we only have to meet the % that comes from the middle east.
If I changed the title of the plot from “Human contribution to climate change” to “CO2 levels due to natural swings in the Earth’s climate”, would that change the meaning of the data?
I don’t believe so. The dramatic rise begins to occur right at the birth of the industrial revolution and seems to increase at an increment similar to the level of increase of the consumption of carbon emitting fuels. Seems to be pretty obvious to me.
Is 10,000 years a useful timeframe? In terms of the age of the planet (which is a whole other topic we won’t get into), this could be like looking at a plot of the stock market for the past hour relative to back to 1940. If you collect data from a billion years ago (which probably isn’t possible), the peak from 1800 to 2000 could be hidden in the scatter.
A big :dunno: to all of the above.
certainly could be. But it’s certainly hard to think that the drastic rise in CO2 in the atmosphere has nothing to do with the billions of tons of carbon we release into on a daily basis.