Earth Passes 400 PPM, Again

Earth has now passed 400 PPM almost as many times as Obama has killed Osama.

ScreenHunter_9047 May. 07 15.44

Looks like his CO2 deal with China didn’t work out quite as advertised.

ScreenHunter_9048 May. 07 15.46

World passes critical global warming milestone – CBS News

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

53 Responses to Earth Passes 400 PPM, Again

  1. darrylb says:

    and the greens should celebrate the world becoming greener!
    20% and increasing according to the latest information.
    In Africa, there may be historic farming in never before doing so areas!

    • MrX says:

      CO2 goes up. Planet gets greener. Temperatures still haven’t gone up in 18+ years. Libs rejoice that the planet is safe. Oh no, wait. That last one might be a little off the mark.

  2. Robertv says:

    The Senate plans to debate legislation that would give President Obama fast track authority over trade negotiation “very soon,” Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) tells reporters.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/06/mcconnell-working-with-obama-an-out-of-body-experience/

    Start practicing ‘f*** the king’

    http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2015/05/more-time-needed-to-assess-f-the-king-court-case-say-officials/

    • Gail Combs says:

      Another very good article on the SECRET Passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership.

      ….The ultimate goal of the TPP isn’t just the creation of an FTAAP, though. Supporters of the deal insist that the TPP is a “trade agreement designed to achieve broad liberalization and a high degree of economic integration among the parties.”

      Integration is a word that is painful to the ears of constitutionalists and those unwilling to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a committee of globalists who are unelected by the American people and unaccountable to them. Integration is an internationalist tool for subordinating American law to the globalist bureaucracy at the United Nations.

      Economic and political integration will push the once independent United States of America into yet another collectivist bloc that will facilitate the complete dissolution of our country and our states into no more than subordinate outposts of a one-world government.

      Equally significant is that 600 industry lobbyists and “advisors,” as well as unelected trade representatives, are at the table, while representatives from the public at large and businesses other than huge monopolies are conspicuously absent….

      In other words this is the equivalent of the EU with the same secrecy surrounding it. Our politicians are about to sell out our country and make the USA a vassal state of the Trans-Pacific ‘Union’ with no real representatives or rights.

      THANKS RINOS!!!!!

    • Gail Combs says:

      The TPP, generally supported by pro-free-trade Republicans but opposed by labor-union Democrats, reportedly contains a barely noticed provision that allows for the free migration of labor among the signatory nations. Patterned after similar provisions in the treaties establishing the European Union, it would override national immigration restrictions in the name of facilitating the free flow of labor.

      The draft treaty, now under discussion among 12 Pacific Rim nations, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Vietnam and Japan, makes provision for needed labor to move across national boundaries without restraint. While much of the commentary on the deal has been focused on high-skill, white-collar migration, it could easily be interpreted as allowing farm workers and others to flow back and forth without legal regulation….

      The writer has this part wrong but it is what the globalists really hope we will or better yet or politicians will swallow. Treaties Do Not Supersede the Constitution “This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.” – Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

      ….Because foreign treaties are the “law of the land,” according to the U.S. Constitution, any provision governing our borders and the flow of immigrants could not be overridden or even modified by Congress. A new president would be able to reverse Obama’s amnesty plan but not the open-border provisions of the TPP. The treaty could lead to the effective repeal of the specifically enumerated power granted to Congress in Article I of the Constitution to regulate immigration and naturalization….
      http://thehill.com/opinion/dick-morris/239633-dick-morris-tpp-mass-immigration

    • Gail Combs says:

      Here is a link to the WIKI leaks: https://wikileaks.org/tpp-ip2/“>Updated Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

      Last year a new draft chapter of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) “free trade” agreement was released…

      Under the TPP we would see whistleblowers and journalists prosecuted for revealing business secrets, according to secret trade negotiations released by WikiLeaks.

      The draft text states that TPP countries must introduce criminal penalties for unauthorized access to, misappropriation or disclosure of trade secrets, defined as information that has commercial value because it is secret, by any person using a computer system….

      All of this comes as the previously leaked chapters of the TPP have shown dire implications for our economy. In the intellectual property section, which deals with pharmaceutical, agriculture and internet freedoms, it would allow multinational corporations to challenge country laws, suing in international court presided over by unelected bureaucrats who are often former corporate lawyers.…..
      http://economyincrisis.org/content/leaked-trans-pacific

      • annieoakley says:

        That ‘bill’ the Senate passed yesterday will be our undoing as the Senate is Required to ratify treaties. Now they gave that away and the “Law of the Sea Treaty” will give the UN total control of the water in the US. Imagine going to the UN for the permission to pump water from your farm pond.

  3. Neal S says:

    I read an article in Daily Caller
    http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/25-years-of-predicting-the-global-warming-tipping-point/

    I find it refreshing that at least some publications have not totally bought into AGW.

  4. AndyG55 says:

    Towards 700ppm. !!!!!

    Onwards and Upwards 🙂

    • tabnumlock says:

      1,500ppm (0.15%) would be about the average for modern life on earth. Tho I wouldn’t say no to 2,000ppm (0.2%). BTW, CO2 warming peters out at about 20ppm is undetectable at 200ppm.

  5. SxyxS says:

    “critical global warming milestone”

    lol-i’m still trying to find an explanation for the incredible coincidence that such a nice round figure like 400 is the milestone and not 387,403 or 412.
    Is there a natural law or unknown magic that turns round numbers automatically into mega important tipping points???
    what is exactly happening at 400pp that does not happen at 399 and why is 400ppm more dangerous in 2015 than 1000ppm+ have been million years ago?
    or is this just another PR trick by the modern bernays/goebbels’ to indoctrinate people into eating more of the endless agw-sh!t because round numbers can be easy memorised by the masses and are therefore systematically missused to justify the installation of a global tax disguised as “save the climate” agenda and to give the elite the opportunity to stiffle production of every country in the world(=blackmail) by simply limiting their annual co2 output 🙂

  6. Winnipeg Boy says:

    What happens at 420? Do we all tip over?

  7. nickreality65 says:

    We have heard for decades how the recent and rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 was caused entirely by industrialized man. So let’s run the numbers.

    Atmospheric mass: 5.14E18 kg
    Atmospheric mass CO2 @ 390.5 ppm (2011): 3.05E15 kg

    Per IPCC AR5:
    CO2 increase 1750 (278 ppm) to 2011 (390.5 ppm): 8.78E14 kg
    Global fossil fuel CO2 1750 to 2011 w/ 45% residual: 3.67E14*.45=1.65E14 kg

    Global fossil fuel share 1750 to 2011: 1.65/8.78 = 18.9% Not even close to “entirely.”
    Global FF share of atmospheric CO2: 1.65/30.5=5.4% Natural sources fluctuate more than this.

    Seems to me man is trying to solve a problem that is 95% not his.

    (ppm mole basis)

  8. J P Gilligan says:

    To answer your question, at 421 ppm, the island of Grenada capsizes and Catalina Island off the California coast has a volcanic eruption.

  9. Got to keep Global Warming in the News!!

    “400 PPM Reached, Tipping point”
    “2014 Hottest Year Ever”
    “April 2015 Hottest Month ever”
    Next: “2015 Shaping up to be the Hottest year Ever”

    Total shit.. but they gotta keep up the FEAR… keep Global Warming in the news… people will forget how freakin’ cold it was this Winter!!

  10. scott allen says:

    ok this is a serious question. they claim we haven’t had 400 ppm for millions of years, for the sake of argument i will ceed that point. My questions is what was the average (best guess or wag, wild ass guess, because evil man had not created the thermometer) temperature when the earth last had 400 ppm of co2.

    • Gail Combs says:

      This is what the Warmist show:

      It is complete and utter Bovine Feces.

      … the measured 19th century CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere ranged from about 250 to 550 ppmv…..

      In the air from firn and ice at Summit, Greenland, deposited during the past ~200 years, the CO2 concentration ranged from 243.3 ppmv to 641.4 ppmv…..

      Until 1985, the published CO2 readings from air bubbles in pre-industrial ice ranged from 160 to about 700 ppmv, and occasionally even up to 2,450 ppmv. After 1985, high readings disappeared from the publications! ….
      — Jaworowski and Segalstad SEE https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/04/29/more-flagrant-lies-from-climate-scientists/#comment-519412

      What is really really interesting is Barrow 1947-1948 data at 420 ppm! (average of 330 samples)

      • scott allen says:

        Gail, Thank you.
        2 things,
        from a visual it appears that CO2 is a following indicator of temps, yes/no?

        The article says millions of years ago, do you have one that goes back that far?
        or are they just making up stuff, again

      • AndyG55 says:

        Gail, even if that graph were correct, it totally destroys the warmist meme.

        It proves categorically that even when CO2 was at its highest , it was totally unable to even maintain the higher temperatures.
        If fact, one could almost conclude that the higher CO2 levels actually lead to cooling.

        • Gail Combs says:

          There are those who think CO2 does lead to cooling, the ‘Sky Dragon Slayers’ who WUWT banned.

          CO2 emits IR in the stratosphere above the tropopause:

          If I understand the physic correctly the CO2 below the tropopause. absorb the IR photons in the correct wavebands but the overwhelming ‘reaction’ is for the energy to be transfered to the rest of the atmospheric molecules warming them. At that point, since hot air rises the energy is carried up. In other words all CO2 is doing is aiding conduction in a poor conductor, air.

          It is not until above the tropopause that the air is thin enough that the mean time between collusions is long enough for the CO2 molecules to emit Ir energy instead of transferring it via collision.

          Paraphrasing Dr. Brown.
          When CO2 near the earth’s surface absorbs back radiation, the lifetime of the excited state caused by the absorption of the photon is much longer than the mean free time between molecular collisions between the CO_2 molecule and other molecules in the surrounding gas. That means that the radiative energy absorbed by the molecule is almost never resonantly re-emitted, it is transferred to the surrounding gas, warming not just the CO_2 but the oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor, argon as well as the other CO_2 molecules around.

          In other words near the surface back radiation, aka a ‘resonantly re-emitted’ photon is a RARE EVENT.

          Dr Happer in his lecture agreed and further stated that the time to radiate is about ten times slower than the time to the next collision in the troposphere. Dr Happer in his lecture also answered my question about where CO2 energy is radiated instead of being handed off via collision. Experimental data shows barely any radiation at 11 KM and that radiating is in the stratosphere ~ 47 KM above the surface as shown in the graph above.
          More details and the liks in my comment HERE.

          This is why there was so much discussion about the missing “Hot Spot”
          As usual when the ” mid-troposphere hot spot (which was previously considered to be the definitive “fingerprint” of man-made global warming)” did not appear “despite millions of weather balloon and satellite observations over the past 60 years” The warmist turned around and are now claiming ” cooling of the stratosphere is now the new indicator.” (Roll eyes)
          What stratospheric hotspot?

        • markstoval says:

          @ Gail

          Yes, some of us believe that the atmosphere as a whole distributes heat and mitigates the rise and fall of temps during the day and night. The “atmospheric effect” is complex and CO2 does not do what James Hansen and the mainstream climatologists claim it does. These views are frowned upon at WUWT and are against site policy. You can briefly mention or hint at these beliefs but you better distance yourself from “the Slayers” or risk being banned.

          One person observed, “Only radiation emitted by a hotter body to a cooler body is absorbed for thermal gain. The radiation emitted by a cooler source does not have the power to jump the energy gap (wider electron orbit?) to make the hotter body raise its thermal energy level. The radiation from the Sun has that power, ‘backradiation’ from atmospheric CO2 does not, unless the receiving surface is cooler, which is certainly not the case globally. So demonstrating that one can identify ‘backradiation’ exists is a far cry from proving that it causes warming of the surface!”

          That last sentence is something that will send the luke-warmers into fits of anger.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Some people do get upset when you suggest that the atmospheric pressure gradient regulates the temperature, and is in fact responsible for what they call the Greenhouse Effect. (I think this seems plausible, certainly more so than the current CO2 hypothesis.)
          I tend to think of Venus and Uranus as having dense atmospheres, therefore the planetary surface remains relatively constant even on the non-solar side.
          Earth has a semi-tenuous atmosphere, therefore experiences wider swings, but nevertheless, the atmosphere is always trying to regulate the temperature, against other factors.
          There is still A LOT we don’t know about how the atmosphere operates, so all hypotheses should be on the table. 🙂

        • AndyG55 says:

          The real point is that in those graphs, peak CO2 was ALWAYS followed by cooling.

          We of course realise that CO2 is actually following the temperature, and the variations in temperature are being driven by some outside factor.

          But any of the alarmista that want to use those graphs to try to prove CO2 causes warming, should be nailed to the floor with that fact that peak CO2 was ALWAYS followed by cooling.

          They really DO NOT like it when you point this out to them 🙂

  11. R. Shearer says:

    It will likely pass 400 ppm twice more in the next year, once down, then back up again.

  12. michaelspencer2 says:

    Don’t you just love the way they use scary pictures of water condensation to frighten the wits out of the public so that they think it’s invisible CO2!

  13. sabretoothed says:

    If Humans are making that CO2 why isn’t it accelerating?

  14. sabretoothed says:

    http://iceagenow.info/2014/07/million-underwater-volcanoes-wrong/

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12218-thousand-of-new-volcanoes-revealed-beneath-the-waves.html#.VUv905MlQ40

    The team estimates that in total there could be about 3 million submarine volcanoes, 39,000 of which rise more than 1000 metres over the sea bed.

    “The distribution of underwater volcanoes tells us something about what is happening in the centre of the Earth,” says John Hillier of the University of Cambridge in the UK. That is because they give information about the flows of hot rock in the mantle beneath. “But the problem is that we cannot see through the water to count them,” he says.

  15. From the “famously hot” Columbia, SC — Bring it on!!

  16. gregole says:

    400 ppm? I thought 350 ppm was the absolute max, the limit; well according to McKibben 350 is the max. And as we continue to choke the atmosphere with Mann-Made CO2, and absolutely nothing out of the ordinary happens, then what? Can we get our money back?

    • You get no money back, kulak. If you are lucky you may not go to a labor camp for denialism.

    • AndyG55 says:

      The first time a used “Toward 700ppm” was on a site with some resident McGibbonites.

      Gees did they get upperty ! 🙂 🙂

      Needless to say, I found I was not able to post there again. 😉

      • Gail Combs says:

        When you can not win the debate with facts Toss Ad Hom Bombs and then ban the opposing side. TRUTH must never get in the way of a money making Con.

  17. rah says:

    I guess they used “green house gases” because they were afraid they would confuse CO2 with CO again. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-ciandella/2015/04/07/oops-cbs-evening-news-flunks-basic-science

  18. nickreality65 says:

    IPCC AR5 ties ppm and RF together in the RCP models.
    Box SPM.1
    RCP 2.6 = 2.6 W/m^2 & 421ppm
    RCP 4.5 = 4.5 W/m^2 & 538 ppm
    RCP 6.6 = 6.0 W/m^2 & 670 ppm
    RCP 8.5 = 8.5 W/m^2 & 936 ppm
    RCP 8.5 is the one where the ice caps melt and the sea levels rise 1.51 to 6.63 meters – in year 2500.
    Solar & earth heat fluxes are hundreds of W/m^2, clouds generate -20 W/m^2, but 5 W/m^2 is terrible!! End of earth!!
    Per figure 6.1 annual anthropogenic CO2 adds about 1.47E13 kg to the 3.05E15 atmospheric CO2 or 0.48%.

  19. Snowleopard says:

    Why do we measure “World atmospheric CO2” at just one location? If that’s valid why don’t we just measure “world atmospheric temperature” at the same place for simplicity? 🙂

    In exploring validity, most will agree that warm oceans are CO2 emitters, as are active volcanoes. So, of course, the “World CO2” measurement location, (obviously selected for neutrality /s) just happens to be an active volcano on an island located in the warmer part of the ocean.

    I’m tempted to stop there and ignore the matter henceforth. But maybe I’m wrong, and current measurement of “World CO2” is actually valid. In that case, one notices that the atmospheric CO2 content graph is linear, but the human produced CO2 graph is exponential. IOW, after decades of exponential growth in “human CO2 ‘pollution’ “; there is no significant change in the ongoing rate of increase of “World CO2”. Surely I’m not the only one to conclude from this that human produced CO2 does not yet exceed the “noise” in the natural system??

    • Snowleopard says:

      I’m told (see below) a possibly valid world CO2 measurement system does exist, and that seems to be the case.. NOAA has spent megabucks on a CO2 system for over 30yrs, but that escaped me, and somehow the Hawaii CO2 measurements are the only ones I’d seen till now. Thus, my first point above is just wrong, sorry ’bout that.

  20. nickreality65 says:

    NOAA’s tall towers web site has several locations. Lots of variety, pick a location and readings that suit your agenda.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s