CFCs and Rising Global Temperature During 1969-1998: A Time Series Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper seeks to assess if there is any evidence that Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) have caused global warming during 1969 to 1998. The choice of the period of study is driven by the historical fact that the accumulation of CFCs in the atmosphere increased during this phase and the global temperature also registered steady increases. By exploiting a data set on accumulated CFCs along with changes in the global temperature we bring two new insights to the literature on global warming and CFCs: first and foremost, we introduce an Autoregressive Distributed Lagged (ARDL) model to capture the long-term relationship between CFCs and global warming. By doing this we establish that a statistically significant long-run relationship exists between CFCs and global warming. Secondly, we also establish that the nature of this relationship is rather counter-intuitive: the growth in the concentration of CFCs in the atmosphere, as our study finds, has reduced the increases in the global temperature during 1969 -1998. There is thus little empirical support that the CFCs are a source of global warming.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".