Hi bb, nice try no cigar. Point 1 is not of my doing. It's the physical properties of gases, and not a single paper I have come across bothers to deal with it.
How else is CO2 going to be captured in ice in the first place? Just more unanswered questions.
But even you should know from Al Gore's hockey stick, the magic number he needed a scissor lift to get up to was a paultry 380ppm. Many thousands of times less than that needed to kill anyone. In fact you need some CO2 for you lungs to work properly. 4000ppm of CO2 goes into mouth to mouth to resuscitate someone - so CO2 is not a pollutant yet.
Here's point number 10 - to finish it off 10. "What does the lag of CO2 behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?"
"At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to rise about 800 years (600-1000 years) after Antarctic temperature during glacial terminations. These terminations are pronounced warming periods that mark the ends of the ice ages that happen every 100,000 years or so."
Heres a possible answer - (a) you need only temperature to melt ice, gases do not melt ice, so high temperatures came without CO2 after the ice age (a solar cycle), melting ice releases trapped CO2. (b) you need cold temperatures to freeze ice, so low temperatures CAME IN SPITE OF HIGH CO2 (another solar cycle), feezing ice traps CO2. (c) Ice/glaciers form on the ground, the ice from a glacial ice age is a great CO2 sink, but needs low temperatures to achieve it -> this is not a gas induced cycle (d) CO2 released by the melting ice age had to go somewhere - where did it end up?
Temperature and CO2 have nothing whatsoever in common like many claim it to be. Time will tell.
