I thought I might follow up the comments on that thread by looking at what
the ice core records actually tell us about variations in CO2.
Not exact matches
For another, much as I respect the National Academy, and the various members of the panel that did that assessment, it was in the end their informed opinion being expressed, and there are
actually quite a few factual errors in that report (indeed, Steve McIntyre and I had a rare moment of agreement on this, regarding what they said about
ice core records in Antarctica).
Now the locations of avaialble proxy data (tree rings,
ice cores, ocean sediment
records, corals etc.) are not necessarily optimally spread out, but the spatial sampling error is
actually quite easy to calculate, and goes into the error bars shown on most reconstructions.
And in AR4 FAQ 6.1, IPCC timidly admits that CO2 lags temperature by «some hundreds of years» (
actually about a millennium) in the
ice core record.
According to Ruddiman (not a direct link to the literature), it was
actually the release of methane from rice paddies and other forms of agriculture starting about 5,000 years ago that prevented the same sort of fairly rapid decay in temperature seen in the Vostok
ice core record of previous interglacials.
It turns out that for any time they looked at in the
ice core record, temperatures
actually increased on average 800 years before CO2 started to increase.