Peter Clack

A common climate myth is that modern CO₂ is rising faster than anything in 800,000 years. The truth is, no one can ever know. And this is where the science rubber really hits the road. There's no way to measure the speed of previous warming episodes. This means no one can say modern warming is 'unprecedented'. The truth comes from science, the laws of physics and ice core studies for more than a century. Before snow turns into solid ice, it exists in what is known as the 'firn'. This refers to the porous, packed layer of snow that eventually settles into glacial ice. But this doesn't happen overnight. These ice bubbles are not sealed from the surrounding air. So the air moves freely through this layer for decades or even centuries before the weight of new snow finally crushes the pores shut. This gas-age/ice-age difference is why a single slice of ice contains air that is significantly younger than the ice surrounding it. Because the air can circulate during those 50 to 200 years (depending on the site’s snowfall rate), a single bubble doesn't represent a year. It can represent a rolling average of a century. If a massive CO₂ spike occurred 10,000 years ago but only lasted 40 years, the ice core would smooth it out. The spike would be averaged into the surrounding centuries of lower data, making it appear as a tiny, invisible bump. Comparing a 20-year satellite trend to a 200-year ice core average is like comparing a high-definition photograph to a smudge of charcoal.

The 'temporal smoothing' effect seen in ice cores doesn't just hide spikes, it also obscures the massive thermal lag between the air and the deep ocean. If CO₂ was the root cause of warming it would rise first. But it doesn't. CO₂ increases are almost always shown to lag behind temperatures, by as much as 700 to 1,000 years. This is caused by oceanic inertia. The oceans hold roughly 50 times more carbon than the atmosphere and also contain 90% of the planet's retained thermal energy. The oceans act as the master flywheel. Historically, CO₂ levels have been shown to lag temperature rises by centuries. The ocean warms, and like a glass of soda left in the sun, CO₂ slowly outgasses into the gossamer thin film of our atmosphere. Water is also 1,000 times denser and heavier than air. Oceans cover 71% of the planet's surface to an average depth of 2.3 miles. This is why the oceans have intertia. They are the powerhouse of the thermal world. Ocean currents are slow yet ceaseless and it takes roughly 800 to 1,000 years for a parcel of water to complete this journey (called thermohaline circulation). The weight placed on CO₂ levels at 0.042% of the atmosphere is really a thermodynamic rounding error. The oceans are the true climate drivers with a 1,000 year memory. Ice cores are just a low-resolution blurred history of the relationship between CO₂ and temperatures in the atmosphere. This physical process cannot physically record short-term spikes. We aren't necessarily seeing unprecedented changes happening. We are simply the first generation with the technology to see the flicker in high definition.

@Monetarius Carbon dioxide at 420 parts per million is not 'saturating' the atmosphere. And you say 'refuted' without any substantiation at all. So you can drop your high handed tone. You can't just make things up and hope someone believes you.

@PeterDClack What the papers show is that the planet is sensitive to changes in CO2 saturation of the atmosphere. The claim that earth's climate was unaffected by higher levels of CO2 in the past is refuted.

Significant ice core data over for the past three million years confirm that major cooling takes place 'without' the influence of CO2. Two new papers published in Nature (March 17-18, 2026) found that CO2 levels played no part in the cooling and were stable and largely unchanging. This finding runs counter to climate change dogma that CO2 levels drive all climate change. The onset of ice age conditions did not come from atmospheric CO2 effects at all, but from deep ocean cooling that preceded the ice ages. The core of the findings from Allan Hills blue ice samples, reveal that the long-term cooling of the last 3 million years happened with only a modest decline in greenhouse gases. Researchers used noble gas ratios (Argon, Krypton and Xenon) trapped in the ice which specifically reflected ocean temperatures. They showed the ocean cooled by 2C to 2.5C - independently of major CO2 shifts. The data show CO2 levels remained relatively stable (broadly below 300 ppm) even as the planet underwent massive cooling and the formation of the northern hemisphere's Arctic ice sheets. Instead of CO2 driving every turn, climate responds to small nudges in ocean circulation and reflectivity (albedo), which then push the system across a threshold. This means the cooling was from changes in total solar irradiance or orbital positioning (the Milankovitch cycles) and oceanic inertia. This is the 'flywheel effect', where the ocean redistributes heat over thousand-year scales, regardless of the thin film of the atmosphere.

The Mid-Ocean Ridge is the ultimate unwatched tragedy of modern science. It's almost never mentioned in the climate debate. We obsess over a trace gas 0.042% of the atmosphere, yet ignore a 65,000 km volcanic spine that endlessly resurfaces the planet. How does that happen? This isn't just a geological feature, it’s Earth’s primary circulatory system. While the narrative focuses on tailpipes, this ridge is quietly venting heat, minerals, and carbon on a scale that makes human activity look like a footnote. New Evidence: * Woods Hole research shows hydrothermal vent temperatures are volatile, spiking by 40°C in short bursts. This isn't a steady hum, it’s a pulsating engine room injecting vital energy into deep currents (the AMOC) that can take decades to surface. * University of Sydney researchers argue we’ve significantly underestimated these ridges. When mid ocean ridge spreading speeds up, they don't just release CO2, they change ocean chemistry, dictating how much CO2 the water can hold. * Scientists only recently discovered the Kunlun Hydrothermal Field. This is a 'vent metropolis' 100 times larger than the fabled Lost City. If we didn't know an 11 square kilometre volcanic field existed until last year, how can we claim to have settled the math on global emissions? Does the climate narrative stop at the shoreline? While we argue over parts per million in the air, a 65,000 km natural wonder is busily creating the very crust we stand on. It’s the origin of life, the driver of oceanic heat, and a massive, unmeasured variable in the carbon mystery.

@Baker_RidgeLine All fully appreciated and understood... Peter

@PeterDClack Atmospheric CO2 concentration is not the driver of earth's temperature -- solar insolation is the driver. Until this fact is more broadly accepted, the chaos around this topic will likely continue. The AGW narrative is fear mongering and baiting for fundraising purposes, IMHO.

When the Nature papers on ice age cooling refers to 'small nudges' driving the oceans, they are describing the precision of the Milankovitch Cycles. These aren't massive shifts in heat but subtle changes in distribution. They come from slight shifts in Earth's tilt (obliquity) or the shape of its orbit (eccentricity). They change where sunlight hits. A slightly cooler summer in the Northern Hemisphere means the winter snow doesn't fully melt. Leftover snow then reflects more sunlight back into space. This is a nudge in reflectivity (albedo) that starves the system of energy. As the surface cools, the deep ocean 'flywheel' begins to shift. Cold, dense water sinks more aggressively, altering the global conveyor belt (Thermohaline Circulation). Only after the ocean has cooled by that 2C to 2.5C (as seen in the Allan Hills noble gases) does it begin to re-absorb CO2 from the atmosphere. The atmosphere isn't the driver; it’s a passenger in the process. The code red narrative treats the passenger as the driver, while ignoring the 1,000-year momentum of the ocean beneath them.

@mapjkw Thanks Michael, all so true. Peter

Thank you for the correct science? All we hear in the media and from politicians is a political narrative that has absolutely nothing to do with climate change but it certainly has to do with the business plan of the climate emergency 💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵💵👹 When there is no emergency in the climate There’s certainly an emergency which is not being dealt with with the pollutants plastics and toxins that are being put into the biosphere and bio mass. That’s the emergency.‼️

@Mr_K4ne_ It just shows anyone who accidentally stumbles onto your trash on X just who and what you represent. Let's face it, you can't write a sentence without cursing.

@PeterDClack Pornography is not what hypocrisy means retard

The stunning expansion of Earth's green biomass is continuing to track consistently northward. Studies show 70% of this greening is due to higher CO2 levels, which contradicts the doomsday climate narrative. NASA studies explain that this expansion of a greener, leafier world is driven by rising carbon levels, helped by longer growing seasons and warmer winters. Studies confirm overall greenness is moving north into traditionally barren colder regions. The frigid wastes are yielding ground to more productive new biomass. This latest finding is published in a new study in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences), a leading science journal. The spread of greening, higher leaf cover and improved agriculture yields is being tracked by a flotilla of satellites. They include NASA's PACE satellite (Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem) launched in 2024, which has now completed its first full year of hyperspectral data (March 2025 to March 2026). The carbon gift has now been confirmed. It's now measuring specific plant pigments (chlorophyll, carotenoids, and anthocyanins) from space. The data also show massive productivity spikes in the US midwest corn and soy belts and greening hotspots in India and China. Increased leaf cover is cooling the land surface in 93% of vegetated areas, according to NASA. This is explained by leaf cover creating a more efficient vertical mixing of heat and water vapor. This becomes a natural air conditioner that the UN's urgent code red models often avoid. The MODIS instrument on NASA's Terra satellite is nearing the end of its mission (set for late 2026). NASA is currently transitioning that data stream to VIIRS (on the Suomi NPP satellite) and PACE. The data remains consistent - the global leaf area index continues to climb. If 93% of vegetated areas is cooling via increased leaf cover, why is this missing from the UN climate narrative?

@Mr_K4ne_ What a hypocrite. You run pornography on your X account. By the way, seeking the truth is not criminal and never was. Only tyrants lock people up for speaking. Free speech is the bedrock of western civilisation. Maybe you belong somewhere else.

@PeterDClack Absolutely false. You should be ashamed of yourself. Spreading this sort of purposeful disinformation should be criminal

@VinodBhardwajUS We are the light Vinod, shining into the dark corners of your misery, hoping to put a toothy smile on your face, to get you out into the sunshine of truth, to toss you into a boiling pit of happiness. What a dreary life you must leave, believing all that shit.

Ok. Let us not blame humans for 100% of CO2. Why not just remove the CO2 dumped by humans? Your freedom ends where my nose begins. You have no right to contaminate the air I am breathing with your industrial waste - CO2, just as you have no right to blow your cigarette smoke in my face. You climate science deniers are like a bully who keeps on throwing his trash in my house and says that if is good for me. Keep your trash in your own atmosphere.

To blame humans for 100% of the carbon dioxide rise is simplistic and misleading. It suggests the natural world - with its tectonic shifts, mid-ocean ridge volcanism, feedback mechanisms and massive water vapor flux - all suddenly vanished in 1850. The greening of the planet (confirmed by NASA) proves the biosphere is actively utilising this CO2, yet the crisis narrative treats the Earth as a passive victim rather than a self-regulating, dynamic system. It conveniently tries to frame humans as careless or even as evil. It is more like a case of self loathing. You are completely ignoring the natural world and the real heavy lifters of Earth’s climate: the oceans and the hydrological cycle. The focus on a 150-ppm rise in CO2 bypasses the reality that the oceans contain 50 times more carbon than the atmosphere. Oceans hold 1,000 times the heat capacity. They contain 91-92% of all the entire world's retained heat energy. Water is 1,000 times denser and heavier than the air, a fine inert vapour by comparison We are currently observing the tail end of a multi-century adjustment, as the deep ocean responds to solar and orbital cycles that began long before the industrial revolution. This is how the natural world turns, very slowly. The CO2 rise isn't a human footprint crushing the natural world out of existence, it’s an echo from a complex feedback loop involving the entire planetary engine.

Got anything positive to say? Is this how you are reviving Britain with this misery? My posts are all upbeat and seeking truth, if you bothered to read them. It shows how this poisonous climate fog seeps into every corner of life, finding the weak and the vulnerable and infecting them with toxic ideology, all based on doom and misery. You're in good company.

Another Load of Old Clack. You mix up the changes in Earth temperature due to changes in orbit and angle to the Sun with changes due to atmospheric gases. If you do that, you can easily construct nonsense like this - just claim the current temperature change is due to the same forces as create the ice-age cycle. ..and that lush world with no ice-caps? Sure, but how much dry land was there then? On top of that, when you look on ice-age time-scales, the continents were not even in the same places.

We’re told we’re boiling; Geology says the world's shivering. Earth is still in the Quaternary Glaciation - 2.58 million years so far. Yet for most of the last 500 million years the Earth has been at least 10°C warmer than it is today. There weren't any polar ice caps though. Instead, there were lush biomes from pole to pole and life didn't just survive, it exploded. Pulp fiction's 'hottest years ever' relies on a tiny 175-year window in a geological world of 4.6 billion years. In the context of the late Cenozoic (the last 34 million years) a 1.4°C rise isn't a catastrophe - it’s a minor blip of life-giving warmth in a mostly icehouse world. Why the fear? Because human bureaucracy thrives on fear. By ignoring the 500-million-year baseline of earth's recent geological past, the UN has turned 'natural variability' into a climate sledge hammer for global control. If you only look at the last 175 years, the climate looks like a crisis. But if you look at the last 500 million, it looks like a two-week junket in the Bahamas. We should really be talking about 'Icehouse Earth'.

@DIRE20211 Thanks...

Agreed. Rate of change... Sensible, measured and carefully considered changes are recommended not stupid panicky nonsense as is happening with NetZero in the UK. See my other response to your other post. There will however be a greener planet either way if things keep going the way they are and we don't fill it full of solar panels. It will probably be quite a nice place to live. Whether we will be here to see it still remains to be seen; we are adaptable, not as adaptable as cockroaches though, but it will likely be a very painful process, especially if we play kneejerk money making politics, as we are doing in the UK. I really hope that society, especially Europe and the UK can start acting sensibly, take sensible precautions that don't screw up our economy, and energy infrastructure. Not so much for me, but for my niece, nephew and grandchildren, the oldest is 12.

The earth's atmosphere is a thin veil; the global ocean is a 1.3 billion cubic kilometer engine. To focus solely on 430 ppm CO2 is like trying to explain a hurricane by looking at a single butterfly. 🦋 Did the Earth’s natural carbon cycles suddenly stop in 1850? 🌍 The 'human-only' CO2 narrative assumes a static planet. The reality is a pulsing, oceanic feedback loop that the models can't quite capture.

To blame humans for 100% of the carbon dioxide rise is simplistic and misleading. It suggests that the natural world - with its tectonic shifts, mid-ocean ridge volcanism, and massive water vapor flux - suddenly vanished in 1850. The greening of the planet (confirmed by NASA) proves the biosphere is actively utilising this CO2, yet the crisis narrative treats the Earth as a passive victim rather than a self-regulating, dynamic system. It conveniently tries to frame humans as careless or even as evil. It is more like a case of self loathing. You are completely ignoring the natural world and the real heavy lifters of Earth’s climate: the oceans and the hydrological cycle. The focus on a 150-ppm rise in CO2 bypasses the reality that the oceans contain 50 times more carbon than the atmosphere. Oceans hold 1,000 times the heat capacity. They contain 91-92% of all the entire world's retained heat energy. Water is 1,000 times denser and heavier than the air, a fine inert vapour by comparison We are currently observing the tail end of a multi-century adjustment, as the deep ocean responds to solar and orbital cycles that began long before the industrial revolution. This is how the natural world turns, very slowly. The CO2 rise isn't a human footprint crushing the natural world out of existence, it’s an echo from a complex feedback loop involving the entire planetary engine.

As of early 2026, the atmospheric CO2 concentration is approximately 430 parts per million (ppm), which is over 50% higher than pre-industrial levels of ~280 ppm. This measurement indicates a steady annual rise driven by burning fossil fuels, often referred to as CO2 levels, concentration, or parts per million.

@ArborDrone If it upsets you, you Sad Drone, then that makes me feel good.

@PeterDClack "Earth is cooler now than at any point in the last 485 million years" False. Stop spreading lies.

There is no way of knowing the rate of temperature changes from past warming periods. This is due to temporal smoothing in the firn, the caked snow that eventually becomes ice. Ice can take from 50 to hundreds of years to seal. This means the atmosphere is not excluded and any record of pace of change is removed, or not retained. So there is no basis in physics for your assertion.

@PeterDClack It's the rate of change, not the actual temperature, that is the problem. Life can't adapt fast enough. We're destroying so much hard earned biological diversity. And all we get in return is consumerism and unbelievable wealth disparity. Interesting trade, humanity.