LOL. If you were not such a dumb ****, you would realize that you have already killed your case. Yes, the present rapid warmup is well within the range that is known from Geological history. It is as fast, or faster, than the changes that preceded several extinction periods.
Poor rocks. Why tell lies when you have to know that you are going to be called out on them?
Tell me rocks, have you ever actually researched anything? Even once? Your claim that the present change is as fast or faster than that of extinction periods is simply a lie. One need research no further than the Vostok ice core data to prove that your claims are fantasy.
Here, have a look at the temperature record for the past 450 thousand years. The temperatures during this period are well below the average mean when earth history is considered, and there are certainly no extiinction events during this period and yet, we see multiple time frames when the temperature rise was considerably faster than the present.
As to your claims of present temperatures resembling past extinction events; you have clearly never actually looked at the subject. You are either simply making it up as you go or are taking your que from someone else who is simply making it up as they go. In either case, you should try actually looking up the facts before you say something that is going to bring yet more public humiliation upon you.
Your claim that the present temperature increase is similar to increases that preceeded extinction events is yet another shining example of your ignorance. In the first place, no record exists further back than the Vostok ice core data (450K years) that can provide a high enough resolution of temperature changes to even begin to compare the past with the present when short term temperature changes are the issue. That said, you have no clue what the short term temperature changes looked like during any extinction event.
If you believe you do, I would be very interested in seeing the data source.
If you ever actually took the time to actually learn something about the major extinction events, you would know off hand that your claim was BS.
The most recent extinction event was the KT event about 65 million years ago. The average global mean temperature at the time was about 25 degrees C and had been for about 80 million years when the event took place. Compare 25 degrees C to the present 13.9 degrees C and that alone is enough to tell you that the sort of temperature change we are experiencing was not the cause of the extinction. Scientists theorize that the KT extinction was the result of an impact event, volcanic activity, sea level drop, or perhaps a combination of the two. If it was due to impact events or volcanoes, then the extinction would have been the result of temperature decrease.
The triassic - jurassic extinction also took place during a time when the average mean temperature on earth was about 25 degrees C and had been for about 80 million years. This suggests that when the earth's mean temp reaches 25 degrees C and remains so for about 80 million years, an event that probably won't have anyting to do with climate change may kill us. Contact me when the earth as been at 25 degrees C for 79 million years or so.
The next extinction event was the permian triassic event. Once more, the suspected causes of this event are varied. Some sort of super volcanic activity with associated hydrogen sulfide emissions and anoxia are the most reasonable culprits. Certainly not due to any temperature change even faintly resembling what we are experiencing today. Again, at the time of the permian - triassic extinction, the mean temperature of the earth was at least 10 degrees C higher than the present.
The late denovian extinction is next on the list. The late denovian saw a signifigant mean temperature drop of about 4 degrees C. Global cooling, not warming is the most likely cause of the extinction.
Travel on back and the next extinction event. Among the most likely causes of that event are a burst of gamma radiation resulting from a supernova about 6,000 light years from earth or volcanoes. In either event, it was not due to any temperature shift even remotely resembling the present.
You are full of crap rocks. I suggest that you either stop lying, or find better research materials as you are being lied to. Doing so will result in less public humiliation.
As for proof of the effect of the GHGs, once again, here is what the American Institute of Physics has to say;
I have asked you to point out what part of that essay you believe constitutes proof. As I predicted, you are unable as you clearly don't understand the material. Where in that essay is any observed, experimental proof? I see nothing more than a rambling discussion of a pretty poor hypothesis. It is science we are talking about. Where is the proof. Where is the observed experimental evidence?
Not that I expect you to actually read what the scientists have to say. You get all the science you need from an obese junkie of a radio jock.
I read the essay completely whichi is why I can ask you which part you believe constitutes proof of the greenhouse gas hypothesis with complete confidence that you will be unable to answer the question. No part of that essay represents proof of any sort. It is an essay describing the evolution of a hypothesis over the years. A hypothesis, I might add, that has not managed to become convincing enough to be called a theory. A hypothesis that doesn't have one shred of observed, experimental evidence in its support.
So again I ask, where is the proof? Your essay doesn't even come close. Got anything else?
