Time history of atmospheric carbon dioxide from 800,000 years to the present

[orogenicman]

EDIT

 

[Old Rocks]

Ol' Walleyes has a problem with a real geologist posting.

 

[American Horse]

To Summarize:
Ice Ages = 185 parts per million (baseline)
Pre Industrial = 278 parts per million (50 percent increase from baseline)
Present (2014) = 398 parts per million (43 percent increase from Pre-Industrial)

 

[orogenicman]

To Summarize:
Ice Ages = 185 parts per million (baseline)
Pre Industrial = 278 parts per million (50 percent increase from baseline)
Present (2014) = 398 parts per million (43 percent increase from Pre-Industrial)

One part of your summary that you left out: The fact that CO2 levels have never been as high in the past 800,000 years as they are today.

 

[DGS49]

The only relevant question is as follows: If the U.S. shut down all of its coal-fired power plants, mothballed all of its SUV's, killed all of its farting cattle, and decreed that we all must become organic subsistence farmers, and everyone else on earth continued doing what we know they are going to do anyway, WOULD OUR SELF-IMPOSED MISERY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER IN THE FUTURE CLIMATE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The answer is clearly, "No."

Carry on.

 

[DGS49]

Note that in my previous posting, it is not necessary to be a "Climate Change DENIER" in order to conclude that it would be futile to punish ourselves in our horror and fear at the coming catastrophic climate changes.

 

[orogenicman]

The only relevant question is as follows: If the U.S. shut down all of its coal-fired power plants, mothballed all of its SUV's, killed all of its farting cattle, and decreed that we all must become organic subsistence farmers, and everyone else on earth continued doing what we know they are going to do anyway, WOULD OUR SELF-IMPOSED MISERY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER IN THE FUTURE CLIMATE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The answer is clearly, "No."

Carry on.

Straw man argument. Congratulations.

 

[orogenicman]

Note that in my previous posting, it is not necessary to be a "Climate Change DENIER" in order to conclude that it would be futile to punish ourselves in our horror and fear at the coming catastrophic climate changes.

So your response is "fuck it, let's have an apocalypse party"? I only ask because they tried that in during Hurricane Camile, and as I recall, it didn't work out too well for the participants.

 

[DGS49]

No, my response is, (1) use our resources wisely, and (2) plan ahead for the effects of climate change. Like they are doing in Venice right now with the tidal dikes.

But shutting down coal fired power plants is stupid. Minimize the a real pollution, but do not walk away from that huge resource we have.

 

[orogenicman]

No, my response is, (1) use our resources wisely, and (2) plan ahead for the effects of climate change. Like they are doing in Venice right now with the tidal dikes.

But shutting down coal fired power plants is stupid. Minimize the a real pollution, but do not walk away from that huge resource we have.

Why not shut down coal plants? They are the dirtiest source of energy we have. And aren't needed when we have an ample supply of much cleaner natural gas.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - we all gonna die - it's the end times...

Study: Rising Carbon Dioxide Levels Threaten Human Nutrition
May 07, 2014 ~ Climate change is threatening human nutrition, according to experts, who say rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are robbing the global population of vital plant nutrients.

That conclusion follows the release of the 2014 National Climate Assessment, which predicts that extreme weather will disrupt agricultural production, and have negative consequences for food security, both in the U.S. and globally. The study says the damage will come not only through changes in crop yields, but also from changes in the ways climate affects food processing, storage, transportation and retailing.

Unless something is done, climate change will take significant amounts of dietary zinc and iron away by 2050 from food staples, including rice, wheat, corn, soy, field peas and sorghum. Scientists with the Harvard [University] School of Public Health make the prediction in a new study published in the journal Nature. An estimated 2 to 3 billion people receive 70 percent or more of those essential nutrients from wheat, rice and legumes, particularly in the developing world.

Workers collect red grapes in the vineyards near Bordeaux, France.

Reductions in nutrients

Samuel Myers, a researcher in Harvard’s Department of Environmental Health in Boston, said, “What our study is showing is that, unequivocally, as CO2 concentrations rise up to levels that we expect to see in the next 40 years, there are very significant reductions in nutrients that are really important for public health.” Zinc is essential for a healthy immune system, according to Myers, helping to fend off diarrheal diseases, pneumonia and measles, while deficiencies in iron cause anemia and decreased IQ in children. Mothers who are severely anemic are at increased risk of death.

Some 2 billion people worldwide suffer from zinc and iron deficiencies, resulting in a loss of 63 million life years annually. Life years are a measurement of years that are lost due to disability and disease. For the study, the nutrient content of plants exposed to artificially elevated levels of carbon dioxide was compared to that of plants grown naturally in nearby fields.

Limiting damage

 

[SSDD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UatUDnFmNTY

We know that CO2 lags temperature....you are showing a graph of CO2 increasing as the earth comes out of an ice age....what's your point? Why not go back to the period prior to the beginning of the ice age? Oh...I know....that would ruin your flawed point because it would show that CO2 was in the range of 1000ppm when the ice age began... Tell me, if CO2 causes warming...how did the earth descend into a deep ice age with CO2 levels at 1000ppm?

 

[SSDD]

To Summarize:
Ice Ages = 185 parts per million (baseline)
Pre Industrial = 278 parts per million (50 percent increase from baseline)
Present (2014) = 398 parts per million (43 percent increase from Pre-Industrial)

One part of your summary that you left out: The fact that CO2 levels have never been as high in the past 800,000 years as they are today.

Does the fact that the earth has been in an ice age for the past 800,000 years mean anything to you?

 

[SSDD]

The only relevant question is as follows: If the U.S. shut down all of its coal-fired power plants, mothballed all of its SUV's, killed all of its farting cattle, and decreed that we all must become organic subsistence farmers, and everyone else on earth continued doing what we know they are going to do anyway, WOULD OUR SELF-IMPOSED MISERY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER IN THE FUTURE CLIMATE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The answer is clearly, "No."

Carry on.

Straw man argument. Congratulations.

You don't think posting CO2 levels from the period of a deep ice age and coming out of that ice age are also a strawman argument when if one looks back to the period when the ice age began the CO2 levels were at or slightly above 1000ppm?

 

[orogenicman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UatUDnFmNTY

We know that CO2 lags temperature....you are showing a graph of CO2 increasing as the earth comes out of an ice age....what's your point? Why not go back to the period prior to the beginning of the ice age? Oh...I know....that would ruin your flawed point because it would show that CO2 was in the range of 1000ppm when the ice age began... Tell me, if CO2 causes warming...how did the earth descend into a deep ice age with CO2 levels at 1000ppm?

The Earth came out of the last ice age 11,000 years ago. And the graph goes back 800,000 years, dude. You didn't know this? Huh.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Why not open up nuclear?

 

[orogenicman]

The only relevant question is as follows: If the U.S. shut down all of its coal-fired power plants, mothballed all of its SUV's, killed all of its farting cattle, and decreed that we all must become organic subsistence farmers, and everyone else on earth continued doing what we know they are going to do anyway, WOULD OUR SELF-IMPOSED MISERY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER IN THE FUTURE CLIMATE OF THE UNITED STATES?

The answer is clearly, "No."

Carry on.

Straw man argument. Congratulations.

You don't think posting CO2 levels from the period of a deep ice age and coming out of that ice age are also a strawman argument when if one looks back to the period when the ice age began the CO2 levels were at or slightly above 1000ppm?

At no point in the last 800,000 years were CO2 levels as high as they are today. Do you have a problem reading graphs?

 

[jc456]

Straw man argument. Congratulations.

You don't think posting CO2 levels from the period of a deep ice age and coming out of that ice age are also a strawman argument when if one looks back to the period when the ice age began the CO2 levels were at or slightly above 1000ppm?

At no point in the last 800,000 years were CO2 levels as high as they are today. Do you have a problem reading graphs?

Come on man! Can't you read?

 

[boedicca]

So, basically we have higher CO2 than during the Ice Ages.

That is AWESOME!

Global Warming been berry berry good to me.

 

[orogenicman]

So, basically we have higher CO2 than during the Ice Ages.

That is AWESOME!

Global Warming been berry berry good to me.

And during all the interglacials in the last 800,000 years. In other words, modern concentrations aren't a natural occurrence. We did it. And are still doing it. And it is having adverse consequences that will only get worse. Not that you give a shit.