After you fully understand the above (review also your class notes)
repeatedly view the graphic below too which has more detail (the
notation Δy, or "delta-y" stands for the difference you get when
you subtract the second y-value from the first y-value; similarly for
Δx. Ignore the "f &prime(x0)" part at the end) see below:
The Mauna Loa Observatory (MLO) is an atmospheric baseline station on Mauna Loa volcano, on the big island of Hawaii. Since 1957 MLO has been continuously monitoring and collecting data relating to atmospheric change, and is known especially for their continuous monitoring of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels. The observatory is under the Climate Monitoring and Diagnostics Laboratory (CMDL) which is part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).The high elevation (11,000+ feet high) helps avoid most local, time dependent CO2 release issues distorting the data (e.g. a lot of traffic on some days, less traffic on other days). But since volcanoes can release CO2 isn't this a problem?Mauna Loa Observatory (MLO) has activities at five sites. The primary observing site is located at the 11,135 ft (3397 m) level on Mauna Loa north slope...Mauna Loa was originally chosen as a CO2 monitoring site because, being isolated in the middle of the Pacific, the air is exceptionally pure. Being high, it is above the inversion layer. There was also already a convenient road to the summit built by the military. [about Mauna Loa Observatory]
"The purity is good as long as there is no contamination from local volcanic sources - this is detected and removed" [Wikipedia There is a blog run by PhD climate scientists, see comment by notable science history expert Spencer Weart
So the scientists are of course well aware of this. In addition, the CO2 readings at Mauna Loa can also be checked against other observatories around the world. And, sure enough, while there are minor variations (since CO2 is not at completely identical levels but differs a bit from one place to another), the data match very closely so the famous Mauna Loa data is a very good match, that is, it is confirmed elsewhere like the Barrow CO2 data, Samoa, etc (notice the red and dark blue dots are almost identical, and the other two (Barrow, Alaska and South Pole differ a bit but stay in the same narrow distance 'band' in the graph
(Notice that the yellow and pink are methane readings ;the first four colors are CO2 at various stations around the world. Notice also how this graph/data set being much more condensed it's harder to read the precise year to year increases, while overall 1970-2006 trend is visible)
See also here for CO2 data from Barrow (Alaska).
Speculation that government ministers are far more concerned about a future supply crunch than they have admitted has been fuelled by the revelation that they are canvassing views from industry and the scientific community about "peak oil". The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) is also refusing to hand over policy documents about "peak oil" ...under the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act, despite releasing others in which it admits "secrecy around the topic is probably not good". Experts say they have received a letter from David Mackay, chief scientific adviser to the DECC, asking for information and advice on peak oil amid a growing campaign from industrialists such as Sir Richard Branson for the government to put contingency plans in place to deal with any future crisis.
"A study by a German military think tank has analyzed how 'peak oil' might change the global economy. The internal draft document -- leaked on the Internet -- shows for the first time how carefully the German government has considered a potential energy crisis...According to the German report, there is 'some probability that peak oil will occur around the year 2010..'The Bundeswehr prediction is consistent with those of well-known scientists who assume global oil production has either already passed its peak or will do so this year."