread continental ice sheets and exhibit shallow latitudinal temperature gradients”
One part of the globe can be under ice while other parts are well above freezing.
Yes, but there is no ice age now. There’s not even the “little ice age” that we had 300 years ago, when Washington’s troops could attack Staten Island by marching there from Morristown.
Not just here; there’s no ice age anywhere on the planet. The entire planet is now obviously warmer than it was 300 years ago, and much warmer than it was 12,000 years ago, just as it’s also colder than it was 800 years ago.
The issue is exactly that. It’s too cold.
Glaciers aren’t just made of regular ice.
Glaciers are made of compressed snow.
Regular ice, when compressed tends to shatter.
Compressed snow ice, when compresssed, flows.
But if it’s too cold the frozen water in the atmosphere doesn’t get heavy enough to fall as snow, so glaciers, the ones we still have, do not compress and thusly do not flow.
In Antarctica we still have glacial flow due to the sheer amount of ice crystals in the air over the continent, but the flow is uneven, resulting in the massive amount of calving as the tp of the ice slides over the denser lower levels.
So, what you’re telling me is that Indianapolis for example isn’t under a glacial sheet because its current average annual temp of ~54 degrees is too COLD?
When the glaciers retreated 12k years ago or so, it’s not because it warmed up, but because it cooled even more?
I refer you to the quote I ended my last comment with.
That’s ridiculous. And it’s wrong. The average global temperature 20,000 year ago was about 8°C. Now it’s about 14. And that is why 20,000 years ago was the height of the last ice age, and now we’re in between ice ages.
I think the comment is reflective of scale at longer time periods. As in “the last 200,000 years are the coldest 200,000 years ever” and not “the current decade is colder than all previous decades.”
Or, at least that’s the only way I can make sense out of it without it being obviously factually incorrect.
If that’s what they mean, that’s what they should have said. Just claiming that the current climate is the coldest it’s ever been, which is clearly fallacious (I don’t recall ice skating parties on the Thames any time in recent memory), just undermines their argument . Now I’m not going to believe anything they say.
Jon Kerry and Al Gore should go on a polar bear expedition together so they can update their doomsday predictions, plus the photo opportunities would be priceless ♥️
The average level of atmospheric CO2 since mammals have inhabited planet Earth is estimated to be greater than 1000ppm. Current levels are less than half that at around 430ppm.
Humans live in submarines and space stations without health concerns for several months at a time where CO2 levels exceed 8000ppm – or 20x greater than current atmospheric levels.
In the U.S. CO2 peaked in 2005. Almost two decades ago. Several tens of millions more people live in the U.S. today than did in 2005; the annual GDP of the US economy is several $TRILLION greater than it was then; and Americans drive around 200 million more vehicle miles annually than we did in 2005 when CO2 peaked.
Oh, and the cherry on top is that according to the EPA, the air keeps getting cleaner. The last breath the “average” American took is the cleanest air that person has ever breathed in their life.
The fake CO2 climate crisis is the biggest hoax humans have ever perpetrated on their fellow humans.
Even if none of that convinces you, then consider that the surface area of the United States is only 2% of planet Earth’s surface area; we have 4% of planet Earth’s human population and we emit around 13% of the total emissions planet Earth’s human population is estimated to emit. Coercively throttling our emissions while much greater emitters like China and India do not will likely lead to lowering our standard of living while theirs rises. I believe that is the goal. The elites want to make global standards of living more equal (by lowering the West’s and allowing the sub standard economies to catch up) because that will make it easier to smash us all together into a coordinated global governance system sometime in the future, perhaps 50-100 years from now.
As I explain to those who come to my door, begging for Earth-saving donations to stop climate change: I consider my “carbon footprint” to be helping forestall the next ice age and world hunger. Between keeping the mile-high glaciers away and improving crop yields substantially, what’s not to like?
Leave a Comment