Climate Craziness of the week: Guardian's Damian Carrington 'glass half full' moment

This, is really quite something. We know the Guardian has lost just about all journalistic standards, but this one really takes the cake, especially from somebody who should know better. See the screen cap below.

“The atmosphere right now is half-full of carbon dioxide”.

carrington-half-full

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2014/jan/22/eu-2030-climate-change-energy-emissions-targets

Erm, riiiggght.

Let see, Mauna Loa/ Scripps says:

Maybe Damian doesn’t understand that whole “parts per million” thing, if he did, he’s certainly know that 398.58 is nowhere close to “half full”. The value of 500,000 parts per million is what would be considered “half-full”. He’s only off be a couple orders of magnitude.

If indeed CO2 in Earth’s atmosphere was 500,000 parts per million, we’d have a big problem: we’d all be dead.

Maybe he was thinking in terms of saturation of the CO2 effect in the atmosphere on temperature? In that case, we are closer to 90%, and additional CO2 won’t make much difference.

This graph showing CO2′s temperature response to supplement the one Doug Hoffman cites from IPCC AR4. here we see that we are indeed pretty close to saturation of the response.

CO2_temperature_curve_saturation

click for larger image

The “blue fuzz” represents measured global CO2 increases in our modern times.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
81 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ed Zuiderwijk
January 23, 2014 8:54 am

There isn’t enough carbon on the planet to get to 10%, let alone 50%. But the Guardian is a pamphlet of the left, hence of and for people who mostly cannot count. This is just another example.

Ed Zuiderwijk
January 23, 2014 8:55 am

He simply doesn’t know the difference between 400 per million and 400 per mille.

Gail Combs
January 23, 2014 12:12 pm

M Courtney says: January 22, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Gail Combs, I don’t doubt you when you say “The Climate Change industry has hired Stan Greenburg”.
However, I question the fearsome reputation, effectiveness and even significance of Stan Greenburg.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Greenburg is one of the behind the scenes guys like Maurice Strong, another powerful man many people have not heard of. I mention him because he is completely over looked and he should not be. You may not have heard of him but he has been active behind the scenes in your country.

Labour role for Tony Blair’s former political strategist Stan Greenberg
The renowned polling guru and political strategist Stan Greenberg is playing a key behind-the-scenes role in Labour’s general election effort, PRWeek has learned.
The man who helped Bill Clinton and Tony Blair get elected is providing high-level strategic communications advice in a number of seats that Labour is fighting hard to hold.
Greenberg confirmed he was involved in Labour’s general election effort….

Greenberg is no light weight.

Stan Greenberg
Dr. Stan Greenberg has served as polling advisor to an array of special leaders, including President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, South African President Nelson Mandela, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, Bolivian President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer and Romanian President Traian Basescu.
In 2009, Greenberg published Dispatches from the War Room: In the Trenches with Five Extraordinary Leaders – leading George Stephanopoulos to conclude, “No single strategist has done more to lay the foundation for modern progressive politics – across the globe.”
He also wrote The Two Americas: Our Current Political Deadlock and How to Break It and Middle Class Dreams that put the spotlight on “Reagan Democrats.” Those insights made him the principal polling advisor to the Democratic Leadership Council during the formative years of change (1988-1994) for the Democratic Party….
Greenberg’s corporate clients include Boeing and Microsoft….

Pacific Standard The Science of Society: Why Are You So Smart, Stan Greenberg?

Stan Greenberg used numbers and intelligence to help get Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela, and other political figures elected. The CEO of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and co-founder of Democracy Corps with James Carville and Bob Shrum came into the spotlight during the 1992 Presidential campaign when the Man From Hope took the nation by storm and defeated incumbent George Bush. Greenberg and his “War Room” cohorts fashioned the strategy using polling numbers and focus groups. Two decades later, polling is all the rage in political rhetoric, but Greenberg believes the second part of the equation is missing. There are too many numbers and too much noise, and not enough understanding….
The Miami University political science department was really good, and I went to Harvard afterward. I did a Ph.D. and got the top grade on the Ph.D. exam. I went to Yale after three years and started teaching there at a scarily young age. I was 25. I taught for 10 years, up to 1987. I started my company in 1980, but I was teaching at the same time. I was a Guggenheim Fellow….
I was at Harvard and MIT, and I had some of the best advisers in terms of people who were using advanced math and statistics in polling. At the time, that methodology was controversial within political science. I was being schooled in that. But I was also with people who were studying political economy and political philosophy. I was continually blending those things together….

Silver ralph
January 23, 2014 1:51 pm

Richard.
We each said the subject is too large for a full answer in this thread, and I suggested you read the links obtained by using the WUWT search for climate sensitivity so I suppose you have done that.
_____________________________________
Your tone is hardly conducive to a warm reception. It would have been far easier to say ‘yes’ you are perfectly correct.
According to Archibald, a doubling of CO2 will only give 5 w/m2 of extra forcing, which a pee in the ocean. So the graph is much as i expected – increasing CO2 has little or no effect.
Thanks,
Ralph

January 23, 2014 2:36 pm

Silver ralph:
I and Kevin Finnegan each went to the time trouble and effort of answering your technical question.
You replied that our answers were not sufficient, so at January 23, 2014 at 4:41 am I provided another and fuller answer. It is here
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/22/climate-craziness-of-the-week-guardians-damian-carrington-glass-half-full-moment/#comment-1546205
As anyone reading my answers can see, I explained that the effect you were questioning depends on climate sensitivity and has no specific answer. It concludes saying

I hope that is helpful and makes sufficient sense for you to follow up the matter elsewhere.

Your reply at January 23, 2014 at 1:51 pm is churlish and includes this

It would have been far easier to say ‘yes’ you are perfectly correct.

How dare you misrepresent me like that?!
OK. I have learned. You are filed under ‘Offensive time waster’ so I will not provide you with technical information again.
Richard

January 23, 2014 5:24 pm

If the atmosphere was half full of carbon there would be no comments here.