Bible Science Forum

, ,

Before the Industrial Revolution the Atmospheric CO2 was Higher than the Claimed 280 ppm

Recent measurements indicate a rise in atmospheric CO2, attributed to human activities by various “experts”, despite claims that human contribution is minimal. Research by Dai Ato challenges the established pre-industrial CO2 level of 280 ppm, suggesting it’s underestimated and highlighting flaws in related climate studies, thus questioning current climate change assumptions.

John Gideon Hartnett
5–8 minutes
, , , ,

The Carbon Dioxide concentration in the atmosphere has been rising according to recent measurements. The cause of the rise in CO2 has been claimed by politicians worldwide, by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Climate Cult to be significantly anthropogenic. That is, about 33% to 100% can be attributed to human activity, breathing, burning fuel, agriculture and industrial use.

Figure 1: Recent Global CO2 Trend: Image from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Fig. 1 shows a plot of the measured CO2 concentration in parts per million (ppm). Thus we are currently at about 420 ppm is equal to 0.042%. The whole world has gone crazy about “Climate Change” for this tiny fractional change. When human activity has been claimed by some to contribute only 4% of that amount or 0.0016% in absolute terms.

The following diagram (Fig.2) was posted on Facebook, which I retrieved from Archiv.org.

Figure 2: “Misleading” claim by Reuters’ fact-check team.

Reuters’ fact-checked the claim (March 12, 2024) and asserted the following.

Facebook users circulated a version with the caption: “Don’t tell me we have to change our way of life and get into all kinds of hardship to minimally change what amounts to 0,0016 % of the atmosphere, the human activity-produced CO2.”

However, experts told Reuters that human activities have significantly increased atmospheric CO2, contributing a third of the current level, and that neither the proportion of CO2 relative to other gases nor the proportion of CO2 that existed “naturally” in the pre-industrial era versus what human activities add are relevant to the climate impact of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere. (my emphasis added)

The “unnamed experts” claim humans contribute one third of all CO2 to the atmosphere. That would be at least 10 times what the Facebook post claim was. The Reuters piece continued with:

“There is a specific error in the percentage of atmospheric CO2 that is human-caused,” Gavin Schmidt, NASA climate scientist and director of the Goddard Institute of Space Studies, said in an emailed response to the graphic.

CO2 levels before humans began mass-burning of fossil fuels, which the graphic calls “natural” levels, were around 278 ppm (0.028%), not the claimed figure of 0.0384% (384 ppm), according to the IPCC, and Chris Brierley, a professor in climate science at University College London.

Human activities are responsible for this 50% increase of around 142 ppm (0.0142%), Paulo Ceppi, a senior lecturer in climate science at Imperial College London, and Simone Alin, supervisory oceanographer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and affiliate associate professor at the University of Washington School of Oceanography, told Reuters. (my emphasis added)

Notice how the credentials of the “experts” are emphasized. So you should trust the science because the scientists are from reliable institutions.

So the “experts” claim that the preindustrial level of CO2 in the atmosphere was about 280 ppm. Is that correct? They claim 33% or 50% or even 100% of all CO2 emissions are from humans.

Dai Ato an independent Japanese researcher form Osaka, Japan published in 2025 a research paper titled “Pitfalls in Global Warming and Climate Change Research: Flaws in Ice Core Reconstructions of Atmospheric CO2 — The Naked King of 280 ppm at the Industrial Revolution” in the open access journal SCC Publishing, Vol. 5.1 (2025).1 By the “Naked King” the author means the “Emperor has no clothes on”. The 280 ppm at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is his Naked King.

His Abstract provides a good summary of the research.

Recent global warming and climate change studies frequently assume that the rise in atmospheric CO2 is entirely due to human emissions. In particular, the assumption is based on a figure of CO2 concentration of 280 ppm at the end of the pre-industrial period. However, this assumption reveals itself to be contradicted by an examination of the relevant underlying data. At least, this assumption cannot be fully trusted. This paper points out in plain language the flaws in the fundamentals of the relevant climate change research, using as little technical terminology as possible. (my emphasis added)

This study mainly points to flaws that lead to the assumption of a mostly human-caused increase in CO2, in particular to the problems related to the methods used in the reconstruction from Antarctic ice cores and of the general consensus of 280 ppm CO2 at the onset of the Industrial Revolution. (my emphasis added)

Ato’s previous report2 “Multivariate analysis revealed that SST was the only factor independently determining the annual change in atmospheric CO2, but not anthropogenic fossil fuel use” argued for Sea Surface Temperature (SST) as the only factor determining annual change in CO2. Human activity was found to be irrelevant.

I recommend that you read Ato’s new paper. He wrote:

Therefore, the assumption of an atmospheric CO2 concentration at the time of the Industrial Revolution of 280 ppm is no longer valid. The various related studies that assume this hypothesis are all equally inappropriate. And an update of the previous report by the author (Ato) showed that, in the same manner, SSTs are the sole determinant of annual ΔCO2 and that human emissions have no predictive power related to the atmospheric content of CO2 (Table 5). (my emphases added)

He concludes with the following.

This paper shows that the assumption of 280 ppm CO2 concentration in the atmosphere at the onset of the Industrial Revolution, which is the premise for modern climate change research, is flawed.

There is no doubt that the figure of 280 ppm is a significant underestimate. The various inexplicable phenomena and contradictions seen in the CO2 reconstruction values from Antarctic ice cores symbolize the flaws in the data. This is due to the inherent limitations of the ice core reconstruction method itself. (my emphasis added)

I would add here that the research of Nikolov et al3 showing that total solar irradiance (15%) and albedo (reflection at top of the clouds) (85%) are the major factors in determining how much solar radiation reaches the surface and hence how much CO2 is released from the oceans.

References

  1. Ato D., 2025: Pitfalls in Global Warming and Climate Change Research: Flaws in Ice Core Reconstructions of Atmospheric CO2 – The Naked King of 280 ppm at the Industrial Revolution – Vol. 5.1 (2025) pp. 1-30 https://doi.org/10.53234/scc202501/04
  2. Ato D., 2024: Multivariate Analysis Rejects the Theory of Human-caused Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Increase: The Sea Surface Temperature Rules, Science of Climate Change Vol. 4.2 (2024) pp. 1-15
    https://doi.org/10.53234/SCC202407/19
  3. Nikolov N., Zeller K.F., 2024: Roles of Earth’s Albedo Variations and Top-of-the-Atmosphere Energy Imbalance in Recent Warming: New Insights from Satellite and Surface Observations, Geomatics 2024, 4(3), 311-341
    https://doi.org/10.3390/geomatics4030017

Related Reading

Free Subscribers

Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Free Subscriber and be notified by email. Just put your email address in the box at the bottom of your screen.

You’ll get an email each time we publish a new article. It is quick and easy to do and totally free. You only need do it once.

Premium Subscribers

Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Premium Subscribers at $5 USD/month or $30 USD/year (you choose).

Paid Premium Subscribers will get exclusive access to certain content I publish. That will only cost you a cup of coffee per month.

click for Premium Subscription

This is how you can support my work. I have been publishing this website for 10 years now and up to 2024 I never asked for any support.

Press the button “Premium” on the front page to find a list of Premium content. Thanks so much to all supporters.

At a minimum, please join as a Free Subscriber. It’ll cost you nothing. It may also help me beat the shadow banning of some posts.

Comments Welcome Below

8 responses to “Before the Industrial Revolution the Atmospheric CO2 was Higher than the Claimed 280 ppm”

  1. profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7 Avatar
    profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7

    John, this is true but incomplete information. The “warming” that is occurring has more causes then just the cloud albedo changes you have written of here and in your previous post ” another climate myth busted…” Aug. 2024. But this cloud theory is a significant part of the extreme global heating that absolutely IS. The question that remains unanswered is why then is global cloud coverage decreased/decreasing, increasing solar radiation on the ground?

    Agreed, the CO2 “cause” driving economics today is not the main driver at all, but is involved, involved because it is part of the whole math equation of climate change/global warming. The atmosphere as a whole IS Earth’s solar shield, so all elements of chemistry that make up the atmosphere, CO2 included, must be included in the math. Leaving one out makes the conclusion(s) inaccurate. When one element changes it effects the other elements.

    Methane gas is being emitted from Earth in massive amounts and it is known to be a much greater heating element then CO2 is, yet no mention of that from this Japan NOAA/NASA scientist? Hence the incomplete conclusion he gives in this post. My point being this could be misleading to mindsets regarding the global warming/climate change issue in play. To really awaken minds let’s stop playing politics, climate change and the warming is not a hoax. It is real, it is happening and it is extreme to the point that we all are facing a serious human existance issue. The hoax of it does exist but that may well be the focus on CO2 being “the cause” of it.

    Can we consider this said to be ignored cloud albedo theory given here would give rise to the climate cult coming up with a solution? Answer is yes, they already know that and are acting on it but focus remains in distraction mode towards the CO2 argument dividing people politically. I’m sure you have heard of cloud brightening? That is happening and has been for many years. I’m commenting to tell you and your readers that our atmosphere is severely depleted and that’s why there is an uptick in solar radiation hitting earth. The thing that is wrong is our solar shield is being destroyed. A simple Google Search for solar UV index readings any where can be had and tells the truth for this. Very high or extreme almost every day when it’s a sunny day. It proves what your saying here John, but it doesn’t end the debate and or problem we all are facing. Geoengineering is and has been prescribed and like all the other potions of this world called meds, the side effects are probably worse then the disease (CC/GW).

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      Thank you for your comments. You make a lot of good points. I have covered about all of them in many previous posts.

      Above the clouds albedo is the primary mechanism for solar radiation reaching the surface (85%) with the remainder from changes in total solar irradiance (15%). The Sun is the dominant source of energy, so it is a combination of its output and how much is reflected by the clouds. The research of Dr Ned Nikolov is explained here (which you mention).

      Another Climate Myth Busted: Earth Global Surface Temperature Controlled by Cloud Cover and the Sun

      The observed systematic reducing albedo in turn affects global surface temperatures. Did you see that his model for albedo matches the observed CERES satellite albedo data quite well? It is in this post.

      Earth’s Albedo: The Mechanism Behind Global Warming

      That then leads to the mechanism of sea surface temperature that Ato’s paper here describes. The oceans heat up and release CO2 and we measure the systematic tend of increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. So CO2 increase is a result of the GW caused by decreasing albedo. Of course it could swap and go the other way, but it is all controlled by the Sun and cloud cover.

      And both lines of research (Nikolov and Ato) suggest CO2 is not a significant driver of global temperatures.

      I agree; warming does exist. Decreasing albedo means more warming. The point is though, it is not man made, but a natural phenomena. The hoax is that it is caused by CO2. In that sense I write CO2 is busted. It is not the culprit. But nor is methane and water vapour. The latter is the strongest greenhouse gas by far. These gases are necessary to keep the planet warm. See here.

      The Madness of Net Zero

      Because of the physics described by the Stefan-Boltzman equation if with their best geoengineering they manage to emit/reflect back into space 1% more radiation than is the current status quo they would only achieve a 0.25% cooling effect in the atmosphere of 0.7 C.

      I have written on cloud brightening and solar radiation modification (SRM) which are more futile attempts to fix the warming by blocking out the sunlight with geoengineering. How insane! Reduce sunlight for growing crops, and sequester CO2 underground. Sounds like a formula for mass extinction.

      In a way the idea of reflecting sunlight back into space using SRM is a tactic admission that albedo is key to this.

      Understanding Chemtrails and Geoengineering

      You are also right, that there are multiple factors involved, but GW is not something humans have caused or can fix. We are in the hands of the Creator.

      I would think long term if we lose the magnetic shield around the planet, more cosmic rays get through to seeds more clouds, and we may get more cloud cover which will feed back and cool the planet but that may take a long time to see happen. And who knows what else comes with losing the shield?

      On the political front, global warming or global cooling and a coming Ice Age have always been used to gain power over the masses.

      Global Cooling Alarmists 40 Years Ago

      Like

      Reply
  2. profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7 Avatar
    profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7

    Thanks for your reply John! I didn’t see that link for the chemtrails post you included in this reply, so I will go read it next. I agree with all you say, except the “natural phenomenon ” part of the cloud albedo, although in part it is a natural effect from an un-natural injection in nature. Geoengineering is the cause of decreasing cloud coverage, not natural not God, BUT yes, God is allowing it….for now anyway. Heating the atmosphere dries it out. That part of it is used to steer storms. I am a witness to that with regards to hurricanes. I live in SWFL and am a survivor of ground zero hurricane Ian in Sept. 2022. Totally steered right in to us! As are all hurricanes and storms now.

    Geoengineering is very multi faceted but most of it is removing humidity levels in an attempt to cool. Removing humidity removes clouds. This evil project of geoengineering the planet, after it pulls all humidity out then goes in and sprays a chemical cloud cover, or seeds existing clouds, which is why rain has become a deluge most of the time and also why hail stones the size of golf balls to baseballs are being seen in many rain events globally. That is the cooling chemicals. Geoengineering is also why droughts are so prevalent these days. I’m sure you know all of this! Good. I’m new to your site and so I say good because your stance on this subject fits to your Biblical views, so you are a good one to educate! Thank you!

    I too see the absolute Biblical prophecy connection to our planetary weather caused by man through geoengineering as our Lord and Savior has prophesied for the end of days. This is how God woke me up, removed my veil, 12 years ago! Praise God!! So there’s one reason He may be allowing it.

    Great talking to you John!

    THANK YOU!

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      You may not have read my book “Merchants of Death” co-authored with my friend and law academic Prof. Augusto Zimmermann. In that book we include a chapter on Geoengineering. You can buy the book from Amazon.com.

      Merchants of Death: Global Oligarchs and Their War On Humanity

      Like

      Reply
  3. profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7 Avatar
    profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7

    Can I please add to my comment above….regarding what you wrote saying, “…but GW is not something humans have caused or can fix…” totally disagree with that because I think geoengineering is hugely responsible for GW/CC now and the past couple decades at least, but it’s in responce to humans (beastly humans) effects like for example nuclear bomb testing, rocket launches constantly, and biggest addition is technology. Technology in general emitts radiation etc etc., but then there is CERN, HAARP, satellites, all by the hands of humans. Cause and effect John! Seems they are in part telling the truth saying human caused but not by us human citizens but by human leaders. See?!

    You are right, humans can’t fix it but let’s be reasonable in considering all factors for this subject matter and how all human created meds or drugs always make things worse and really don’t cure anything. Same is true for geoengineering and all the causes that prompted that “technology” to come to pass not leaving out the malice of another aspect involved but the big secret (shhhh) being weather warfare. A lot of evidence confirming that part too. You must be aware of President Johnsons exotic speech warning of “owning the weather”? Come on John, God is not doing any of that, man is and is as wicked as can be. God is letting wickedness take itself down this time.

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      I agree with the point you make. I should have been more nuanced. Human geoengineering is weather modification and hence affects temperatures. My comment there meant humans do not control the solar irradiance, which is the natural part I referred to. But long before the crazy geoengineering and solar radiation modification experiments were being performed humans were blamed for “climate change”. It was “global cooling” back in the 1960s and 70s, and that it was halocarbons in refrigerators and air conditioners and fluorocarbons in hairspray that caused it via ozone depletion.

      Like

      Reply
  4. profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7 Avatar
    profoundlyfest6f4f5260a7

    Thanks for your replies John! This subject matter is the big elephant in the room all polly ticks ignore and make excuses for it’s side effects. Just as you pointed out above here, back in the 60’s & 70’s it was global cooling, humans blamed for using too much hair spray! Haha, I am old enough to remember that, yes, it was funny then and is funny now, hairspray? Haha, it’s similar to today as they blame cow farts for the extreme methane emissions! Just an excuse to kill more of God’s creations IMHO. Ridiculous excuses for so so long.

    The point is that’s how long ozone depletion has been going on, and probably longer then that! It validates my warnings, we are being cooked by the sun now due to serious ozone depletion and the proof is skin cancer has become normalized due to its significant uptick in cases. Just one example!

    I think this is our underlying problem for which all other economic problems rise from and are blamed on. It causes great distraction for the public. Evil is clever but only if your eyes are wide shut. It is definitely the meaning behind a few verses of Revelation as you have noted John. I thank you for this opportunity to bring this to print to help people understand prophecy, and to help people protect themselves. It’s so great to share these conversations with good like minded others and especially well educated others as you are John. I think that maybe it’s not such a good idea to put full trust in NASA/NOAA though because they are in part involved in the sky candy operations. Are their scientists writing papers based on lies they know not of or are they part of the script to look the other way? We must be more diligent in who we put our trust in for accurate information. As Christ has told us, test the spirits to know if they are good or not.

    The eco-system can not take anymore of this interference in it’s natural cycles and has passed the point of returning to any kind of normal again. This is a good indicator of where we are time wise regarding the end of days, the very last few years is how I see it because most life is dying, dead or in serious decay now and scripture does tell us that these days would be shortened or no flesh will survive. Fits pretty good, doesn’t it!? Blessings to all. Stay out of the sun and keep your lamps full of oil!

    Like

    Reply
    1. John Gideon Hartnett Avatar
      John Gideon Hartnett

      Amen to that. Let’s stay close to our Lord. Only in Him is salvation.

      I recommend you read my book “Apocalypse Now”. It is a study on the book of Revelation and I cover the issues of the last days and final judgment.

      Book Release: Apocalypse Now

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment

Trending