Russ Steele
We have been told, and told again, and yet again that the increase in CO2 is responsible the increase in global temperature. And, that we humans are responsible for these CO2 increases. But, take a minute and look at this graphic, developed by By Joseph D’Aleo at ICECAP. The graphic shows the latest decadal plot from February 1998 to February 2008 of global temperatures from Satellite (UAH MSU lower troposphere) (blue) and land and ocean variance adjusted surface (Hadley CRU T3v) (rose) plotted with Scripps monthly CO2 from Mauna Loa (green).
D’Aleo points out that the "decadal correlation strengths (r-squared) of both the Hadley and MSU satellite with the corresponding CO2 is non-existent (r2=0.00). If you start in 2000 at the coldest point of the last decade, this does not significantly change (r2=0.01 for the Hadley and r2=0.08 for MSU). These numbers also do not change if you use the Scripps seasonally adjusted CO2 values (r2=0.00 for both the decadal Hadley and MSU). The correlation since 2000 stays at r2=0.01 for the Hadley but drops to r2=0.05 for the MSU using this seasonally adjusted CO2."
The closer that r-squared is to 1.0 the closer the statistical fit to the temperature plots. As you can see regardless of how the temperature is measured there is little or no correlation with the rise in CO2. I know that this analysis is over a short time span, but we keep hearing about tipping points and run away temperatures and we must take action now. This whole action now manta would have more validity if there was some correlation, or the correlation was going more toward 1.0, when in fact it is is moving more towards zero. Temperature and CO2 are not related. Period! If you have another version, I recommend you post a comment pointing to another solution.
