/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15489184
>>15488977
>>15488975
>I am ignorant of the subject and methodologies but I'll just state its wrong
First of all, ice core temperature estimates are regional and a large variety of proxies from different locations are used to estimate GLOBAL temperature change.
CO2 from ice cores on the other hand are a global measurement since CO2 mixes really fast in the atmosphere.
Ice core data does indeed have sufficient resolution to resolve changes in CO2 and temperature when combined with other proxies. for example, corals have monthly resolution for temperature estimates.
Since I know you won't look at papers or look up data I plotted ice core CO2 data with an added 100 and 200 year averages and you'd see that the recent changes can be captured by ice cores

>>15315247
Since I know you won't actually read the data, I went ahead and graphed ice core based CO2 measurements and did a 100 year and 200 year resolution sampling, showing that even at those resolutions the anthropocentric signal is clearly visible. The red dot is CO2 ppm today.

Keep in mind that it took more than 7,000 years to increase CO2 by 70ppm from 18k to 11k years and that's the at the fastest interglacial warming rate.
Even lowering the resolution of the data an 80 ppm increase in CO2 happened in the span of 400 years.