The latest watts misinformation and all over a picture:
Watts contention starts out as being the data is false in the background information.
Watts' telling comment is
Huh, that’s strange, it only shows around 280ppm of CO2 at the “present” of 1999 when this graph was published
The trouble is he has forgotten that present in general refers to 1950 in ice core timelinesThe vostock Ice core finishes 2400 years before present (1950) i.e. some 500 years BC.
Then watts goes on to complain that the real problem is splicing valid CO2 readings from the present to paleo data,
But CO2 is a well mixed gas over the globe
Now here’s the problem. If you took surface temperature data from Antarctica, and spliced it with surface temperature data from Hawaii, and then presented it as the entire historical record from Antarctica, our friends would have a veritable “cow”.
This shows most of the CO2 records fall within +-1ppm with a couple of outliers at +-5ppm (linear) looking at the monthly plots shows that the peak at alert Alaska occurs some 2 months before the peak at Mauna Loa. Indicating that CO2 is pretty much in synch.
Yes, I agree that a spliced data should be indicated (perhaps the previous slide showed just the vostok data and was then compared to current data in the slide used as background???) But there is no invalid information in the picture.
