Warmist Waterloo: Did the atmosphere hit 500+ ppm CO2 — in the 1800s?

Did one of the fathers of manmade global warming cherry-pick his data for a 1957 study?

Here’s the original data.

Source: Slocum, G., Has the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere changed significantly since the beginning of the twentieth century? Month. Weather Rev., 1955(October): p. 225-231.
Source: Slocum, G., Has the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere changed significantly since the beginning of the twentieth century? Month. Weather Rev., 1955(October): p. 225-231.

Here’s the cherry-picked version.

Callendar graph

Read the full story at Tallbloke’s blog.

3 thoughts on “Warmist Waterloo: Did the atmosphere hit 500+ ppm CO2 — in the 1800s?”

  1. I rely on two sources .. The 420.000 year old ice sheets and the new modern CO2 readings from hawaii since the 1950s.. No doubt that the last 70 years increase is due to man burning fossil fuel.. We have to go back before the quarternary period (3 million years ago) to experience similar CO2 levels,…
    But the IPCC scare scenarios are not really credible.. They do not take into account the fact that the world population will start to shrink.
    It is not only Europe that are getting very few babbies,, Countries such as China, Taiwan, South Korea, japan and Brazil are getting fewer babies..
    Also the world is in a global recession..Just ask people in the shipping industry…The movement of cheap goods produced in countries with low environmental control and transported around the world will hopefully come to an end… Production have to become more local with better quality, which hopefully will shift the wealth and power from the few to the many…

  2. CO2 varies during the year. The graph above states the dots are the mean value of CO2. That would require period readings and taking finding the mean. The current 400 PPM is the high end mark, is it not? I question the pre-industrial numbers that are accepted by the IPCC but I have problems with that data shown since current CO2 rates have shown slow steady growth and not the seemingly random jumps seen in the data above.

  3. It has been long known that Callendar scrapped the higher values. People of some authority in the field have found no reason to do so, so his trick should evidently be called scientific fraud, simply expressed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.