[yor_on]

Alan, those readings, from f.ex ice cores, are about measurements. And I think you know it too. So you might not believe them, as I said, that's up to you. I wouldn't bet on them being wrong though.

[yor_on]

So how do they do it?

Measure those traces of gas contained in a ice core?

1997  https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.94.16.8343

Alternatively  "  Carbon dioxide concentrations have been relatively stable for the last millennia until around 1800 AD but since then a rise of almost 40% has been measured

In addition to comparison with present-day measurements, the trapped gases offer a record of direct atmospheric and greenhouse gas concentrations, including methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide (Fig. 6) on a longer timescale – up to 800,000 years (Loulergue et al., 2008). Records show the connection between fluctuations in the atmosphere and long-term global climate variations (e.g. temperature) on a millennial timescale (Kawamura et al., 2007). The long-term trends show a pattern in the gas concentrations that compare well with glacial-interglacial climate. The phasing and timing of the eight glacial cycles covered by this record are dominated by the orbital cycle of the Earth on a 96,000-year periodicity, with a warm, interglacial period between each cold period. However, as we will see later in this blog post, this may not be the case when we look further back in time! "

https://blogs.egu.eu/divisions/cr/2016/12/14/ice-cores-for-dummies/


Tree rings   https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/how-tree-rings-tell-time-and-climate-history

sediments and fossils

" Today we can measure concentrations of greenhouse gases by using different instruments. But the longest instrumental record of CO2 reaches some 60 years back in time. To be able to reconstruct the amounts of greenhouse gases in the distant past the scientists use proxies – indirect measurements of preserved physical characteristics such as fossilized shells of single celled organisms that also live today.

Plaktonic / living in the water column), and benthic ( living in and on the seabed) foriaminifera are species with shells that are easily affected by the environment. Chemical traces which covary with climatic changes, such as quantities of particular isotopes, can be recovered from these shells and measured to uncover changes in temperature and environment of the oceans in the past. Their fossils are well preserved in ocean sediments all over the world. "

https://cage.uit.no/2015/10/16/how-do-we-measure-greenhouse-gases-in-the-ocean/

[yor_on]

Here's a more technical description of the procedure of measuring gas traces in ice cores.

https://www.iceandclimate.nbi.ku.dk/research/drill_analysing/cutting_and_analysing_ice_cores/analysing_gasses/sampling_and_analysing/

[yor_on]

From there you're on your own Alan  :)

But not here please, go to realclimate if you want to dispute the chemistry, climate and science around it.

[yor_on]

What can I say?

" The world is at “boiling point” and humanity needs to redefine its relationship with nature if it is to address a web of crises, from rising prices to extreme heat and floods, according to a report released ahead of a landmark UN conference.

The research from the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and the Council on Energy Environment and Water says the solutions to the interlinked planetary and inequality crisis exist, but calls for “bold science-based decision-making” to “completely rethink our way of living,”. "

I get a rather unpleasant feeling when I read things like “bold science-based decision-making” to “completely rethink our way of living,”. "

Thinking inside their mold. Trusting to a hierarchical model that has failed to change anything so far.

well   https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/18/humanity-nature-stockholm-environment-institute-report

and the report itself at  https://www.stockholm50.report/unlocking-a-better-future.pdf

[yor_on]

Instead of calling it profitable maybe? I think it's another dead end actually. Expecting those with the most to lose on a change to 'lead' that change. They need to find it profitable, personally, before anything else will change. And that's the same sort of mistake climate science did when calling global warming 'profitable'. It didn't work.

[yor_on]

To see it you just need to think of how Sweden's current 'democratic' government refused a referendum on us losing 200 years of peace instead favoring future conflicts allied with NATO.

[yor_on]

No odds for you.

[yor_on]

And maybe you deserve it.

[yor_on]

Anthills

Not civilizations.

[yor_on]

So, as soon as Sweden get involved into the next NATO conflict that record breaks. And so it will be for all nations, we can forget about peace, it's about resources and geopolitics. I really think this government should resign.

[yor_on]

So that is one trend my pointy hat see, very close to us now.

War

and this?                  Well, if wishes was fish.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/may/18/critical-climate-indicators-broke-records-in-2021-says-un

[yor_on]

I'm still wondering about if we ever will get out of 2022

[yor_on]

I think I can say this.

If it would have been USA, pressed back and ringed in by the Warsaw pact, their president vilified in the media. Having their current policy of small yields and 'limited nuclear warfare' with 'preemptive strikes' this situation should have been a lot worse.

Russia still believe in MAD, which is what the west, NATO and USA is betting on.

[yor_on]

So no, it's not Ukraine they will go nuclear on. You are projecting, not using your mind.

[yor_on]

and a book 

" Od Magic"  By Patricia McKillip

[alancalverd]

Hey, I've learned something here! I didn't realise ice cores could be read to such finesse over recent periods. Many thanks.

Now all we need to do is explain why the temperature was higher 500 years ago when there was less CO2 around.

[yor_on]

Welcome to your new site Alan :)

https://www.realclimate.org/

[yor_on]

I really enjoyed this sentence.

"  “The world-leading migration partnership with "  Eh?  Ahh, so it was   " Rwanda means those making dangerous, unnecessary and illegal journeys to the UK may be relocated to Rwanda to have their claims for asylum considered"

World leading, was it?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/18/i-thought-the-uk-was-a-good-country-man-faces-removal-to-rwanda

[yor_on]

And then for Sweden's glorious partnership with NATO.

"  “It is not possible for either country … to change its domestic legislation on freedom of assembly,” he said. “Sweden in particular has an active Kurdish community that has political support. This episode is reminiscent of 2009 when Erdoğan said he would not allow Anders Rasmussen to be appointed Nato’s secretary general unless Denmark closed a Kurdish TV station. Rasmussen was appointed but a year later the TV station was closed.”

Some similar delayed behind-the-scenes deal could happen this time. Neither country can simply tear up its own internal asylum systems and Sweden says it does do not run independent terrorist lists different from those compiled at EU level."

The fun we have.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/18/erdogan-doubles-down-on-threat-to-veto-nordic-nato-membership

Hmm, thinking of it, the same Denmark that finally gained that 'special partnership' with, what was it?  NSA and USA, by spying on its Nordic neighbors?

And now we are expected to mimic Denmark?

Makes me proud to be a Swede. 


double link