The top curve shows the temperature changes over 500 million years. Since temperature has a direct effect on rain, snow, winds, etc., the curves prove that

climate changes over long periods. It provides sound evidence that Climate Change is real. The proxy measurements are estimates only. Results can vary between different locations.

Figure 1 does not determine the causation or if CO₂ had any influence on temperature. While some may consider Climate Change and CO₂ a single issue, this study shows they are entirely separate and distinct.

The lack of correlation between the curves is clear. Between 350 and 260 million years ago, the temperatures oscillated ten degrees while the CO₂ concentration decreased steadily. This indicates that CO₂ concentration and temperature appear unrelated. The slopes and magnitudes of the two curves are also different.

Table 1 displays five representative points. In the table, column one is the applicable time period. Column two is the temperature change during that period, with a negative value representing a dropping temperature. Column three illustrates changes in CO₂ concentration, with positive numbers showing an increase and negative numbers showing a decrease.

The ratio is calculated by dividing the CO₂ change by the temperature change for the same time period. The ratio is important because it shows both the slope of the curve and the magnitude. When the ratio is negative, it means CO₂ and

temperature move in opposite directions; when positive, they move in the same direction. The ratio value represents magnitude, with the higher number meaning more CO₂ for each ˚F.

A second observation in Figure 1 shows general trends. The CO₂ curve declined noticeably, the temperature remained remarkably stable, exhibiting many ups and downs.

A third assessment deals with the slope and magnitude of the changes.

The first row in Table 1 illustrates that the temperature dropped 23 degrees in the same time period that CO₂ concentration rose 249 ppmv. Since they were going in opposite directions, the ratio was negative. In row four. It showed that the temperature rose 7 degrees while the CO₂ concentration dropped 294.9 ppmv. Since they were also going in opposite directions, the ratio was again negative. The second row illustrates a situation where both the temperature and the CO₂ were rising and reflects a positive value. Both the CO₂ and temperature in the fifth row declined (negative values), which caused a positive ratio since they moved in the same direction.

Neither Figure 1 nor Table 1 proves causation. That is, whether carbon dioxide influenced the temperature to change, or vice versa. The cause is more likely attributed to other independent factors. Studies have reported that the rise in the CO₂ concentration lagged behind temperature increases by 400 to 1000 years [6] . In 2007 the IPCC stated at page 105 [7] “However, it now appears that the initial climatic change preceded the change in CO₂ but was enhanced by it (Section 6.4)” But there was no proof provided in section 6.4 supporting the enhancement theory. They stated on page 442 “it may be the result of increased ocean heat transports due to either an enhanced thermohaline circulation” (citations) “or increased flow of surface ocean currents.” A lagging CO₂ concentration after the temperature changes contradicts the Greenhouse-CO₂ hypothesis, i.e. a rise in CO₂ concentration results in warming.

The fact that the curves were wildly divergent suggests there were major factors in play that were not considered. Excluding water vapor from the analysis may be one reason, as explained in sections 4 and 5. The list of other contributing factors is extensive. For example, changes in the orbital paths of the sun and planets, as suggested by the Milankovitch Cycles, may have had an effect. Changes in the sun’s radiation intensity may play a role. The Earth’s volcanism, nuclear fission at its core, radioactive decay, or changes in the magnetic fields may have an effect over millions of years. These are only a few possibilities not considered in the hypothesis.

How will biology respond if the Earth warms to 74˚F from the present 59˚F? History suggests that it will thrive. According to Figure 1, for most of the last 500 million years, the temperature was 20˚F to 30˚F hotter than it is today. There were no polar ice caps then, and yet the plants and animals thrived.

There were mass extinctions, but none were caused by the higher temperatures. Over the course of 500 million years, three mass extinction events occurred. The first one occurred 250 million years ago in Antarctica when a meteorite caused a crater the size of Ohio. There were also significant volcanic eruptions in Siberia, potentially linked to the impact. The second one occurred about 200 million years ago. The origin of that one is uncertain, but it is likely related to either an asteroid impact or volcanic eruptions. About 66 million years ago, a meteorite collision in Mexico led to the third extinction event. The dinosaurs perished in that event.

Both CO₂ and temperature experienced a general downward trend during this period. This supports a potential connection. However, the slope and magnitude ratio showed a greater than expected disparity. The number of negative ratios (CO₂ and Temp going in opposite directions) rose from 32% to 43%.

The positive ratios varied from 0.7 CO₂ ppmv/˚F to 420 CO₂ ppmv/˚F. Like the 500-million-year graph in Figure 1, there seems to be no direct correlation between a certain amount of CO₂ and a specific temperature change. The negative ratios varied from −1.8 CO₂ ppmv/˚F to −210 CO₂ ppmv/˚F. Like the 500-million-year graph in Figure 1, there seems to be no direct correlation between a certain amount of CO₂ and a specific temperature change.

Super volcano eruptions occurred at thirty million years and at 1 million years. Neither one showed a significant long-term effect on the temperature or CO₂ concentration.

The temperature and CO₂ both experienced an almost level long-term trend. But significant deviations persisted in both the slope and magnitude. The negative ratio (CO₂ and Temp going in opposite directions) was 26% of the total.

During this time period, there was a duplication of 7% of the values. Like the previous two figures, there appears no direct link between CO₂ and temperature changes.

During the 1-million-year period, few noticeable biological issues arose. However, there was a major hidden biological issue. The CO₂ levels fell to 175 ppmv about 660 thousand years ago and dropped to 190 ppmv only 25,000 years ago. The proximity to the 150 ppmv limit poses a serious threat to all plant life on Earth. Without CO₂.plants cannot survive. If the plants perish, then animals that feed on plants will soon die.

The Climate Change-CO₂ hypothesis is that CO₂ can change the temperature of the entire atmosphere. But CO₂ is present in an extremely low concentration. It is 24 times lower than the definition of a trace gas, which is anything below 1% [13] . Based only on the parameter of concentration, and nothing else, most scientists would demand to see non-refutable proof that 0.04% can control the other 99.96%. Everyone can grasp the concept of relative size. The scientist Thomas Huxley once said, “Science is simply common sense at its best” [14] . The following Table 2 shows the atmospheric gas percentages when expressed in parts per million at ground level. When expressed in parts per million, it shows that the average water vapor content is 30,000 as compared to 421 for CO₂. The infrared absorption area of water vapor molecules is also larger than CO_2. The absorption area is a measure of the ability of the molecules to absorb infrared radiation. Section 4 provides a more detailed explanation of this.

If there is a relationship between CO₂ and temperature, it should reveal itself by the number of repeating ratios. Those repeating values would normally line up around its mean. However, no such repeating ratios were observed. The average ratio used by the IPCC in making future projections was +92.6 CO₂ ppmv/temp. Neither that number nor its equations were disclosed by IPCC in their various assessment reports. But it could be reversed engineered from a comparison IPCC Fig 8 and Fig 9 dealing with future projections under a Business-as-Usual scenario [3] .

Many of the ratios had a negative value. As discussed earlier, a negative value shows that the CO₂ and temperature move in opposite directions. Such as, if the CO₂ rises the temperature goes down or if the CO₂ drops then the temperature rises. This negative ratio is directly contrary to the Climate Change-CO₂ hypothesis, i.e. that a rising CO₂ causes the temperature to increase.

In the 500-million-year period, there were 35% of the ratios with negative values. During the 50-million-year span, 42% had negative values. Over a period of 1 million years, 27% of the ratios had negative values. The high percentage of ratios with negative values represents a direct contradiction of the hypothesis.

When a test yields zero effect, it usually means there is no measured response and as such there is no correlation. This is called the stimulant response test, since a failure to respond will yield a zero value. The same is true for those data points that are near zero. In this specific analysis, a low ratio signifies an absence of correlation. For example, CO₂ levels below 10 ppmv cannot absorb enough infrared radiation to measurably impact the temperature. This is discussed in Sections 4 and 5. A plot of the ratio data is shown in Figure 4.

There were no repeating values around 92.6 ppmv/˚F. None of the 160 ratio data points had that value. The closest two ratios were 91.3 ppmv/˚F that occurred

400 million years ago and 90 ppmv/˚F that happened 38 million years ago. In the last 1-million-year time period, there was no ratio above 73 ppmv/˚F.

70% of the ratios covering all three time periods are either in the negative area where the temperature and CO₂ travel in opposite directions, or the magnitude is zero or near zero. A comparison in the last million-year time period showed that 87% of the ratios were negative or had a magnitude of zero or near zero. Those high percentages provide significant evidence rejecting the Climate Change-CO₂ hypothesis.

A greenhouse gas is any gas that can absorb infrared radiation being emitted by the surface of the planet. Table 4 sets forth the relative atmospheric concentrations

of these gases. The table regarding water vapor does not include ice or liquid water that are contained in the clouds. NASA has estimated that clouds cover 67% of the Earth’s atmosphere [20] .

The IPCC listed CFC’s (chlorofluorocarbons) as a Greenhouse Gas. But those compounds are present in concentrations that are measured in parts per trillion. And they have absorption spectra in the UV zone and the very cold infrared (−430˚F) area, and neither are significant zones for the Greenhouse Effect.

The following Figures 5-9 are absorbance spectra for each Greenhouse gas. It is also representative of the absorbance spectrum of the other gases. The normal land temperature range and normal ocean temperature range stand out in shades of green. The absorbance band is shown at the bottom near zero and highlighted in blue. Figures 5-8 show an extremely small absorbance band within the Earth’s normal surface temperature range. This is because the spectra were within the infrared window.

The water vapor and carbon dioxide have a slight absorption band (about 3%) in this wavelength zone. Methane and nitrous oxide had almost no absorption. However, ozone, shown in Figure 9, has significant absorption. The absorption area is the topic of discussion in paragraph 4.2.3. A 100% absorption would result in the entire area within the normal land temperature zone being highlighted in blue.

There is a range of wavelengths contained within the normal land temperature zone. The area under the curve is called the absorbance area. This area was calculated for each of the Greenhouse Gases from the absorbance spectra shown in the Figures 5-9.

The calculations yielded an absorbance area of 0.06625 for water vapor and 0.0561 for carbon dioxide. It shows that the absorbance is very small. But it also indicates that each molecule of water vapor will absorb about 18% more infrared radiation than CO₂ can, regarding radiation with a wavelength within the normal land temperature zone. The absorbance area for methane is 0.00257, nitrous oxide is 0.00257 and ozone is 0.4391.

The concentration of the gas in the atmosphere and its absorbance jointly determine the total amount of infrared radiation absorbed. For example, if a Greenhouse Gas molecule is not present, it can’t absorb any radiation, regardless of its absorbance area. This was addressed by the IPCC on page 48, quoted earlier.

Hence, as concentration increases, so does the amount of absorbed radiation. The following Table 5 is the relative total absorption based on the absorbance area and the atmospheric concentration. Column 1 is the Greenhouse Gas. Column 2 is the total absorption that the Greenhouse Gas can absorb. This value is the Greenhouse Gas concentration multiplied by its absorption area. Column three is the ratio of the absorption of the other gases as compared to water vapor. This factor provides a relative number.

Relative absorption refers to how it compares to other Greenhouse Gases. Relative values depend on other values. It is useful in situations where variables cancel out because they are present in the both values. In this case the numbers are relative to those of Water Vapor. For example, potential radiation absorption in the areas outside the normal land temperatures and not included, will cancel out.

Table 5 shows that water vapor can absorb 84 times more infrared radiation than carbon dioxide. If water vapor changes its absorption from 84 to 83, it would wipe out all of what CO₂ could have contributed. With respect to the other Greenhouse Gases, water vapor is 407 thousand times greater than methane, 452 thousand times more than ozone, and 2.3 million times greater than nitrous oxide relative to the infrared radiation absorbed under the Greenhouse Effect. The low concentration of ozone and nitrous oxide explains their minimal total

absorption. It also explains why ozone with a high absorption area has a very low total absorption.

Using the cloud trendline in Figure 10, it shows a reduction of clouds of 4.1%. The trendline temperature at the end of the observation period (2018) was 59.6˚F. Multiplying 59.6˚F by 4.1% yields a temperature change of 2.4˚F. This is remarkably close to the 2.7˚F difference observed between the Hemispheres. It suggests that the clouds may be responsible for 89% of the temperature rise. The remaining 11% may be attributed to other factors including the Greenhouse effect applicable to water vapor. The water vapor over the oceans (specific humidity) appears to be slightly higher in the Northern Hemisphere [10] . It indicates that clouds have a greater impact on short-term world temperatures than anything else, except for catastrophic events such as meteorites and super volcanic eruptions. As used herein, short-term means less than a thousand years.

Regarding long-term changes in temperature, there are many factors that must be considered. Some of those factors include orbital deviations, changes in the sun’s illuminance which changes every second and every day, volcanic activity, frequency of meteorite strikes, changes in the wind patterns and ocean currents, deviations in the nuclear reactions taking place in the core of the Earth, changes in magnetic properties of the Earth, the moon progressively moving further away which changes the water and atmospheric tides, and a long list of other factors, including biology. There is also a massive ocean heat sink that modulates the temperature over the long term.

The author could not find any substantial proof indicating that CO₂ has had a measurable impact on global temperatures, either in the short or long term. Scientists have not experimentally evaluated the Greenhouse Effect using normal Earth surface temperatures as the infrared heat source. The IPCC did not cite the existence of any such tests in their six assessment reports.