1
00:00:00,010 --> 00:00:04,040


2
00:00:04,060 --> 00:00:13,730
[music]

3
00:00:13,750 --> 00:00:16,350
Is there any merit to the studies that show

4
00:00:16,370 --> 00:00:20,570
that historical CO2 levels lag behind temperature changes, not lead them.

5
00:00:20,590 --> 00:00:22,390


6
00:00:22,410 --> 00:00:24,420
Well yes, there's merit to that.

7
00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:31,440
In fact in the pre-industrial age, the CO2 response to temperature was that

8
00:00:31,460 --> 00:00:35,460
the temperature would go up and CO2 would go up.

9
00:00:35,480 --> 00:00:37,730
Or if the temperature went down, CO2 would go down. 

10
00:00:37,750 --> 00:00:44,580
And the reason for that is when the temperature went up, the whole biosphere revved up and emitted CO2,

11
00:00:44,600 --> 00:00:48,640
and we had more CO2 in the atmosphere. So we understand that process.

12
00:00:48,660 --> 00:00:52,660
The problem for the science community is in the post-industrial age

13
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:56,690
the CO2 rise is preceding the temperature rise.

14
00:00:56,710 --> 00:01:00,220
So two different things happened, one pre-industrial,

15
00:01:00,240 --> 00:01:04,060
where temperature was driving the CO2, and post-industrial,

16
00:01:04,080 --> 00:01:09,730
where CO2 was driving temperature. Which means a completely different physical-biological process is going on

17
00:01:09,750 --> 00:01:12,810
And we don't understand what the consequence of that change is.

18
00:01:12,830 --> 00:01:16,870
It is a fundamental change to how the earth works

19
00:01:16,890 --> 00:01:20,920
and the earth's radiation balance works. 

20
00:01:20,940 --> 00:01:24,280
And so, we're very concerned because we don't see any restraining force

21
00:01:24,300 --> 00:01:30,020
on continued increase in temperature due to continued increase in CO2. And that's a problem.

22
00:01:30,040 --> 00:01:37,080
[music]

23
00:01:37,100 --> 00:01:40,013