CO2 'highest for 650,000 years'

[FoBoT]

blah blah blah global warming blah blah blah

 

[Cattlegod]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

 

[Linflas]

Carbonate depositional period FTW.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
blah blah blah global warming blah blah blah

Russians love it for their now-mild winters . . .

sea-level places/cities aren't so happy

blah blah blah end of the human race blah blah blah
:Q



good riddence
[quoted from Mr/s Plant]

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

wtf? that's all the data they have, and this is the highest point in that time...not the highest point since 650,000 years ago...

"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years."

read the article more carefully

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

wtf? that's all the data they have, and this is the highest point in that time...not the highest point since 650,000 years ago...

"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years."

read the article more carefully

it's the OP's misquoting that did it

Originally posted by: yellowfiero
Current levels of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere are higher now than at any time in the last 650,000 years.

That is the conclusion of new European studies looking at ice taken from 3km below the surface of Antarctica.

Bad reading of their conclusion . . . or at least open to interpretation - unlike the article


edited

 

[FoBoT]

Sea levels are rising around the globe, though not uniformly. In fact, sea levels have risen more than 300 feet over the last 18,000 years - far predating any possible human impact. Rising sea levels are natural in between ice ages. Contrary to the predictions of global warming theorists, the current rate of increase is slower than the average rate over the 18,000-year period.

 

[reverend boltron]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

Dittohead

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

Dittohead

read mine and others replies to that

EDIT: cliffs: so you have one link/shred of proof/peer reviwed study to back that up?

 

[reverend boltron]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

Dittohead

read mine and others replies to that

EDIT: cliffs: so you have one link/shred of proof/peer reviwed study to back that up?

I don't at all, I was just calling him a Dittohead because the statement "1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years" was from "The Way Things Ought to Be" by Rush Limbaugh. I don't have a copy of it, but maybe they have a footnote about that in the book.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

Dittohead

read mine and others replies to that

EDIT: cliffs: so you have one link/shred of proof/peer reviwed study to back that up?

I don't at all, I was just calling him a Dittohead because the statement "1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years" was from "The Way Things Ought to Be" by Rush Limbaugh. I don't have a copy of it, but maybe they have a footnote about that in the book.

i'm way out of touch with US slang

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: reverend boltron

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

Dittohead

read mine and others replies to that

EDIT: cliffs: so you have one link/shred of proof/peer reviwed study to back that up?

I don't at all, I was just calling him a Dittohead because the statement "1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years" was from "The Way Things Ought to Be" by Rush Limbaugh. I don't have a copy of it, but maybe they have a footnote about that in the book.

i'm way out of touch with US slang

it's OK. . . ANYway, Rush Limbaugh is WAY outta touch with reality . . . i guess he is OFF drugs now.

:roll:

 

[nCred]

Originally posted by: FoBoT

Sea levels are rising around the globe, though not uniformly. In fact, sea levels have risen more than 300 feet over the last 18,000 years - far predating any possible human impact. Rising sea levels are natural in between ice ages. Contrary to the predictions of global warming theorists, the current rate of increase is slower than the average rate over the 18,000-year period.

Well of course, the last ice age reached it´s maximum 18 000 years ago, and over the following 8 000 years or so the ice melted away causing the oceans to rise rapidly. You should look at the numbers for the last 10 000 years if you want see if the sea levels are starting to rise faster.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

wtf? that's all the data they have, and this is the highest point in that time...not the highest point since 650,000 years ago...

"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years."

read the article more carefully

Historical CO2 Levels (Older than 900k years)
Direct link to chart

I dunno... You can't just lay the blame on volcanos. There are so many factors involved in global temperature that have nothing to do with CO2 levels. The model is so sophisticated that anyone who stands up and says "AHA! This is IT!" should automatically be view with skeptical eyes.

It wasn't more than 200 years ago that we were emerging from a mini-ice age. Some studies show that there was a serious cold snap about 8000 years ago that lasted for about a century. (Temps dropped 9C - Much colder than the MIA) In both instances there wasn't enough people to say that we caused the upward swing in temperatures. But in both instances as well as dozens of other ice ages throughout the history of our planet the earth has warmed just the same.

I think the biggest problem with the GW crowd is that they seem to want to view the climate as static. It's not.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

wtf? that's all the data they have, and this is the highest point in that time...not the highest point since 650,000 years ago...

"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years."

read the article more carefully

Historical CO2 Levels (Older than 900k years)
Direct link to chart

I dunno... You can't just lay the blame on volcanos. There are so many factors involved in global temperature that have nothing to do with CO2 levels. The model is so sophisticated that anyone who stands up and says "AHA! This is IT!" should automatically be view with skeptical eyes.

It wasn't more than 200 years ago that we were emerging from a mini-ice age. Some studies show that there was a serious cold snap about 8000 years ago that lasted for about a century. (Temps dropped 9C - Much colder than the MIA) In both instances there wasn't enough people to say that we caused the upward swing in temperatures. But in both instances as well as dozens of other ice ages throughout the history of our planet the earth has warmed just the same.

I think the biggest problem with the GW crowd is that they seem to want to view the climate as static. It's not.

I certainly don't...

 

[imported_DocHolliday]

*yawn*

 

[mercanucaribe]

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that releasing carbon that has been stored in fossil fuels for millions of years is going to increase CO2 levels in the atmosphere. It's really strange that some people would deny that.

 

[DrPizza]

It's sort of like the Intelligent Design debate - you can find plenty of scientists who believe in ID. You can find plenty of scientists who believe that ID isn't necessary to explain what's happening today. However, the latter tend to be at the top of their field.

Then, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there isn't global warming. Or, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there is. Again, the latter half tend to be at the top of their field.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
It's sort of like the Intelligent Design debate - you can find plenty of scientists who believe in ID. You can find plenty of scientists who believe that ID isn't necessary to explain what's happening today. However, the latter tend to be at the top of their field.

Then, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there isn't global warming. Or, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there is. Again, the latter half tend to be at the top of their field.

damn.

i'd have your babies if i was a broad :beer:

 

[iwearnosox]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: DrPizza
It's sort of like the Intelligent Design debate - you can find plenty of scientists who believe in ID. You can find plenty of scientists who believe that ID isn't necessary to explain what's happening today. However, the latter tend to be at the top of their field.

Then, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there isn't global warming. Or, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there is. Again, the latter half tend to be at the top of their field.

damn.

i'd have your babies if i was a broad :beer:

:Q

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
It's sort of like the Intelligent Design debate - you can find plenty of scientists who believe in ID. You can find plenty of scientists who believe that ID isn't necessary to explain what's happening today. However, the latter tend to be at the top of their field.

Then, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there isn't global warming. Or, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there is. Again, the latter half tend to be at the top of their field.

It's not so much that the latters are at the tops of their fields as it is that the formers are at the BOTTOMS of their fields.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe

Originally posted by: DrPizza
It's sort of like the Intelligent Design debate - you can find plenty of scientists who believe in ID. You can find plenty of scientists who believe that ID isn't necessary to explain what's happening today. However, the latter tend to be at the top of their field.

Then, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there isn't global warming. Or, you can find plenty of scientists who claim there is. Again, the latter half tend to be at the top of their field.

It's not so much that the latters are at the tops of their fields as it is that the formers are at the BOTTOMS of their fields.

I've gotta agree with you there. I wonder what it takes to be called a "scientist" - a major in liberal arts at a college, with a minor in science. And of course, the minor requires the "science" courses that just about any idiot can pass. I would assume that this is the type of scientist who types "Contrary to the predictions of global warming theorists, the current rate of increase is slower than the average rate over the 18,000-year period." Well, obviously, since there was an ice-age within the last 18,000 years and that ice-age ended. However, anti-global warming people will grasp at little statistics like that and use them as evidence against global warming.

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: DocHolliday
*yawn*

 

[m2kewl]

we're fvcked. the human race will be extinct in less then 100 years.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cattlegod

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Acanthus
this is the natural progression of the earth, 1 volcano puts out more CO2 than the entire human population in 10 years.

Funny they dont happen to mention that.

strange that all the volcanos in the last 650,000 years have never hit this level, which just happens to coincide with our present massive level of industrialisation..that's one hell of a coincidence :roll:

strange that time moves forward and it will always go up?

then why has it fluctuated?

volcanos dont erupt periodically to a watch?

plants consume it, but volcanos produce much more than what is consumed (obviously).

and we spike now? one hell of a coincidence as i said

you are not reading the data clearly.

if our level of co2 was 1/2 what it is today the date might not have been 650,000 years ago but maybe 500,000 years ago and say that it is one hell of a coincidence.

you can make the same argument no matter what our level of co2 is.

wtf? that's all the data they have, and this is the highest point in that time...not the highest point since 650,000 years ago...

"We find that CO2 is about 30% higher than at any time, and methane 130% higher than at any time; and the rates of increase are absolutely exceptional: for CO2, 200 times faster than at any time in the last 650,000 years."

read the article more carefully

Historical CO2 Levels (Older than 900k years)
Direct link to chart

I dunno... You can't just lay the blame on volcanos. There are so many factors involved in global temperature that have nothing to do with CO2 levels. The model is so sophisticated that anyone who stands up and says "AHA! This is IT!" should automatically be view with skeptical eyes.

It wasn't more than 200 years ago that we were emerging from a mini-ice age. Some studies show that there was a serious cold snap about 8000 years ago that lasted for about a century. (Temps dropped 9C - Much colder than the MIA) In both instances there wasn't enough people to say that we caused the upward swing in temperatures. But in both instances as well as dozens of other ice ages throughout the history of our planet the earth has warmed just the same.

I think the biggest problem with the GW crowd is that they seem to want to view the climate as static. It's not.

:thumbsup:
Sadly most people sleep through their "rocks for jocks" class in college and have no concept of just how much CO2 is currently "banked" in limestone rock (CaCO3).