AGW1&2 — Proof of Anthropogenic Global Warming








1. NASA land-marine measured temperature curve during the 20:th century as presented in


2. The pure temperature/Energy curve in (1) given from the corresponding industrial Fossil-Carbon emissions curve as given at

(greatly smoothed as seen by the great oceanic heat-inertial volume)


3. The (simplified) surface ocean period curve, partly detailed in

ICECAP (International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project 2007-2008),

Ocean Multi-Decadal Changes and Temperatures, Joseph D'Aleo;

Authors references at


4. (2) + (3)


5. (4) dotted over solid (1) — see enlarged below.








AGW2 — (5)

See also NOTE below the figure.



NOTE WITH CARE that the dotted match in the figure above is NOT recognized by modern academy standards. [See RealClimate]. It is not even recognized as such: Its notification is openly taunted by the RealClimate personnel (further referenced below). 

   For anyone eventually interested in the development of the details in anthropogenic global warming (Jul2011), a separate article on the subject is under edition; The revelation of the content behind RealClimate has depicted the situation to be a little more complicated than advertised, and yet simple (as many of us already may have noticed).

   The principle figure above prevails with the named NASA/CRU/GISS-extensions,

Sample@INTERNET 22Jul2011


NASA versions Sep2009 | Jul2011




NASA association

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)

CRU (Climatic Research Unit)

 GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies)


(See also the NASA-links above), and will be discussed and related with further additional detailed comparisons with RealClimate for your knowledge.

   When launched, the additional article will be notified here — See AGW and RealClimate. The article below is only a (first) complement.



Addition from BellDharma for Gwinnevere

All Gwinnevere associated posts

2011-07-14 | YearMonthDayTime 17:30

The RealClimate Exclusions


Something we don’t like in humanity, is appearance of discrimination — whatsoever.

   The following content is for your complete — uncut — personal reference, whether you agree or not.

   In posting a reference on details to the well known @INTERNET WebSite RealClimate


the posting person Gwinnevere, in connecting to ARRHENIUS AND AGW, seems to have ended up as termed a (quote) »CRANK» (and perhaps, »INFANT»).

   That would, of course, be OK — if a corresponding space was offered for defence.

   However, it seems RealClimate WebSite (”Climate science from climate scientists”) does not approve of such an order, but chooses a more one-sided attitude — of this character:


WHILE continuing to give derogative comments on Gwinneveres posts, RealClimate deleted Gwinneveres answers.


The actual RealClimate topic has this following URL (beginning from post no140 from Gwinnevere, page 3), - comments


and continuing over the following pages, ending/prohibiting at page 6 (post no266), at it seems.

   We can follow the development of arguments (mostly) by searching for ”gwin”-occurrences.

— While excluding Gwinnevere from further posting, comments of an unmistakable degrading and derogative nature did continue to be addressed to Gwinnevere — with all kinds of proposed defects. Especially, as it seems, opinions on »her English».

   Wao. ”Climate science from climate scientists”. Some persons really know how to take advantage of such an excellent opportunity in establishing a solid credit.






In case you have any interest in following what is happening »at the frontiers»:


The following excerpts are the deleted/inhibited/prohibited posts from Gwinnevere on RealClimate — to give a fair picture of the arguing situation:


See also a full addition of

All Gwinnevere associated posts at RealClimate




The deleted/inhibited/prohibited posts from Gwinnevere on RealClimate


2011-07-14 | YearMonthDayLocalTime 02:30




The scientific community and the meaning of Arrhenius-AGW-math


This was, and still is, the subject of guesting:


— NATURAL temperature (atmospheric) variations are given by LOGARITHMIC functions (time-derivatives) — the Arrhenius expressions. These are often termed »radiative forcing» or the ”Arrhenius's greenhouse law for CO2” in the established scientific community, see for example WEATHERQUAKES, EARTHQUAKES, MATHEMATICS AND CLIMATE CHANGE (2008),

We all know that. Or should, in case missed.


— ANTHROPOGENIC variations — AGW-mathematics, however — have no such, basic, connection; AGW is — only by quantitative provability and besides that, not at all — expressed, explained and described through POWER functions:

— Why is that?

— The reason a logarithmic function cannot express, describe or explain the anthropogenic (industrial fossil carbon) complex, is the central driving temperature-energy function responsible for the phenomena (the middle one in Sea, Industry, CO2). It is a power function. Not a natural logarithmic function. Namely an elementary transient (power, energy) function. No logarithmic (exponent, e-) function.


This is also what was posted, and notified, in post no140:

The triple power AGW-math functions INCLUDE the Arrhenius (the ”as accepted by 97-98% of publishing climate scientists”, as noted in post no237) expressions as a

VERY CLOSE APPROXIMATION. That is what post no140 exposes to the eye.


— But where is the notification of this, obviously illuminating, (»world scientific sensational») mathematical coherency in the present scientific community? I mean not the post no140 as such, of course not, but THE COHERENCE as such, the bare mathematical correspondence — obviously too the EXPLANATION: all of it.

— I see none.




no269 Didactylos:

— Thought so.

I am still waiting for you to exemplify quantities by practical values.

— As to the rest of you comment, I am not allowed to argue with you on such premises. But I would very much like to.




no273 tamino:

— Whether it is a nonsense phrase or not, tamino, your comment makes nothing to the matching quantities in the deduced functions Sea, Industry, CO2.

— I see no mentioning of quantities in your post.

— Does that mean you don’t want to accept these quantitative matches in the three functions Sea, Industry, CO2?

— As to the rest of you comment, I am not allowed to argue with you on such premises. But I would very much like to.




no276 Hank Roberts:

— Elliptical functions — never introduced in modern academy. Atomic masses by the entire atom seen as a unit, not the »isolated» nucleus. These two describe two different ways, with no mutual correspondence. The precision in the resulting atomic masses talk for themselves in comparison to the measured and the established theoretical.

   To your information, unless already familiar. (Don’t read it, unless you are qualified).






END RealClimate excerpts.



IF this (the above exposed) would be a representative section of established science on Earth 2011, there is no wonder the situation is as it is. It seems the plug has been taken out, all together.


— It was already stated from the beginning in this encyclopedic exercise: MAC [Modern Academy — the responsible AGW creator, not the workers at the factories] is [apparently] a primitive institution on Planet Earth, born out of the essential nazistic idea that mathematics is a human creation, the PRINCIPLE idea that intelligence is authorized by human institutions, not by Nature.

   Compare explicitly the Fields Medal (first 1936) Medallion Text (‘the finest award a mathematician can have’ [MATEMATIK 2000 Lärobok 3 · NT | Naturvetenskapsprogrammet, Björk · Borg · Brolin · Ljungström · Natur och Kultur 1991, p219]):

Transire suum pectus mundoque potiri”, »To overwin ones human limit and become master of the universe».

   NATURE is, always was, and will continue to be, master of the universe. Not any human.

   See also explicitly in ENTROPY — how MAC unplugs the bare idea of a purpose in Universe — and how its primitive idea is explained by related physics as such: primitive.


Do see the 1h29m INTERNET FILM unless already familiar,


You will most probably have one of your most interesting 1h29m sessions. Good film, basic reference.


— Modern academy does not realize it is overrun, always has been, always will be, by this: nature.

The Entropy-article focuses on the most essential details.


See also a full addition of

All Gwinnevere associated posts at RealClimate


A NOTIFICATION of the above publishing has been sent to RealClimate of the following content:




To RealClimate:

As this writ anyway will be read/moderated by you, you are hereby notified of its content:


While still unresolved in question, RealClimate seems to have deleted responding posts from the person Gwinnevere, while at the same time comments on previous posts TO Gwinnevere continued.


I will make a report on this, on an open place on the web, available for anyone to inspect; The posts from Gwinnevere you deleted will be published by me, so that people can get a full — and thus a fair — picture of the actual argumentation, not only your one-sided version of repeated cuts (with ev. further continuing verses and pounces aimed at a further derogation of the person Gwinnevere).


Humanity never was impressed by persons in any community believing themselves to be the center of Intelligence — proposing a general division of humanity into A-people and B-people. That is essentially nazistic (not in the English dictionary, meaning: of a not openly Nazi uniformed but still daily established character applying to the behavior showing contempt of truth, especially in concern of equal human rights of opinion in recognizing a general face of respectable conduct) idealization, and we are not interested in its issues, attitudes or contemptuous preferences. We have Nature for the purpose of Intelligence, and without Her, nothing. The rest should be open for a serious scientific arguing, which it seems RealClime is unable to comply. That is indeed sad.


If you want to add something to this appeal, whatever, it is custom to give you an opportunity to do so.


You can send your response, if any, to the email-address of this post. If an answer will be received from you, it will be added — uncut — to the publication.


Thank you for sharing.


With kind greetings, BellDharma for Gwinnevere

2011-07-14  | YearMonthDayLocalTime 18:45





























































Last updated version YearMonthDayTime 2011-07-22