Well.... Darn

[DutchMuch]

dang, hardknock life for not being albino
idk what I just said but it sounds serious
damn...

 

[StevenF]

Changing the Y axis on a graph will not change that fact.

I didn't say it would. I said it would make the changes not look as big. I was just saying the graph was misleading in the way it was presented.

If I did as you ask you would have a flat horizontal line which would show a stable climate for 10,000 years with no obvious warming or cooling. But that said the graph I posted is available in a version with about 12X the temperature range and adds about 15,000 years of data.

All of the modern warming and the medieval warm period are on the far right of the graph. The original graph was not misleading in any way .The current extreme temperature or the rate of change are not unprecedented in earths history.

If it went from the severe little ice age to warmer than the Medieval Warm Period in a short amount of time, doesn't that suggest human caused climate change?

No it just say climate is changing. It doesn't say why or what caused it.

And there is growing evidence that it was the sun that did it. Not CO2.
Please link the evidence.

This is a chart of sun spot activity for the last 200 years.

Notice sun spot numbers are about double what they were before 1960. From 1960s to 1990 is one of the most active periods seen since we started monitoring the sun during the little ice age. During the entire period in the graph CO2 levels have been increasing. Yet most of the warming has only occurred since 1970.

The next graph shows sunspot activity and temperature. Not the two track very well. Also not that in the two graphs sunspot activity has dropped substantially since 2000. The rate of warming Since then global warming has slowed dramatically. NASA, NOAA, and the IPCC tell use to expect a lot more warming. Many other people not on government payroll are expecting some cooling for the next 30 years.

That is not a good match. Sun spot number drop and temperature drops. Sun spot numbers increase, temperature increases. CO2 however steadily increases year after year

In the original article that said the great barrier reef would never recover ignore the fact that past temperatures were much warming than we have are today. Yet the reef survived. As I stated earlier the reef would recover. Just like it did the last time it was bleached during a major El Nino. And all the graphs and links I have post support that.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

No it just say climate is changing. It doesn't say why or what caused it.

Read the bit after that. Explains why I associated it with humans.

 

[StevenF]

Read the bit after that. Explains why I associated it with humans.

I did read all of it. but just because the warming occured at the same time as the industrial revolutionn doesn't mean we caused it. What you have failed to understand is that the earths temperature has a history of changing suddenly and in most past cases CO2 was not the cause. Even with all the CO2 we have added, we are sill well below the 500million year average the earth has had (about 1000ppm). 800 million years ago the earth entered a period known as the snowball earth. At that time the earths oceans were almost completely frozer over at the equater. At the time and yet everything remained frozen for millions of years. Scientist believe that the ice melted when CO2 levels got to 130,000ppm. Thats 325 times current levels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

With all these big naturally occuring change. How can we say we caused the small amount of warming we are seeing now?

 

[GobyMaster11276]

I did read all of it. but just because the warming occured at the same time as the industrial revolutionn doesn't mean we caused it. What you have failed to understand is that the earths temperature has a history of changing suddenly and in most past cases CO2 was not the cause. Even with all the CO2 we have added, we are sill well below the 500million year average the earth has had (about 1000ppm). 800 million years ago the earth entered a period known as the snowball earth. At that time the earths oceans were almost completely frozer over at the equater. At the time and yet everything remained frozen for millions of years. Scientist believe that the ice melted when CO2 levels got to 130,000ppm. Thats 325 times current levels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

With all these big naturally occuring change. How can we say we caused the small amount of warming we are seeing now?

Ok, I would like to say I haven't failed to understand anything. I'm not sure if you have read everything up until now (the several pages), but I have already stated multiple times that the world's climate has always been changing, but that it recently has spiked much faster than it did in the past, which was always gradual. This, the fact that it started around the industrial revolution and the graphs that I have linked are all used to create my argument. Even if it was just a coincidence, it is very unlikely. And I am well aware of the snowball Earth time. It almost completely wiped out life.

 

[StevenF]

climate has always been changing, but that it recently has spiked much faster than it did in the past, which was always gradual

Currently the earth has warmed by about 0.9C since 1860. About 0.05C per decade At the end of the last ice age there was a dramatic pause in the warming followed by renewed warming. The warming after the pause know as Younger Dryas has been estimates at:

Three quasi-independent approaches employed in this work all give the same result of a +10 °C warming in several decades or less.

That is about 60 times faster than what we are experiencing now. Link to abstract of the sturdy: :http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005QSRv...24..513G

Also note that at the end of the last ice age CO2 started to rise from 200ppm to about 250ppm about 200 to 1000years after the warming started. So CO2 did casue the warming that ended the last ice age.

There have been 3 proposals presented to explain the end of the ice age:

• Increasing CO2 levels melted the ice but the theory cannot explain why it started to melt before CO2 increased.
• The Earth has a 24,000 year orbital cycles. About 12,000 ware years followed by 12,000 cold years. The change in the orbital cycle was thought to explain the last ice age but couldn't explain why ice ages are about 100,000 years long.
• The most recent theory states the when atmospheric CO2 levels dropped to 200ppm many plants died due to CO2 starvation. This is from plant studies done about 60 years ago. Once CO2 levels dropped this low plant ground cover died resulting in dry ground with few if any plants . Thousands of years of dust storms followed. This gradually changed the color of the ice from a reflective white to brown which absorbs more sunlight than it reflects. When the orbital cycle changed to warm period the dust absorbed the extra light and started melting the ice. As the oceans then warmed they released CO2 into the air (cold water holds more CO2 than warm water). Glacial ice cores show dust levels do increase at 200ppm CO2 and then the ice melts at the start of the next orbital warm period for every ice age during the last 1,000,000 years. Link below:
• https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/06...ges-via-precession-and-dust-albedo-feedbacks/

 

[StevenF]

climate has always been changing, but that it recently has spiked much faster than it did in the past, which was always gradual

Currently the earth has warmed by about 0.9C since 1860. About 0.05C per decade At the end of the last ice age there was a dramatic pause in the warming followed by renewed warming. The warming after the pause know as Younger Dryas has been estimates at:

Three quasi-independent approaches employed in this work all give the same result of a +10 °C warming in several decades or less.

That is about 60 times faster than what we are experiencing now. Link to abstract of the sturdy: :http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005QSRv...24..513G

Also note that at the end of the last ice age CO2 started to rise from 200ppm to about 250ppm about 200 to 1000years after the warming started. So CO2 did casue the warming that ended the last ice age.

There have been 3 proposals presented to explain the end of the ice age:

• Increasing CO2 levels melted the ice but the theory cannot explain why it started to melt before CO2 increased.
• The Earth has a 24,000 year orbital cycles. About 12,000 ware years followed by 12,000 cold years. The change in the orbital cycle was thought to explain the last ice age but couldn't explain why ice ages are about 100,000 years long.
• The most recent theory states the when atmospheric CO2 levels dropped to 200ppm many plants died due to CO2 starvation. This is from plant studies done about 60 years ago. Once CO2 levels dropped this low plant ground cover died resulting in cold dry deserts. Thousands of years of dust storms followed. This gradually changed the color of the ice from a reflective white to brown which absorbs more sunlight than it reflects. When the orbital cycle changed to warm period the dust absorbed the extra light and started melting the ice. As the oceans then warmed they released CO2 into the air (cold water holds more CO2 than warm water). Glacial ice cores show dust levels do increase at 200ppm CO2 and then the ice melts at the start of the next orbital warm period for every ice age during the last 1,000,000 years.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

Double posted, lol. You know, I have completely forgotten the point you're arguing for. What was it again? This is getting really confusing, so please remind me. Thanks.

 

[DutchMuch]

 

[DutchMuch]

@GobyMaster11276 @StevenF So what about that football game last night?

 

[GobyMaster11276]

American Football?

Also, how did you get those captions at the bottom?

 

[DutchMuch]

American Football?

Also, how did you get those captions at the bottom?

yea I was jk lol
I cant tell you, I hacked into the forum like a boss and made them, spooky...
Nah jk go to your CP and hit signature.

 

[GobyMaster11276]

This has gone silent...

 

[Logic]

it has