Russ Steele
When I was working on the NCTV Ch-11s Global Warming Series, actually the first program, Alan Stahler, the Union's science writer, introduced me to a concept I was not familiar with. Alan said the frequency of stomata, microscopic pores found on the under side of leaves on leaves, is an indicator of how much CO2 is in the atmosphere. Plants need CO2 to grow. If CO2 is plentiful, the plants form fewer stomata. If there is a deficit, the plants form more so they can take in what little CO2 is available in the air. Based on stomatal frequency in fossil leaves, research has shown that during the past 10,000 years CO2 levels were higher than 300 ppmv, fluctuating up to 348 ppmv.
I have not had time to follow up on my discussion with Alan with some specific research, but recently came across this work by E.G. Beck, 180 Years of CO2 gas analysis by chemical methods, soon to be published in Energy & Environment. Beck showed in the Northern Hemisphere between 1812 and 1961, CO2 concentrations were almost always higher than 300 ppmv, with 3 peaks: near 1820 (440 ppmv), near 1855 (390 ppmv), and near 1942 (440 ppmv).
Click for a larger image.
These peaks raise the question, if CO2 as much higher in the past when we have good temperature records, why was it not warmer during these peaks? The early 1800s were quite cold, it was not much warmer in the 1850s, and the 1940s started a cooling trend that by the 1970s scientist were worried about a coming ice age. I find it interesting these increased levels of CO2 were during periods where the the climate was colder than "normal." These peaks occurred when it was cold, or growing colder.
So, what do you think is going on? Is the increase in CO2 today different today than it was in 1820, 1855, and 1942? Really? Why? Could it be the greenhouse effect really does not exist, as postulated by Al Gore and all the global warmers.
