Climate change: understanding the facts (Vostok ice core)

In this whiteboard animation, I explain why global atmospheric temperature increases due to increased concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane. This is based on the Vostok ice core research published in 1999 and more recent research published by the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report published in October 2013. This data is climate change evidence and shows that climate change is human made.

Climate change is related to the concepts of sustainability, sustainable development, ecological footprint, carbon footprint.

**
Learn about sustainability for free with short animation videos!
Extra info & links below...

**

Music by Huma-Huma
Thank you to our subtitles volunteer:
Spanish & Catalan: Josep Simona
Portuguese: André Ribeiro Winter

[christopherdavis]

The University of Copenhagen found that the rise in temperature preceded the rise in carbon by a thousand years in the ice cores.

[stephenskinner]

Wait a minute. At 3.15 the young man shows a massive up tick in temperature that goes way above the previous inter glacial 120k years ago. This is NOT true. Average global temperatures have risen just over 1C since the end of the mini ice-age at the beginning of the 1800s and based on the scale of this graphic that temp up tick is equivalent to the total temp range of the current ice age (including its inter-glacials), which is about 10C . The last inter-glacial was and is still warmer than the current inter glacial. So why show such a massive temp rise which as he says 'we are already seeing this worldwide'? +10C? This Video does not show that CO2 is driving temperature and it is not scientific to simplify such a complex and open system as the worlds weather, which incidentally can be characterized by not one but several climate types. As temperature increases there are a multitude of things that will also increase particularly sea level and evaporation and rainfall. If CO2 is the main driver then what is making that increase and decrease as it has in the past?

[patrickcollins]

Everyone assumes that co2 causes temperature rise. No one appears to considering that temperature rise might be causing an increase in atmospheric co2

[morgs]

Seems to me a 60 year spike in a chart that goes back 400 000 years could be spurious. Might have happened dozens of times in that chart but over such brief time spans (say 200 years or less) we wouldn't be able to tell. But what we can see is we have been in this situation before

[GANTZpts]

According to the heat graph we had much warmer periods. Then we currently are at right now.

[Head-ckhu]

Classic bait and switch technique used by Michael Mann and here. Using historical records of ice cores is a good data set. But when you start mixing in actual present data to come to your goal corrupts your theory. Not all gases remain in the ice core sample from a particular historical time. So 100K years ago when the ice core shows 500 ppm of CO2 it could have actually been 1000 ppm.

[Phyroxin]

CO2 volume lags behind temperature change in the Vostok sample. Increased CO2 catalyses plant growth and increases humidity producing cloud cover ( however increased CO2 will also constrict the pores releasing moisture in some species ). Cloud cover reflects sunlight reducing direct temperature. The Earth will regulate herself as she has done to a greater extent before. Are we able to adapt is the question.

[knarftrakiul]

Why didn't he mention we are about to start another ice age? The trend is in the very chart he posted. We might be adding extra co2 but the climate is changing because we are at the tail end of our interglacial period

[christophercharles]

You never mentioned that rises in CO2 follow rises in temperature, not the other way around. As the oceans, which represent 71% of the planet's surface area, warm, they release CO2.

[maxtabmann]

Is this how typical IPCC scientists work? You have three curves. From the similarity, you conclude that one is the cause and the other is the effect. What if it is exactly the other way round? Without any further analysis, you declare one as the cause, because it suits you. But you have more in your curves. You see a steady decline of temperatures over 90.000 years and then you see an extremely rapid increase of temperature. As far as I know, you have neither a satisfactory explanation for the decline, nor for the rapid increase. Furthermore, you have a periodicity of 100.000 years in this curve. IPCC scientists already published, that the Milankowic cycles cannot serve as an explanation. Do you have another explanation? So I ask again, is this your typical method of approaching problems? Other fields of science would consider this as insufficient work.

[pehenry]

You’re backwards and wrong. CO2 follows temp and not the other way around.

Warm water releases CO2. Cold water holds more CO2. Think of a hot flat beer vs a cold carbonated beer.

Thus the as the global temps rise, the oceans release more CO2. And when the global temps cool, the oceans can absorb more CO2.

CO2, man made or other wise does not drive global temps.

[KM-qhel]

In the records you present I read that the CO2 trails the temperature by about 800 years, so how can it be the cause?

[bobdooly]

My friend lives in NUUK, Greenland and says the ice shelves have not changed . These videos are made in Summer when ice melts but freezes in Winter.

[SeanWasserman]

This video is laughably unscientific and amateur. Why not be honest and state the facts and data, not how YOU interpret the data.

[paulbrowne]

IF CO2 IS THE CAUSE OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE AND SINCE 1960 WE ARE OFF THE CHARTS, LITERELLY, WITH CO2 .... WHY AREN'T WE DRAMATICALLY MORE WARM THAN WE ARE? IT SEEMS THAT THE SYSTEM IS MORE CAUSE AND EFFECT AND TEMPERATURE IS DRIVING THE METHANE LEVELS HIGHER NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. CO2 MAY BE ELEVATED DUE TO FOSSIL FUEL BURNING BUT IT'S BEING GIVEN WAY TOO MUCH CREDIT FOR TEMPERATURE CHANGE.

[pocketpenis]

How about the periods in geological history when it was 4, 000ppm carbon dioxide? Temperature was much the same....they don’t like talking about that part

[stubkar]

What? Clear?
I teach this subject and would disagree on this "clarity" STRICTLY BASED ON THE INFORMATION YOU ARE PROVIDING.

*If the temp lags the CO2, (according to this, and other sources), we haven't seen a proportional uptick in temp that would reflect the uptick in CO2.

That simply hasn't happened yet. It's predicted, but hasn't taken place.

Also, I've heard that the vostok sample revealed that CO2 lags behind upticks in temp. You didn't mention that.

*I'll move on to another video source for my students. This is bunk.

[DDFergy]

Look at your graphs carefully. Even though the scale was such to make it not as obvious as it could be it clearly shows CO2 following temperature change. This means CO2 is not the driver of Climate but is a reaction to Climate.

[brianjacob]

Climate change or global warming? Quit moving the goal posts.

And the answer to your question is NO.

[Jwick]

Correlation dose not mean causation. Carbon and Methane most likely went along with temp, not because of it!!!