Just put this into the search engine:
Wingaarden-Happer 2025, Greenhouse Gases and Fossil Fuels Climate Science
I heard a bizarre proposal for cooling the oceans involving pumping heat from the oceans into space using lasers . . . .
1 Like
Hi. I did just that in Google but found no matching documents with Wijngaarden-Happer as authors and that figure. Could you provide a URL to the figure that you copied (from the CO2 Coalition)? It appears mis-attributed and it might be interesting to uncover the ‘geneology’ of that figure.
I did try searching again, after stripping the authors from the text you suggested. The only thing I found references a (non-journal) manuscript by Lindzen and Happer that was put up on the CO2 Coalition web pages. It looks like they reference the graph as coming from “Gregory Wrightstone, Inconvenient Facts (2017) p. 7”.
That reference is a shortish, non-technical book written by a petroleum geologist (BS, MS) & Executive Director of the CO2 Coalition, that lays out “60 inconvenient facts” about climate change. Mr. Wrightstone also cites experience as a “expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change“. However, the panel notes in What is an Expert Reviewer of IPCC reports?:
Because the aim of the expert review is to get the widest possible participation and broadest possible expertise, those who register are accepted unless they fail to demonstrate any relevant qualification.
[…]
But because the review is essentially open to all through a self-declaration of expertise, it follows that having been a registered expert reviewer does not by itself serve as a qualification of the expert or support their credibility in a different context.
In any case, lacking access to the book, I took that figure at face value. Again, it suggests that with the ~1.5x increase in CO2 since the 1800’s we would expect about a 1 °C warming contribution, and with expectations of doubling CO2 conc by the end of this century if modest remediation is attempted, then an additional 1 °C could be expected. That is possibly not out of line for transient climate responses but as I mentioned previously, equilibrium climate responses are estimated to run about 2-3 °C higher. In their writings, I know that Lindzen and Happer describe the current concentration of CO2 as “saturated” with respect to warming, but I cannot see how that is justified. It seems unlikely there is going to be ‘runaway’, Venus-like warming, but the ‘dial’ can definitely be turned much higher. Counter to claims, “Beer’s Law” is perfectly compatible with additional warming from higher CO2 concentrations.
3 Likes
Yes, CO2 fluctuates…. but not in a non-sensical way. The graph below switches in scale from Millions of years to Thousands of years….. and what you see is the Earth absorbing more and more CO2 over the millions of years …. until a tipping point “range” is attained: alternating up and down from 180 ppm to 280 ppm back to 180 ppm begins about 1 million years ago…. and is responsible for 8 glaciations in 800,000 years!
But now that we are back in the 400 ppm range, and still increasing, the tipping point has been flooded out…. luckily for us we’ll have much better science when we finally figure out how to fixate atmospheric CO2 and sequester it away….. because the only thing more “tax expensive” than a runaway global heat wave is an unstoppable global glaciation!
Notice the up-and-down blue squiggles starting at about 800,000 B.P.!
The third section of the graph focuses on the last 1000 years…. and the upturn triggered by human industry!!!
G.Brooks
I had no trouble with that link. I get the document, it is a supporting document for the DOE report from July 2025.
All of those nice analyses presume that CO2 is responsible for the current rise in temperature. So, we are to conclude that the climactic feature responsible for the gentle rise in temperature staring in 1700 going to 1900 suddenly shuts off and the rise in CO2 takes over. I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale cheap.
Well did you ever. What a swell party this is.
1 Like
Your objection (above) is analagous to saying Brownian Motion on a Baseball makes it impossible to hit a home run!
1 Like
Those of us with Ph. D.s in physical chemistry learn to seek straight lines as a phenomenon with a
cause and effect. ….y = mx + b. We prefer straight lines that go through the origin, but not all do. Starting at the end of the little ice age, some change in something caused the temperature to undergo a linear rise. Maybe solar radiance? Who knows how long that will last. After all, the temperature dropped more or less continually from around 950 to 1650. Not quite a straight line, but something lowered the temperature for 700 years. That is along time. Even more interesting is the younger Dryas period about 14,000 years ago, as the earth emerged form the last glacial maximum. The temperature rose rather rapidly from whatever source, and then suddenly plunged several degrees and stayed flat for about 1000 years. And, then, started to rise again toward what he now have. Carbon dioxide had nothing to do with any of these ups and downs.
As for home runs, not impossible, but difficult. Put AI to work and ask how many Major League Baseball players have never hit a home run. It would be interesting to put a big super turbo fan behind home plate and see how much easier it would be to hit a home run. Was it Candlestick Park where the afternoon winds made hitting home runs difficult? Nothing like de-randomizing those air molecules to make a ball go further…..or slow it down.
You haven’t studied first or second order reactions?
I guess you haven’t heard of the Milakovitch cycles and their influence on climate change?
You also keep ignoring the fact that the little ice age was a regional dip in temperature, not a global one.
Before I discuss the next part, it might be useful to use an analogy. Let’s say you are on a jury in a murder trial. The defense attorney gets up and says to the jury, “It is impossible that my client caused the death of the supposed victim because people die of natural causes all of time”. Would you be swayed by this argument? I wouldn’t be. And yet, this is essentially the argument you seem to be making.
Were shifts in global temperature in the past 500,000 years initiated by a shift in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations? No. Those changes were initiated by changes in the Earth’s orbit, polar drift, and tilt (i.e. the Milankovitch cycles). When the oceans did start warming due to these factors it did release carbon dioxide which amplified warming, but it wasn’t the sole cause of any increase in temperature. That’s the natural process, the equivalent to people dying of natural causes in the earlier analogy.
So does this mean it is impossible for humans to warm the planet by releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Obviously not. Just as humans are capable of causing people to die outside of natural causes, so too are humans capable of warming the planet outside of natural causes. Whereas previously carbon dioxide concentrations were governed by the Milankovitch cycles, right now they aren’t. We are causing a rise in a greenhouse gas due to our activities, and as greenhouse gases do it is trapping more heat in our atmosphere.
10 Likes
Those are ideal, but real equations of state are never linear. Are not real curves what separate PhD physical chemistry from high school?
3 Likes
Definitely not - I learnt about non-linear curves in high school.
Mostly in maths, but we definitely covered radioactive decay in physics.
1 Like
Yes, but I am thinking more of EoS virial expansions or matrix regressions for compressibility. These are heavily applied in Chemical Engineering simulations, but can be extended into plasma physics such as stellar modeling.
2 Likes
Scary!
Agreed. But those are minor blips compared to the force of the Milankovitch Cycles which have a net forcing effect of a glaciation every 100,000 years! But only when CO2 levels get into the range of 180 ppm to 280 ppm.
Past and future Milankovitch cycles via VSOP model
-
Graphic shows variations in five orbital elements:
Axial tilt or obliquity (ε).
Eccentricity (e).
Longitude of perihelion (sin(ϖ)).
Precession index (e sin(ϖ))
-
Precession index and obliquity control insolation at each latitude:
Daily-average insolation at top of atmosphere on summer solstice (Q¯day
) at 65° N
-
Ocean sediment and Antarctic ice strata record ancient sea levels and temperatures:
Benthic forams (57 widespread locations)
-
Vertical gray line shows present (2000 CE)
Now that we have burned MILLIONS of years of carbon sequestered in
fossil fuel deposits - - all within just a little bit more than 100 years, the
”tipping point” (back and forth between glaciation and full on glacial melt)
has been once again flooded out.
All that is left is to see tiny blips like the ones you fixate upon to give us
relief from a complete revision of the world’s climate systems.
1 Like
A practical example of how climate change has already affected winter weather in Northern Europe:
During the ‘good old days’ (= a few decades ago), December was a month when the northern Finland had almost continuously below-zero weather and nice conditions for winter sports. Southern half of Finland had a more variable weather, varying between below-zero temperatures & snowy vs. periods when snow melted and it rained sleet.
That seems to have changed. What has previously been autumn weather is now what we experience in December or even January. Warmer winds and moisture flows from Northern Atlantic, causing cloudy and rainy weather.
Northern Finland experiences repeated periods of above-zero temperatures, often with rain instead of snowing. That melts the surface of the snow, which means a hard crust on the snow when temperatures again drop - bad for animals that try to survive through the winter.
Southern Finland experiences something we used to call early November weather but with less light: heavy clouds, rains instead of snow or sleet, and temperatures several degrees above zero. I read that in our region, the total sum of sunshine during the ten first days of December has been five minutes. The capital has had a better situation: a total of 20 minutes of sunshine.
This morning one of the main news in both national and local media was that sun may shine some hours today - the news adviced people to be prepared and try to enjoy of the moments if the clouds break so much that the sun can be seen.
Here, climate change is not something that may happen in the future, it is very visible and perceptible. In summer, unprecedented periods of hot and dry weather. In winter, autumn-type weather and darkness because the snowless ground does not reflect light.
5 Likes
You are correct, these long-term cycles do govern the major movements of temperature on Earth. However, those “little wiggles” are being used by the Climate Alarm Industrial Complex as an excuse to deprive millions of people of affordable electricity that can be used to improve drinking water, education, and health care. Extreme part of that Complex want to move humanity back toward the Stone Age with no private cars, no meat, no milk, few clothes, and sparse travel.
How did Finland get through the Medieval Warm Period when the neighboring Norse were farming in Greenland, Iceland, and along eastern North America? Growing grapes there also. And, how did Finland fare during the Little Ice Age when the frozen canals in Holland made it possible for Hans Brinker to win his Silver Skates?
Your Honor:
I am pleased to defend Doctor Dioxide, aka Doctor Carbon Dioxide of this charge. Indeed, the GPS data do show that he was in the vicinity at the times of the events for which he is charged. However, the record shows that these events were taking place LONG before the Esteemed Doctor Dioxide was anywhere near those events. Moreover, the prosecution has not presented credible evidence that Doctor Dioxide had anything to do with these events.
The record of good works for humanity of Doctor Dioxide is important to consider. In conjunction with his spouse, the honorable former Miss Dihydride, aka Miss Oxygen Dihydride….and also known as water….. they have been responsible for the presence of Carbon in all of life following their union presided over the Very Reverend Chlorophyll performed in the bright Sunlight.
The stories about ‘greenland’ and ‘vineland’ were propaganda, selling speeches forged to get status, support and immigrants to move into the new communities that needed more people. The actual living conditions there were quite far from the images painted in the selling speeches.
Finns have been fairly good in surviving in cold and hard conditions. The main problem has been getting enough of food. During the years when crops failed, there were famines and many died.
A Finnish method for such emergencies was to mix minced cambium of pine with cereal flour and bake bread from that. Bad food but helped as long as there were enough of milled cereals to add to the mix - too much cambium in the mix caused serious stomach problems and pure cambium did not keep people alive.
6 Likes
We visited Greenland, Iceland, Newfoundland, and Nova Scotia on a cruise in September. Indeed, the guides indicated that Iceland was a very poor country until the British moved in and started building military facilities in 1940. However the people in the northern tip of Newfoundland seemed to think that life was Ok there in the Lief Ericsson era. And, a place that was inhabited for more than a few generations. Their casual comments included the ideas that it was considerably warmer then than it is now. They indicated that the grapes….Vineland…must have been further south in New Brunswick.