Well.... Darn

[DutchMuch]

I have also seen or heard of corals being WAY down there. Like im the "I cant see my hand against my eye" zone of the ocean. That or Sponges, or both!

 

[GobyMaster11276]

Complex life on earth first appeared 700 million years ago. C)2 levels at that time were well over 1000ppm. Corals did exist at that time.

This statement is incorrect. Even google it. Corals were around 542 millions years ago, and were scarce at the time (according to fossil records).

Also, in terms of global warming, it can work both ways (making the world warmer and colder). Also remember that humans are damaging the ozone layers.

And they say more research is needed. Mostly they are looking for more government money so that they don't have to get a real paying job.

This comment is pointless, and unrelated. Are you saying that science isn't "a real job"?

They have only been closely watching for coral bleaching in the last 15 years.

Not sure about your country but ours has been for about 30 years.
"Over the last 30 years, the Australian Institute of Marine Science has been monitoring the condition of the Great Barrier Reef. Teams of divers have been surveying coral cover along the entire 2,000km length of the reef for decades."

Even if we burned all of our CO2 emission would not push CO2 levels to 1000ppm

Have you got any evidence to back this? (Search "CO2 levels in the atmosphere since 1850 graph" to see the change since the industrial revolution. Is it really a hoax?)

Furthermore the models cannot explain why major El nines appear about every 18 years .

El Ninos happen about every two to seven years.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

Well corals typically grow close to the surface. If see level drops then the corals will bleach. Sea level does change a little pit during El nine's and along with strong tides large areas of coral will dry out and bleach. But I don't know if that is enough to cause significant bleaching that has occurred. Hi water temperatures certainly will bleach coral.

Hot water tends to stay close to the surface. So if the water gets deeper then the coral will likely be in cooler water and will have a better chance of surviving. However if the water gets too deep coral will die from loses of light. During the last ice age sea level was at least 200ft lower than it is today. biologist have found the remains of corals at about that depth.

You do realise how fragile corals are, don't you? Even a 1-2 degrees Celsius change for prolonged periods could kill them. If they get deeper it won't help them.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

I have also seen or heard of corals being WAY down there. Like im the "I cant see my hand against my eye" zone of the ocean. That or Sponges, or both!

What do you mean by "I can't see my hand against my eye"?

 

[GobyMaster11276]

MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate.

FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, warming to 1941, cooling to 1964, warming to 1998 and cooling through 2011. The warming rate from 1964 to 1998 was the same as the previous warming from 1911 to 1941. Satellites, weather balloons and ground stations all show cooling since 2001. The mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8 C over the 20th century is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects"). Two science teams have shown that correcting the surface temperature record for the effects of urban development would reduce the reported warming trend over land from 1980 by half. See here.

There has been no catastrophic warming recorded.

Please look at these graphs. One shows that the was warming from 2001 onward, and another shows warming of more than 0.6 to 0.8. If there had been "natural" warming, why did it start with the industrial revolution (see my earlier reply)? And why have we recently had the warmest days/years on record?

 

[GobyMaster11276]

MYTH 2: The "hockey stick" graph proves that the earth has experienced a steady, very gradual temperature decrease for 1000 years, then recently began a sudden increase.

FACT: Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at the low steady rate mentioned above; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.

The "hockey stick", a poster boy of both the UN's IPCC and Canada's Environment Department, ignores historical recorded climatic swings, and has now also been proven to be flawed and statistically unreliable as well. It is a computer construct and a faulty one at that. See here for more information.m

The below graph shows a reconstruction of the controversial hockey stick graph you mentioned. It shows the Medieval Warm Period that you mention, but as you see that was much more gradual, and overall lower, than the modern rise.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

MYTH 3: Human produced carbon dioxide has increased over the last 100 years, adding to the Greenhouse effect, thus causing most of the earth's warming of the last 100 years.

FACT: Carbon dioxide levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout geologic time. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased by about 120 part per million (ppm), most of which is likely due to human-caused CO2 emissions. The RATE of growth during this century has been about 0.55%/year. However, there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.

Could you please link/reference your sources about the ice cores? I found this when I tried to search for it: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-rises-disproving-the-link-to-global-warming/. This website says: "The lag proves that rising CO2 did not cause the initial warming as past ice ages ended, but it does not in any way contradict the idea that higher CO2 levels cause warming." So in a sense, you are correct that it isn't the cause, but CO2 is making is worse. Another website said,"CO2 didn't initiate warming from past ice ages but it did amplify the warming. In fact, about 90% of the global warming followed the CO2 increase." Basically, the rise in CO2 amplifies the warming, making it many times worse, as that statistic says. If we emit high amounts like we do, then we are responsible for it. Also remember we are responsible for other emissions as well, such as methane, which also contribute to the problem. These are always shadowed by CO2, because it's the biggest issue, but they're still there.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

I forgot to say in my last comment, CO2 is a main driving force, but it did not start the warming. I believe that the gradual temperature change our planet was slowly going through has been massively boosted due to the recent green house gas boost (starting with the industrial revolution) and is now the massive problem we face, which possibly threatens our future.

 

[DutchMuch]

Complex life on earth first appeared 700 million years ago. C)2 levels at that time were well over 1000ppm. Corals did exist at that time. CO2 levels stayed around 1000ppm for 600 million years. 70 years ago it was at about 280ppm. Today it is 400ppm. Low CO2 levels we see today only started to appear 50 million years ago. Corals survived all of that. We should be start to see a recovery this year.

Even if we burned all of our CO2 emission would not push CO2 levels to 1000ppm

I love everything StevenF said because it wasn't influenced by what I consider lies for the most part, ill type more but you can look this over while I do.

 

[DutchMuch]

This comment is pointless, and unrelated. Are you saying that science isn't "a real job"?

He didn't say science wasn't a real job, most scientist are responsible and work. He is saying that some particular people who "research" a certain "subject" half as* it and just farm money for a "living." (so many quotes sorry). Meaning they are studying something that is obviously pointless.

This statement is incorrect. Even google it. Corals were around 542 millions years ago, and were scarce at the time (according to fossil records).

Also, in terms of global warming, it can work both ways (making the world warmer and colder). Also remember that humans are damaging the ozone layers.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17453-timeline-the-evolution-of-life/
"Between 700 and 600 million years ago, the oceans gradually became more oxygenated, meaning more enriched with oxygen. Fossils of animals dating to 650 million years ago have been found."
https://www.seeker.com/sponges-likely-paved-the-way-for-all-life-on-earth-1768368652.html

"Over the last 30 years, the Australian Institute of Marine Science has been monitoring the condition of the Great Barrier Reef. Teams of divers have been surveying coral cover along the entire 2,000km length of the reef for decades."

can you give the link to where that quote came from? Thanks in advance.

You do realise how fragile corals are, don't you? Even a 1-2 degrees Celsius change for prolonged periods could kill them. If they get deeper it won't help them.

This is where me and stevens discussion of ocean levels come in, idk if you read that or not seems unlikely.

What do you mean by "I can't see my hand against my eye"?

Its English for "its dark."

 

[DutchMuch]

contribute to the problem

Just want a simple answer: what is the problem?

Hate how you cant edit a post while adding a quote?... since it looks like im spamming now...

Please look at these graphs. One shows that the was warming from 2001 onward, and another shows warming of more than 0.6 to 0.8. If there had been "natural" warming, why did it start with the industrial revolution (see my earlier reply)? And why have we recently had the warmest days/years on record?

If (just giving an example) the/a president blocks everyone in and out of the U.S from coming or going, isn't it a coincidence that he is the president at the time of this happening

 

[GobyMaster11276]

Yeah, these quotes are getting out of control.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17453-timeline-the-evolution-of-life/
"Between 700 and 600 million years ago, the oceans gradually became more oxygenated, meaning more enriched with oxygen. Fossils of animals dating to 650 million years ago have been found."
https://www.seeker.com/sponges-likely-paved-the-way-for-all-life-on-earth-1768368652.html

I was just saying that corals weren't around 700 million years ago, as mentioned.

can you give the link to where that quote came from? Thanks in advance.


This is where me and stevens discussion of ocean levels come in, idk if you read that or not seems unlikely.


Its English for "its dark."

No problem. Here's the link. http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/4553792.htm

I did read that by the way.

Never heard that before. Always learning.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

Just want a simple answer: what is the problem?
If (just giving an example) the/a president blocks everyone in and out of the U.S from coming or going, isn't it a coincidence that he is the president at the time of this happening

I didn't say there was a problem with getting a simple answer.

 

[DutchMuch]

550 Ma First fossil evidence for Ctenophora (comb jellies), Porifera (sponges), Anthozoa (corals and sea anemones)
You said that 700m years ago corals didn't exist, trying to prove they did and I agree with stevenF (again).

I didn't say there was a problem with getting a simple answer.

so basically you dodged my question?

More interesting read links I suggest to you:
https://books.google.com/books?id=i...e corals around 700 million years ago&f=false
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-fish-similar-todays-far-earlier-thought.html

 

[DutchMuch]

https://books.google.com/books?id=i...KHa4_C6YQ6AEIQTAE#v=onepage&q= corals&f=false
page 3 of 39 I suggest a GOOD read and fantastic info, this book period is a ocean of information