It means there IS a natural process IN ADDITION TO the human emissions component.
How is this not clear? Because everyone else in this thread can grasp that.
How does such a record CO2 ppm increase occur during a global industrial shutdown, if it is indeed industry which is the primary source of this CO2? In fact, how does this record CO2 ppm increase occur during that time frame, if indeed 47% of global greenhouse gas producing economies are shut down that entire time? A resurgence in Chinese activity (standalone 27.5% of carbon contribution) alone cannot explain this ppm rebound. The implication is of course, that another factor is playing into the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. A factor which is highly sensitive to the sun heating our northerly landmass (67% of global landmass). Now while this heating occurs every year – one very plausible reason (among very few candidates) it is most recently ranging into higher and higher levels of unrecoverable CO2 release, is because this solar-heated source of CO2 (and methane?) is already hotter in its ‘winter’ than compared to previous years/decades/centuries.
Just as the entire world was burning fossil fuels at a record depressed rate
at the height of the Covid-19 Pandemic,
at that same exact time the planet ironically observed its most aggressive CO2 ppm growth in 45 years –
right amidst the annual ‘vernal jump’.
Experiment: 2020 CoV-SARS-2 Economic Lockdown Observation 1B
Exhibit 1D – 2018/19/20 reduced carbon ppms globally only served to produce record peak global temperatures at the same time. Climate models critically failed here.
Now follow this experiment to its next inferential step. From June 2018 through to the end of 2020, humans emitted significantly lower CO2 than in the most recent years. One can observe this in Exhibit 1D to the right which indicates lower emissions during the June 2018 through end of 2020 timeframe. As we saw in the previous Exhibit 1C in Observation 1A, this was due unequivocally to China’s reaction to something which caused it to shut down industrial activity during that 2.5-year duration. Despite this sustained exceptional lower trend in CO2 emissions, curiously the Earth also happened to experience its hottest non-El Niño year on record in 2020.
This was explained away with no study nor ability to forecast whatsoever, as stemming from the following: “global shutdowns related to the ongoing coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic reduced particulate air pollution in many areas, allowing more sunlight to reach the surface and producing a small but potentially significant warming effect.” The credibility of climate models was severely strained with this form of ad hoc rescue. If 2.5 years of lower CO2 emissions also causes global temperatures to rise, then what are we doing? And why did we not know that this would occur in advance? Our models should have indicated this through ergodicity, yet they did not. We are broaching pseudo-theory with such an apologetic method. A theory which quickly explains everything a posteriori without any relevant research, likely explains nothing.
At the very same time as carbon emissions were depressed (from June 2018) through the end of 2020,
the Earth experienced its hottest year on record.
Even more disconcerting, our models did not predict this
and we explained it only after the fact through ad hoc and apologetic, not deductive science.
Now combine the dynamics of these two natural experiments, 1A ad 1B in your mind for a moment.
The largest rise in atmospheric carbon ppm in 45 years came right on the heels of the hottest year on record, and during the vernal equinox timeframe (for the Northern Hemisphere) – in other words, the carbon increase followed the temperature rise, maintained its normal seasonal arrival distribution, and did not precede that heat increase. Moreover, all of this occurred during a climate change activist’s dream scenario, one in which global fossil fuel consumption was down 16% (~47% in western nations, the villains in this play) – and should have produced a sizeable and measurable effect in ppm and/or temperature, neither of which manifested (except carbon ppm in China alone).
Simply because a professional has memorized the abductive, static, and average metrics of a system, does not mean they therefore understand that system nor its dynamics. Medical professionals labored for most of a century believing falsely that obesity was simply a matter of personal caloric balance – and completely missed the entailed systemic injury. The injured stakeholders had to drag the professionals, kicking and screaming, into fully understanding their own discipline. Especially when victim-blaming and political ideologies are at play, never be intimidated by persons spouting ‘Watts per square meter’ figures, as if they know anything through recitation of static indices. This is nothing but chest-thumping and intimidation. Systems theory demands a completely different mindset and analytical approach.