Against time, it is pretty much exponential. Against energy use (which is also almost exponential), not.

]]>I am confused by your statement re the increase in atmospheric CO2:

“…Secondly, the recent increase in carbon dioxide concentrations is almost entirely anthropogenic…”

If this statement were true, wouldn’t the CO2 concentration be an almost exponential rather than an almost linear increase in concentration to reflect the ever increasing output of anthropogenic CO2 production (especially since WW II and again in the last 30-35 years of Chinese production)?

For the ever increasing CO2 output to have an earth/ocean/vegetation take-up at a rate that always leaves a linear progression is too much for this 70 year old cynic to accept without further evidence.

Can you help? ]]>

And not a single mention of ‘logarithmic’ anywhere.

]]>I correlated the data above until October 2015 but as it was a 12 month rolling average of the CO2 data I should have ended the correlation 12 months earlier.

The figures are then slightly different and I now get the same RSq of 0.437 for the UAH v6.4 data.

The correct values are then for UAH v6 an RSQ of 0.61 while for RSS, RSq is 0.48. The figure for GISS is then 0.80 and for HadCrut 4 ,Rsq= 0.78 and for NOAA, Rsq =0.81.

]]>Where is your TLT data from? Is it UAHv6.4? I have 12 month running averaged the CO2 data and correlated this a variety of satellite and surafce based global data sets .

For Jan 1979 until October 2015, I get a slightly higher figure for UAH v6.4 of an Rsq of 0.47 (c.f. your value of 0.43) . For UAH 5.6 I get an Rsq of 0.61 while for RSS, RSq is 0.50.

The correlation coefficients for 12 month running averaged CO2 with GISS is 0.81 and for HadCrut 4 , RSq is 0.79 while for NOAA it is 0.77.

It looks like the satellite data correlates poorly with CO2 compared to the land based data . If we assume that the correlation implies causation then but about 80 % of the surface based temperature data can be explained by CO2 while for the satellite data it is between 47 to 61%

The CO2 data is from ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/trends/co2/co2_mm_mlo.txt.

]]>