I'm interested in the truth about the climate and couldn't care less about government reports or "scientist" qualifications or credentials. Instead of believing what IPCC says, or others who BLINDLY parrot IPCC's "findings", since late 2008 I've been scanning the literature myself, time permitting.

ALWAYS FIND OUT THE TRUTH FOR YOURSELF. That's the ONLY way to understand this universe. Have no intermediary between you and the truth.

One of the biggest issues I had in this area of "science" is a statistical one.

I NEVER look at short term 'trends' before arriving at conclusions. I ALWAYS seek as long a data series as is humanly feasible to have, before I start looking for theoretical explanations.

In my view DATA TRUMPS THEORY ALWAYS. ALL THE TIME. NO EXCEPTION.

You can only explain REALITY. You can't impose theory on reality. That's not how science works. (Of course, religion does work that way, whereby you take theory and impose it on reality. Such approaches are guaranteed to lead us astray.) So we must focus on finding out what is real, before we make up theories to explain it.

The first thing I therefore looked for was for a LONG TERM chart that depicts both CO2 levels and temperatures. This one, below, is the only really long term graph I've found so far. Finding this single graph made me SERIOUSLY question the claims of IPCC.

I hope you will too, if you can read graphs! Go on. Read it! Don't be scared! The truth won't bite you.

Given that some people question Ian Plimer's accuracy, I'm happy to be shown a more accurate but equally LONG TERM graph. Also, there is another variable I'd like to see: the magnitude of solar radiation. So if you can get me a graph that goes across 600 MILLION years, and plots these three variables, let me have it. And if you can add any other thing that might affect the onset of ice ages, do add it. Much appreciated.

But there is nothing like doing first hand research.

So here's a graph I created MYSELF TODAY from original data found on the website of the US Government. This is the longest annual series I could extract from this data.

Note that this relates ONLY to USA, but that should, in my view, reflect REAL climate change, given that US was the GREATEST emitter of CO2 till this year (having now been overtaken by China).

I've also "plotted" a blue line on this graph to reflect the HUGE increase in CO2 emitted from USA (my blue line is not to scale, and is probably inaccurate, but it is broadly reflective of increased CO emissions since the 1950s).

You SHOULD recreate this OFFICIAL chart yourself. Do it! Don't be afraid.

Make sure you take the maximum values of data available, and pick "annual" under "period".

From these two LONG TERM trends, I can CLEARLY SEE that there is NO CORRELATION between CO2 in the atmosphere and temperature. Yes, I notice a slight increase in temperatures over the past 117 years in USA (0.067 degrees C per decade, or 0.67 degree centigrade per century) but I'm not convinced that there is ANY genuine trend. The data could well be cyclical. I need LONGER TERM data.

In any event there is NO relationship between CO2 and temperature increase in USA. That must is BLATANTLY OBVIOUS. Temperature increases occurred well before CO2 emissions increased, and reduced sharply after CO2 increased. Then rose again.

These two charts, together, SINK claims that CO2 causes global warming.

Now, surely that can't be true!

The data must be LYING!

Theory says that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I agree. Of course there must be some effect. But there are likely to be negative feedbacks that dampen this effect. I'm aware of the debates in this regard but won't go into them here.

In any case, THEORY MUST EXPLAIN REALITY, not FORCE its way on reality.

Suffice it for now to note that:

a) We MUST get LONG TERM data to determine whether increasing CO2 is going to be a problem.

b) From whatever long data that is available there is clearly NO obvious problem with increasing CO2 in the atmosphere. Indeed, CO2, being plant food, can only be good, for it increases plant productivity.

Related posts:

1. So what do long term (2000 year) climate data STILL say?
2. Data must always trump theory. CO2 induced panic is not justified by DATA.
3. A physics Nobel laureate now says that climate change is pseudoscience
4. Two more studies that demolish the “science” of climate change
5. Tony Burke admits human fallibility. Now will “climate change” policies be reviewed, please?
6. I’m sorry Australia has such a disappointing person on its Climate Change Authority
7. David vs Goliath: Climate change ‘sceptics’ vs IPCC and world governments
8. Will “climate change” jokers now be shown the door?
9. Milton Friedman’s son, David, points out key fallacies in the climate change alarm
10. NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies bombs badly at climate change predictions