What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CO2 Has Almost No Effect on Global Temperature, Says Leading Climate Scientist

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
124,772
Reaction score
23,541
Points
2,180
It is all about the motion of the tectonic plates. NA is moving SW and has for tens of millions of years. But guessing 30 million years ago is when it passed its "closest to the pole" point and, as is motion on the surface of a sphere, started to move away. The angle of the fault at the bottom of the center of the North Atlantic is the key. That has been pushing Greenland NW and Europe SE for over 100 million years. Greenland is where NA was 40 million or so years ago, same arc.

So, NA moved north, got within 600 miles of the North Pole, started to stack ice, grew its continent specific ice age, and then moved away from the pole and the ice age ended because it melted.




These maps show the extent of the "North American Ice Age," but are wrong because they have Greenland frozen too and we know Greenland was GREEN 1 million years ago...
I believe I heard the pole continues to shift today.
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
124,772
Reaction score
23,541
Points
2,180

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
124,772
Reaction score
23,541
Points
2,180

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
21,199
Reaction score
3,433
Points
290
Location
N/A
Why is there ice at the poles?
What did you mean when you said you'd heard the poles continue to shift? The movement of the magnetic poles is not due to plate tectonics.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
107,018
Reaction score
17,823
Points
2,220
Location
Houston
It is all about the motion of the tectonic plates. NA is moving SW and has for tens of millions of years. But guessing 30 million years ago is when it passed its "closest to the pole" point and, as is motion on the surface of a sphere, started to move away. The angle of the fault at the bottom of the center of the North Atlantic is the key. That has been pushing Greenland NW and Europe SE for over 100 million years. Greenland is where NA was 40 million or so years ago, same arc.

So, NA moved north, got within 600 miles of the North Pole, started to stack ice, grew its continent specific ice age, and then moved away from the pole and the ice age ended because it melted.




These maps show the extent of the "North American Ice Age," but are wrong because they have Greenland frozen too and we know Greenland was GREEN 1 million years ago...
You could have said it simpler. Plate tectonics were responsible for the northern pole becoming thermally isolated from warmer marine currents and lowered the temperature threshold for glaciation. Plate tectonics play no role in ending glacial periods. We are still in an ice age. It began 3 million years ago.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
5,033
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
All of your "terms" are bullshit designed to make Co2 the variable that matters. That thesis is BLOWN AWAY by the DATA that PROVES

Greenland FROZE while NORTH AMERICA THAWED


How did Co2 do both at the same time???

Which data indicates the Greenland is not part of the North American continent? ... see how close they are on the map? ...

You're too stupid to understand ... if we use `100,000,000 years` as our time period, we can demonstrate that indeed continental motion changes climate ... climate would be different if The Amazon and The Congo were connected, and NOT separated by the Atlantic Ocean ... duh ...

We laugh at you because we're talking about Quaternary glaciations, within the past 2 million years ... dumbass ... you know ... with the Atlantic Ocean ...
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
5,033
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
What did you mean when you said you'd heard the poles continue to shift? The movement of the magnetic poles is not due to plate tectonics.

And out of the other side of your mouth comes this beauty ... so, you now agree Orbital Motions (including Milankovitch cycles) don't have anything to do with climate? ...

Two-faced LIAR ...
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
21,199
Reaction score
3,433
Points
290
Location
N/A
And out of the other side of your mouth comes this beauty ... so, you now agree Orbital Motions (including Milankovitch cycles) don't have anything to do with climate? ...

Two-faced LIAR ...
You have completely misunderstood me. I fully accept the role of Milankovitch forcing in our glacial cycles, I was simply wondering, when jc456 said "the poles continue to shift", which poles he was talking about. And guessing that he probably meant the magnetic poles and since the prior conversation had centered around plate tectonics, I thought he might be under the misapprehension that the wandering of the magnetic poles was due to tectonic plate movement.

I do not know HOW you took my query to indicate I rejected Milankovitch forcing. I'm the mainstream science guy around here. If you're ever wondering what I think on any particularl issue, your best guess would be whatever the majority of mainstream scientists are saying.
 
Last edited:

EMH

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
6,029
Reaction score
5,088
Points
1,938
Which data indicates the Greenland is not part of the North American continent? ... see how close they are on the map? ...

You're too stupid to understand ... if we use `100,000,000 years` as our time period, we can demonstrate that indeed continental motion changes climate ... climate would be different if The Amazon and The Congo were connected, and NOT separated by the Atlantic Ocean ... duh ...

We laugh at you because we're talking about Quaternary glaciations, within the past 2 million years ... dumbass ... you know ... with the Atlantic Ocean ...


You have failed to document anything except you are a science invalid parroting moron who cannot explain how two continents close to each other did the exact opposite, one froze while the other thawed, but you can spew a lot of parroted crap trying to obscure that truth.

Your theory is Co2. How did the SAME AMOUNT of ATMOSPHERIC Co2 melt NA and freeze Greenland AT THE SAME TIME....
 

EMH

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
6,029
Reaction score
5,088
Points
1,938
And you are not.


LOL!!!


To a PARROT, everyone is a PARROT, since PARROTING is ALL a PARROT "knows."


Find my "source..."

LOL!!!


Hint - Chris Wray knows who my "source" is....



Science is about TRUTH, not PARROTING.

Finding TRUTH requires THINKING and ASKING QUESTIONS....


You still cannot answer my questions....
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
5,033
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
LOL!!!


To a PARROT, everyone is a PARROT, since PARROTING is ALL a PARROT "knows."


Find my "source..."

LOL!!!


Hint - Chris Wray knows who my "source" is....



Science is about TRUTH, not PARROTING.

Finding TRUTH requires THINKING and ASKING QUESTIONS....


You still cannot answer my questions....

Kinda harsh on parrots don't you think? ... I've never owned one but I have owned budges and parrotlets ... they are not as stupid as Chick ...
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
21,199
Reaction score
3,433
Points
290
Location
N/A
Kinda harsh on parrots don't you think? ... I've never owned one but I have owned budges and parrotlets ... they are not as stupid as Chick ...
Were you ever going to explain how you concluded I rejected the idea of Milankovitch forcing?
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
10,150
Reaction score
5,033
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Were you ever going to explain how you concluded I rejected the idea of Milankovitch forcing?

Let's see your math ... I showed you mine ... it says you LIE ...
 

mamooth

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Messages
29,356
Reaction score
11,380
Points
910
Location
Indianapolis, Indiana
You still cannot answer my questions....
No one can separate your "questions" from your butthurt rambling, so you need to be specific about what your "questions" are.

Ahead of time, I'm going to guess that "You're just making stupid crap up" will be the correct response to the "questions".

I base that on the fact that "You're just making stupid crap up" is the correct answer to 95% of questions from deniers. Their questions usually aren't actually questions. They're big ol' lies phrased as questions.
 

Captain Caveman

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
5,673
Reaction score
3,044
Points
938
Location
England
Co2 at it's current level of approx 415 ppm is so bad, the optimum co2 in a commercial greenhouse is 1,500 ppm.

Why?

Most plants evolved in the last 250 million years when co2 levels were around 1,200 ppm. Plants are designed for co2 levels of 1,200 ppm to 1,500 ppm.
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
21,199
Reaction score
3,433
Points
290
Location
N/A
Let's see your math ... I showed you mine ... it says you LIE ...
Which particular math would you like to see and what lie do you believe I've been telling?
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top