There is nothing unprecedented or even significant about modern warming magnitudes or rates. [some emphasis, links added]
Antarctic ice cores are routinely used to represent not only global-scale CO2 records, but also global temperature records over the last 800,000 years.
Interestingly, if we compare modern Antarctica to paleo Antarctica, we learn “no continent-scale warming of Antarctic temperature is evident in the last century.”
A new statistical probability analysis (Hatton, 2026) using Vostok temperature data indicates the reported 1.1°C global warming over the last century (since the 1920s) is “not even unusual” within the context of the last 20,000 years, as “16% of the centuries since the end of the last Ice Age show a rise at least as big [1.1°C] as the current century.”
As current warming rates are “quite commonplace,” this calls into question the push to attribute temperature changes to human activity.
For further context, the Northern Hemisphere is said to have warmed by 4-5°C “within a few decades” 14,500 years ago (Ivanovic et al., 2017), and during these centuries, sea levels rose at rates of up to 7.5 meters per century (Smith et al., 2011), which is 20-30 times faster than modern rates.
Read more at No Tricks Zone
I thought with in the last 10 k years SL was up to 2 m higher than present, certainly within the current inter-glacial. I also thought ice core data had a century long resolution at best, but don’t remember well.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/fstu6bxrebvdw2kkjp22q/R-futation-Anglais-3-CO2-climat.fr.en-6.pdf?rlkey=37xnen3bzua4r6rn2id4qjn9f&st=6c39zh5p&dl=0
Si simple et évident !!!
Er…. I’ve read this thing 5 times… and it’s possible that i’m mistaken… but doesn’t it find that this temperature increase has literally never happened before? and then try to argue that its not unlikely?
If something has only happened once… in millions of years… then that seems to be definitionally a 1 in millions chance of happening… not 16%.
no – they said warming to the same degree or worse has happened 16% of the time – and gave one extreme example of when oceans rose 7.5 meters (24 ish feet) in a single century.
I had exactly the same tought and I agree with you.
Here is my cherrypicked data set, there the science is settled… Now let me apply for all those wealthy government funds!!! What do you want 1+1 to equal?
The fake one person 16% claim is derived from the Vostok Ice Core dataset, which provides localized Antarctic data. Climate scientists generally use a synthesis of multiple global proxy records (tree rings, ocean sediments, other ice cores) to determine global average temperatures, as single-point data can show higher localized volatility than the global average.
“no continent-scale warming of Antarctic temperature is evident in the last century.”
reliable average temperatures of antarctica did not begin before 1958 which was not a century ago. greenhouse gas emissions cause a negative greenhouse effect over most of antarctica because of its permanent temperature inversion. that’s why very little of the antarctica ice can melt. author ken richard is a CO2 does nothing science denier who knows nothing about these antarctica facts
? The average global temperature is measured by devices only since ab. 1950’s;before, there were only a few countries in N.Am@Europe: we hav data from London,Berlin NY,et*@*sp.US show nothing unsual, Mr.Moron. The claim that 0.00004 of the volume Earth’s atmosphere, here “human co2 or fossils” causes the temperature is not only statistical idiocy but more, a …possession (by Satan). In my town, there are only data available since ….1950’s (on a weather channel). There are available data about …Greenland, Little Ice Age,a proxes from ice cores. Are you going to convert from idiocy (Mk 7:22) or go to Hell? Consult Rev. John von Neumann, mathematician@physicist on modelling@his motto: with 5-independent parameters, a model will prove that an elephant will fly;hence, show me a model function for the Earth’s temperature which encompases at least 10-such parameters@not only the amount of ..co2@your fart-methan!
Beautifully written destruction of Global Warming/Climate Change myth (biggest scam in 1,000 years).
But the brainwashed simps will likely discard your explanation while they clutch their pearls.
My thoughts exactly because this isn’t about climate change, it is about redistribution of wealth.
the surface global average temperature since 1975 can be compared with the satellite global average temperatures since 1979
before 1975 i would not take any global average temperature seriously especially before 1900
Carbon dioxide makes up approximately 0.0427% of the Earth’s atmosphere, which is expressed in decimals as 0.000427%. your number is wrong
without no CO2 almost all life on our planet would die
Important news and I thought we knew that already.
If you are worried about warming and CO2, just read a good book or two and relax!
https://www.amazon.com.au/s?k=Rafe+Champion&i=stripbooks&crid=GZ66NWUYZ193&sprefix=rafe+champion%2Cstripbooks%2C262&ref=nb_sb_noss
Since the Little Ice Age ended some 300 years ago, warming has been unequivocally beneficial and we are still a degree or more short of the Roman Warm Period which was the best time on earth for living things.
Fear of warming and CO2 has driven the most damaging public policy blunder on record, with trillions of dollars wasted around the western world on the attempt to transition to intermittent wind and solar power.
Would you spend a single dollar to get the results of this great experiment? More expensive and less reliable power with catastrophic environmental impacts.
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/its-time-to-simplify-the-grid
we may be at least 1/2 degree C. warmer than any warm period in the past 5000 years
the current period with 427 PPM of CO2 is the best time for life on earth, not the roman period with under 280 ppm.
your disinformation about the roman period is bizarre, since i have read your writings for many years and i agree with your theory that the fear of CO2 and warming is irrational
estimating the global average temperature in the past 10,000 years by using an average of local proxies gives you a number with a margin of error ±1° C.
there are many local proxies that have temperature swings of +/- 1° C or more. but they are not synchronous … so when they are averaged, to no more than ±0.5° C. … this variation is statistically insignificant
as a result we cannot scientifically prove that any period in the past 10,000 years was warmer or cooler than the current 10 years
the best we can say is that interglacial periods have stable temperatures but a rise of 1° C in the past 50 years is not stable, especially if it continues for a few more decades
the fact that the interglacial this time is not stable because of man-made CO2 emissions does not mean that it is dangerous in any way