The explanations upstairs are all wrong, and half of the explanations on the first floor are wrong. This has nothing to do with carbon dioxide, but it has nothing to do with geothermal energy.

From the study of ice samples, we can calculate the temperature and carbon content in the atmosphere in different years in history. The results show that there are many ice ages and high temperature periods on the earth, but this is obviously different from the level of carbon dioxide content. Historically, the temperature always reached its peak several centuries after it reached its peak, but after it reached its peak, it gradually became cold.

The researchers concluded that during the high temperature period, due to the gradual increase of temperature, a large amount of carbon dioxide in the ocean was released, resulting in high carbon dioxide content. When the temperature gradually decreases, the release of carbon dioxide gradually stops until it is no longer released, and finally carbon dioxide begins to be "recovered". Therefore, temperature is different from carbon dioxide content, and carbon dioxide content changes slowly with temperature.

So it is concluded from the above that if the information I get is correct, then the climate has nothing to do with carbon dioxide.

If so, why does the climate change from cold to hot? Why are there high temperature periods and ice ages?

The authoritative experts interviewed by BBC think so.

The universe is full of cosmic rays, which originate from supernova explosions and pass through the atmosphere. Because more than 70% of the earth's surface is water, cosmic rays are injected into the ocean in large quantities, which promotes the separation of water molecules and volatilizes into the atmosphere in the form of water vapor, and the water vapor in the atmosphere gathers into clouds.

Clouds formed by water vapor are very good heat preservation gases. Solar radiation will be reflected when it hits the ground. If there is no cloud in Wan Li, it will directly reflect back into the universe. However, if there is a cloud, it will be intercepted by the cloud on the way to lay the reflection, and it will be reflected back to the earth again to play a role in heat preservation.

However, although the "supply" of cosmic rays is stable, there is another factor, and that is the solar wind.

When sunspots erupt, the stronger the solar wind is. The solar wind will blow away cosmic rays near the earth. When there are few cosmic rays, there will be less water vapor in the earth's atmosphere, and the clouds will be thin, and the thin clouds will lack the function of heat preservation, and the earth's climate will become cold.

The eruption of sunspots also has certain rules.

According to the observation of the sun, sunspot activity was not very frequent until 2000, but it has increased in recent years. I don't know if this has anything to do with volcanoes and earthquakes, but don't you think it's a little cold this winter?

According to historical data, from the end of World War II to 1975, the global climate gradually cooled, and then from 1975 to 2000, the climate was warming, but after 2000, especially in recent years, the climate did not continue to warm. Some experts believe that the climate has begun to get colder. (And it can be seen from this data that after World War II, it was an industrial recovery period, and the emission of carbon dioxide would not consider climate factors. As a result, the climate became cold, further indicating that carbon dioxide has nothing to do with climate. )

To sum up, I think the process of climate warming is actually the normal change of the earth's climate. There was a warmer period on earth than now in history, that is, the Middle Ages, when the world society was quite rich, and most famous churches in Europe were built at that time, while in China, it was experiencing the peak of feudal society-Kaiyuan Shi Sheng! In addition, the industrial revolution was a famous ice age in history. At that time, the Thames was frozen, and vendors often set up shop on the ice in winter. I think the change of temperature is as normal as four seasons in a year.

Then why save energy and reduce emissions when the climate is good?

If what I have learned above is correct, it is impossible for a politician to learn what I can. In that case, why is there a slogan of "low carbon"?

In fact, the global climate problem originated in Britain, and the initiator was Margaret Thatcher, the famous first female prime minister in Britain. Because of the acid rain phenomenon in Britain during her campaign, she put forward the campaign slogan of global environmental degradation and protection, which just catered to the psychology of two people. First, after World War II, because of the existence of the atomic bomb, human beings blindly knew that they had great power and thought that they could destroy the earth. The second is the fear of "having great power", which in turn will be destroyed by your own strength. So Thatcher took advantage of this slogan and became the first female prime minister in Britain. This law will be widely used by politicians in various countries in various political and economic fields, especially in the economic field.

The world economy is like a plate of water, and all countries in the world are like a plate of water. If you lay the plate flat, the water content in all parts of the plate is the same. If you hold it unevenly, some parts of the plate will get more water and some parts will get less water. However, the big countries led by the United States hope that the plate can tilt and get more water.

As a result, big countries throw out the just banner of "energy saving, emission reduction, low carbon and environmental protection", shouting this slogan loudly and confidently, taking environmental protection as the commanding height of morality, and making them "take the environment as the emperor and make them disobey me". Anyone who doesn't listen to him can punish you with this, and it can be cruel. Just as Christians punished pagans in the Middle Ages, they can use the stake. You have to understand that reducing carbon dioxide emissions means that for developing countries, output will drop and economic development will slow down. If you slow down, the advantages of developed countries such as the United States will become more obvious. The "water" of the economy will fall on the United States, and the "water" of the United States will naturally increase.

As the biggest victorious country in World War II, the United States successfully carved up the economy after World War II. Its content is that Africa, Asia and South America export raw materials and cheap crude products, and the first and second world countries (North America and Western Europe) led by the United States are responsible for logistics, advertising marketing, design, packaging and retail. The final product is digested by China or re-exported to developing countries. Among them, the profit of rough processing of raw materials export is the lowest, and the profit of logistics, advertising marketing, design, packaging and retail is the most abundant, so the western powers are rich and we are poor. This was carefully planned by the western developed countries headed by the United States.

However, developing countries are not necessarily satisfied with the status quo, and they are all striving for development. But if developing countries develop to the point of destroying the world economic structure planned by western developed countries, the west can no longer tolerate it. They carefully concocted "protecting the world environment", a fat liar who can go down in history! !