Interesting video - these two effects will add together, so we'll have cooling over next forty years when more CO2 would be useful, and then it will be back to probable global warming when less CO2 would be better, and so on every 206 years. Now I understand why people have been studying the motion of the sun and other heavenly bodies for so long, to try to keep track of these kind of long term patterns.
At first it seems like the natural system sequestered CO2 as things die, and if they get deposited in a low oxygen environment then it is removed from circulation except for a small chance of leaking out as methane or ending up in a volcano. This would mean some of the burning of forests by 'primitives' and fossil fuels by 'moderners' has been very helpful to restore lost CO2 to the atmosphere and prevent another full on ice age.
But we have probably already made too much and the system looks inherently unstable, with a natural cycle of a stronger sun period warming over time, shrinking ice caps and releasing methane adding positive feedback up to the point eventually where there is no polar ice and then the global ocean currents are expected to stop, removing oxygen from the ocean, meaning less dead things get fully decayed, removing CO2 until cooling feedback and weak sun period create polar ice which starts the whole thing again.
It's like a window wiper blade that each extreme triggers the other direction to start.
The problem with this explanation is that the amount of CO2 released will add to global warming, on top of the 206 year solar period, is unfortunately now taking us more quickly towards the next ice age, due to the acceleration of the warming cycle.
No wonder there are so many climate modification projects going on (HARRP, cloud seeding, chem trails... although these are also for economic reasons such as futures trading and hostilities).
While personally I like the idea of society moving on to simple ways, like self sufficient raw population stable communities, the powers that be need to create a surplus for usury and the tax and corporations that contribute to it.
Given the direction accepted by the masses of high energy life style then an improvement on today would be liquid salt thorium nuclear reactors, which are very safe (all nuclear accidents have been caused by the pressured stream in the reactor, using liquid salt avoids this and has fail safe safety features that do not require electricity) and efficient, and have much shorter waste life, only four hundred years not ten thousand.
This energy could make hydrogen and ammonia for efficient vehicles plus low CO2 electricity. There is thorium all over the planet, and the USA has thousand of containers of it, it seems they chose the existing nuclear system because it could be used to make nuclear weapons, unlike thorium.
Existing nuclear continues to be used because it is very expensive to operate and the system is already licensed, so or is very profitable for the service companies. They don't want a better system because they want make as much money, so it will be done by China.
