For a scatter plot of Mauna Loa Vs. Global Mean
Surface Temperature, please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/TempVsCO2.jpg

(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"scatter plots" will find a tutorial on the subject he

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correla...efficient.html

Item 20 in the above shows R squared in several scatter
plots. The larger R squared, the tighter the scatter is
around the central line. The R squared for CO2 Vs.
temperature is 0.78 so the points line close to the line.)


Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)

Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 0.0185249 0.0763159 0.1798386

Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 2.22e-16
CO2 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 2.22e-16

Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
R-Squared: 0.783817
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: 2.220e-16


=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt


The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

On Oct 23, 11:09*am, Roger Coppock wrote:
For a scatter plot of *Mauna Loa Vs. Global Mean
Surface Temperature, please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/TempVsCO2.jpg

(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"scatter plots" will find a tutorial on the subject he

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correla...efficient.html

Item 20 in the above shows R squared in several scatter
plots. *The larger R squared, the tighter the scatter is
around the central line. *The R squared for CO2 Vs.
temperature is *0.78 so the points line close to the line.)

Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)

Residuals:
* * * *Min * * * * 1Q * * Median * * * * 3Q * * * *Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 *0.0185249 *0.0763159 *0.1798386

Coefficients:
* * * * * * * *Estimate *Std. Error t value * Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 2.22e-16
CO2 * * * * 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 2.22e-16

Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
R-Squared: 0.783817
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, *p-value: 2.220e-16

=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt

The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

But Roger the fact that CO2 and Temperature are related does not
prove that CO2 causes the temperature rise the reverse could be true

In fact more accurate analyses of the data show that CO2 LAGS
the Temperature by 3 months.
All the Ice Core data show that CO2 lags the temperature.

chemist wrote:
On Oct 23, 11:09 am, Roger Coppock wrote:
For a scatter plot of Mauna Loa Vs. Global Mean
Surface Temperature, please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/TempVsCO2.jpg

(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"scatter plots" will find a tutorial on the subject he

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correla...efficient.html

Item 20 in the above shows R squared in several scatter
plots. The larger R squared, the tighter the scatter is
around the central line. The R squared for CO2 Vs.
temperature is 0.78 so the points line close to the line.)

Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)

Residuals:
Min 1Q Median 3Q Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 0.0185249 0.0763159 0.1798386

Coefficients:
Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 2.22e-16
CO2 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 2.22e-16

Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
R-Squared: 0.783817
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, p-value: 2.220e-16

=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt

The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

But Roger the fact that CO2 and Temperature are related does not
prove that CO2 causes the temperature rise the reverse could be true

Both are true.

Below, you have a classic fossil fool response:
a bunch of claims without even the smallest
particle of evidence to support them. This guy
claims he's a Chemist. Ha Ha!

On Oct 23, 3:53*am, chemist wrote:
On Oct 23, 11:09*am, Roger Coppock wrote:



For a scatter plot of *Mauna Loa Vs. Global Mean
Surface Temperature, please see:

http://members.cox.net/rcoppock/TempVsCO2.jpg

(Those who are new to statistical correlation and
"scatter plots" will find a tutorial on the subject he

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correlation.html

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Correla...efficient.html

Item 20 in the above shows R squared in several scatter
plots. *The larger R squared, the tighter the scatter is
around the central line. *The R squared for CO2 Vs.
temperature is *0.78 so the points line close to the line.)

Call:
lm(formula = Temp ~ CO2, data = aframe)

Residuals:
* * * *Min * * * * 1Q * * Median * * * * 3Q * * * *Max
-0.2316612 -0.0805322 *0.0185249 *0.0763159 *0.1798386

Coefficients:
* * * * * * * *Estimate *Std. Error t value * Pr(|t|)
(Intercept) 1.10008e+01 2.41721e-01 45.5103 2.22e-16
CO2 * * * * 9.24797e-03 7.01018e-04 13.1922 2.22e-16

Residual standard error: 0.101321 on 48 degrees of freedom
R-Squared: 0.783817
F-statistic: 174.034 on 1 and 48 DF, *p-value: 2.220e-16

=-=-=-=-=-=-= The Data =-=-=-=-=-=-=
The global mean surface "Temp"erature data are the GISS
adjusted J-D yearly land and sea average, available from
NASA at:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ta...LB.Ts+dSST.txt

The "CO2" data are the yearly averages of the monthly data
from the Keeling curve measured at Mauna Loa, available at:

ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/co2/trends/co2_mm_mlo.txt

But Roger the fact that CO2 and Temperature are related does not
prove that CO2 causes the temperature rise the reverse could be true

In fact more accurate analyses of the data show that CO2 LAGS
the Temperature by 3 months.

Just who's analysis would that be?


All the Ice Core data show that CO2 lags the temperature.

All the Ice core data? Please list all the ice core data

On Oct 23, 4:52*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:

chemist wrote:

All the Ice Core data show that CO2 lags the temperature.

All the Ice core data? *Please list all the ice core data- Hide quoted text -

Is this the CO2 lagging that you're talking about from the ice core
data, chemist?

From Real Climate.com
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...-in-ice-cores/

3 December 2004

What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about
global warming?
Filed under: FAQ Greenhouse gases Paleoclimate— group @ 9:42 AM -
()
This is an issue that is often misunderstood in the public sphere and
media, so it is worth spending some time to explain it and clarify it.
At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to
rise about 800 years (600-1000 years) after Antarctic temperature
during glacial terminations. These terminations are pronounced warming
periods that mark the ends of the ice ages that happen every 100,000
years or so.

Does this prove that CO2 doesn't cause global warming? The answer is
no.


The reason has to do with the fact that the warmings take about 5000
years to be complete. The lag is only 800 years. All that the lag
shows is that CO2 did not cause the first 800 years of warming, out of
the 5000 year trend. The other 4200 years of warming could in fact
have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core
data.

The 4200 years of warming make up about 5/6 of the total warming. So
CO2 could have caused the last 5/6 of the warming, but could not have
caused the first 1/6 of the warming.

It comes as no surprise that other factors besides CO2 affect climate.
Changes in the amount of summer sunshine, due to changes in the
Earth's orbit around the sun that happen every 21,000 years, have long
been known to affect the comings and goings of ice ages. Atlantic
ocean circulation slowdowns are thought to warm Antarctica, also.

From studying all the available data (not just ice cores), the
probable sequence of events at a termination goes something like this.
Some (currently unknown) process causes Antarctica and the surrounding
ocean to warm. This process also causes CO2 to start rising, about 800
years later. Then CO2 further warms the whole planet, because of its
heat-trapping properties. This leads to even further CO2 release. So
CO2 during ice ages should be thought of as a "feedback", much like
the feedback that results from putting a microphone too near to a
loudspeaker.

In other words, CO2 does not initiate the warmings, but acts as an
amplifier once they are underway. From model estimates, CO2 (along
with other greenhouse gases CH4 and N2O) causes about half of the full
glacial-to-interglacial warming.

So, in summary, the lag of CO2 behind temperature doesn't tell us much
about global warming. [But it may give us a very interesting clue
about why CO2 rises at the ends of ice ages. The 800-year lag is about
the amount of time required to flush out the deep ocean through
natural ocean currents. So CO2 might be stored in the deep ocean
during ice ages, and then get released when the climate warms.]

To read more about CO2 and ice cores, see Caillon et al., 2003,
Science magazine

Guest Contributor: Jeff Severinghaus
Professor of Geosciences
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
University of California, San Diego.

Update May 2007: We have a fuller exposition of this on a more recent
post.

From Real Climate.com, 2007:

27 April 2007
The lag between temperature and CO2. (Gore’s got it right.)
Filed under: Arctic and Antarctic Greenhouse gases Paleoclimate
Climate Science— eric @ 2:45 PM
Eric Steig

When I give talks about climate change, the question that comes up
most frequently is this: “Doesn’t the relationship between CO2 and
temperature in the ice core record show that temperature drives CO2,
not the other way round?"

On the face of it, it sounds like a reasonable question. It is no
surprise that it comes up because it is one of the most popular claims
made by the global warming deniers.

SNIP -- for the rest of this post, click he
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...-temp-and-co2/