CO2 Levels Were This High 800,000 Years Ago, So Who’s Responsible?

[Sunsettommy]

So the OP uses a TWEET as his source.
WTF!
Where are you Right Wing Critics/Geniuses?
You accept that from your side you FILTHY HYPOCRITES?

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Author: Rebecca Lindsey
August 1, 2018 Climate.gov NOAA
Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov

The global average atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2017 was 405.0 parts per million (ppm for short), with a range of uncertainty of plus or minus 0.1 ppm. Carbon dioxide levels today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) for the past 800,000 years, based on EPICA (ice core) data. The peaks and valleys in carbon dioxide levels track the coming and going of ice ages (low carbon dioxide) and warmer interglacials (higher levels). Throughout these cycles, atmospheric carbon dioxide was Never Higher than 300 ppm; in 2017, it reached 405.0 ppm (black dot).
NOAA Climate.gov, based on EPICA Dome C data (Lüthi, D., et al., 2008) provided by NOAA NCEI Paleoclimatology Program.

In fact, the last time the atmospheric CO2 amounts were this high was more than 3 million years ago, when temperature was 2°–3°C (3.6°–5.4°F) higher than during the pre-industrial era, and Sea Level was 15–25 meters (50–80 feet) higher than today....​

Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!



`



`

I love it.. Tacking on an instrument record of yearly point plots to a record that has 250 year point plots to give the illusion of an emergency.

You are aware that our current rise has indeed happened before but due to its length (less than 150 years) can not be seen in the spatial resolution of the plot, dont you?

More Micheal Mann style fraud, deceptions and lies.. How about you average today's rise into the 250 year plot point and see what happens to your emergency. Miss Lindsay is using the same statisticians parlor trick Mann did and its outright deception.

I see that Mensa child, still triggered with his overuse of the funny button and bypasses debate, It is to be expected from people who are cut and paste artists, which is how they try to avoid debate at all, take note of his parting words in his latest post:

"Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!"

The debate free child once again runs away from making a coherent point ...................., Mensa my ass!

I personally know a few people who are certified Mensa, who can post better than this pretender Mensa child does, in their sleep.

 

[deannalw]

View attachment 274423
Twitter
Dino farts?
Fred and Barney?

My neighbor lady is about that old and she don't even recycle!

I blame her.

 

[deannalw]

This discussion is not based on facts that matter; period
Humans (animals/fish/birds\breath in 02 and exhale CO2
Plants breath in CO2 and exhale 02
It's called the cycle of life
View attachment 274426
Just take one deep breath; breath out slowly, relax
Life is unfolding as it should -

People that yak a lot like me must be utterly fabulous for the environment!

Yay me!

 

[HenryBHough]

I told those dinosaurs not to industrialize.

 

[Flash]

These dumbass Moon Bats say that my gas guzzling Tundra truck is responsible for global warming nowadays.

However, I have news for the idiot Moon Bats. Toyota was not producing Tundras 800K years ago.

 

[Billy_Bob]

I see that Mensa child, still triggered with his overuse of the funny button and bypasses debate, It is to be expected from people who are cut and paste artists, which is how they try to avoid debate at all, take note of his parting words in his latest post:

"Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!"

The debate free child once again runs away from making a coherent point ...................., Mensa my ass!

I personally know a few people who are certified Mensa, who can post better than this pretender Mensa child in their sleep.

NO contemnt frpom Tommy and No addressing my points or the LIE and FALLACY of the OP:
Again:

the OP uses a TWEET as his source.
WTF!
Where are you Right Wing Critics/Geniuses?
You accept that from your side you FILTHY HYPOCRITES?

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Author: Rebecca Lindsey
August 1, 2018 Climate.gov NOAA
Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov

The global average atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2017 was 405.0 parts per million (ppm for short), with a range of uncertainty of plus or minus 0.1 ppm. Carbon dioxide levels today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) for the past 800,000 years, based on EPICA (ice core) data. The peaks and valleys in carbon dioxide levels track the coming and going of ice ages (low carbon dioxide) and warmer interglacials (higher levels). Throughout these cycles, atmospheric carbon dioxide was Never Higher than 300 ppm; in 2017, it reached 405.0 ppm (black dot).
NOAA Climate.gov, based on EPICA Dome C data (Lüthi, D., et al., 2008) provided by NOAA NCEI Paleoclimatology Program.

In fact, the last time the atmospheric CO2 amounts were this high was more than 3 million years ago, when temperature was 2°–3°C (3.6°–5.4°F) higher than during the pre-industrial era, and Sea Level was 15–25 meters (50–80 feet) higher than today....​

Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!

- - - - - -- -
`
NO Answer fom Tommy or ANYONE Else
It's just the usual FRIGHT WING TROLL FEST

BWHAAAsaaaaaaaaaa

An appeal to authority... Authorities who use deceptions....
Keep digging mensa boy!

 

[Sunsettommy]

I see that Mensa child, still triggered with his overuse of the funny button and bypasses debate, It is to be expected from people who are cut and paste artists, which is how they try to avoid debate at all, take note of his parting words in his latest post:

"Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!"

The debate free child once again runs away from making a coherent point ...................., Mensa my ass!

I personally know a few people who are certified Mensa, who can post better than this pretender Mensa child in their sleep.

NO contemnt frpom Tommy and No addressing my points or the LIE and FALLACY of the OP:
Again:

the OP uses a TWEET as his source.
WTF!
Where are you Right Wing Critics/Geniuses?
You accept that from your side you FILTHY HYPOCRITES?

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Author: Rebecca Lindsey
August 1, 2018 Climate.gov NOAA
Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov

The global average atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2017 was 405.0 parts per million (ppm for short), with a range of uncertainty of plus or minus 0.1 ppm. Carbon dioxide levels today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) for the past 800,000 years, based on EPICA (ice core) data. The peaks and valleys in carbon dioxide levels track the coming and going of ice ages (low carbon dioxide) and warmer interglacials (higher levels). Throughout these cycles, atmospheric carbon dioxide was Never Higher than 300 ppm; in 2017, it reached 405.0 ppm (black dot).
NOAA Climate.gov, based on EPICA Dome C data (Lüthi, D., et al., 2008) provided by NOAA NCEI Paleoclimatology Program.

In fact, the last time the atmospheric CO2 amounts were this high was more than 3 million years ago, when temperature was 2°–3°C (3.6°–5.4°F) higher than during the pre-industrial era, and Sea Level was 15–25 meters (50–80 feet) higher than today....​

Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!

- - - - - -- -
`
NO Answer fom Tommy or ANYONE Else
It's just the usual FRIGHT WING TROLL FEST

BWHAAAsaaaaaaaaaa

An appeal to authority... Authorities who use deceptions....
Keep digging mensa boy!

He is so stupid, that he fails to realize that post one actually pushed the same crap, Abu "meathead" Afak wrote, while he never looked into the twitter link.

The report was based on The State of the Climate Report, that ABC NEWS reported on, no rightwing critic here.

LINK

Here is the entire twitter post Mensa child was in a twitter about:


ABC News
@ABC
Carbon dioxide levels in Earth's atmosphere rose to levels the planet hasn't seen in 800,000 years in 2018, underscoring the impact of increasing environmental damage due to human activity, according to a new federal report.

Carbon dioxide in atmosphere rose to levels planet hasn't seen in 800K years: Report
The State of the Climate report was compiled by 470 scientists in 60 countries.

 

[HenryBHough]

"Mensa". That which one calls males who experience extreme menstrual pain without shedding a drop of blood. Only tears.

 

[deannalw]

These dumbass Moon Bats say that my gas guzzling Tundra truck is responsible for global warming nowadays.

However, I have news for the idiot Moon Bats. Toyota was not producing Tundras 800K years ago.

But if they WERE, those truck masters would be producing environment eating trucks like my FORD!

 

[Flash]

These dumbass Moon Bats say that my gas guzzling Tundra truck is responsible for global warming nowadays.

However, I have news for the idiot Moon Bats. Toyota was not producing Tundras 800K years ago.

But if they WERE, those truck masters would be producing environment eating trucks like my FORD!

If Ford was using UAW labor 800K years ago they would have been bankrupt many years ago.

 

[Billy_Bob]

BWHAAAsaaaaaaaaaa

An appeal to authority... Authorities who use deceptions....
Keep digging mensa boy!

"Appeal to Authority" is NOT a Fallacy if that authority IS an actual authority on the Topic. (ie, NOAA on Climate).

IOW (and for You STUPID).. ie, Citing Einstein on Relativity would be a legitimate citation NOT "Appeal to Authority" Fallacy.

A Fallacy would be ALL your posts in the thread, and/or saying ie, "The moderator here says there is no warming."
THAT'S an appeal to Authority FALLACY.

It's No wonder you have Wrong and Stupid opinions on everything
You think using legitimate sources is a fallacy

You are SO STUPID it's Unbelivable.

You're just a 12 IQ Mouthy TROLL, like 90% of USMB.


`

`

`

Here moron.. Chew on this..

Below is a graph from a high resolution (25 year plot) ice core record going back 14,000 years. You will note that just 2,000 years ago, during the Roman Warm Period, CO2 levels were as high as today's levels... Your CO2 boogie man is now dead... Get a new one...

 

[Billy_Bob]

Everyone has to see this again on a new page.
The BLINDING STUPIDITY of Billy Boob!
Again:

BWHAAAsaaaaaaaaaa

An appeal to authority... Authorities who use deceptions....
Keep digging mensa boy!

"Appeal to Authority" is NOT a Fallacy if that authority IS an actual authority on the Topic. (ie, NOAA on Climate).

IOW (and for You STUPID).. ie, Citing Einstein on Relativity would be a legitimate citation NOT "Appeal to Authority" Fallacy.

A Fallacy would be ALL your posts in the thread, and/or saying ie, "The moderator here says there is no warming."
THAT'S an appeal to Authority FALLACY.

It's No wonder you have Wrong and Stupid opinions on everything
You think using legitimate sources is a fallacy

You are SO STUPID it's Unbelivable.

You're just a 12 IQ Mouthy TROLL, like 90% of USMB.


`

LAST WORD away/Bury your Ignorance MOUTH boy.
That's Billy Bob's method.. just keep posting/posting over/Shout down.

`

`

An appeal to authority is a FALLACY ARGUMENT...

1. You have no understanding of the subject matter. Thus you have no informed way to evaluate it.

2. You use circular and fallacy arguments in an effort to hide your ignorance...

Game over...

 

[Flash]

Once upon a time the earth had CO2 levels ten times higher than they are today and earth was an ice planet. Kinda of like Hoth from Star Wars. You know, like when Luke had to spend the night in the belly of a raunchy beast to keep from freezing.

Another time the CO2 levels were lower than what they are now but the earth was warmer. That has been pretty recent. Like when their were Romans and Knights and all that stuff.

The real non cheery picked climate data says that CO2 levels lag temperature changes, not lead it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what that means for the silly AGW theory. Busted!

There is only a theory that CO2 is a green house gas in the levels we see here on earth. It is not supported by any real data, only in flawed computer models. That is why none of the predictions these stupid Moon Bats make never come true. That is also the reason the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate false data to support their outrageous claims.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Everyone has to see this again on a new page.
The BLINDING STUPIDITY of Billy Boob!
Again:

BWHAAAsaaaaaaaaaa

An appeal to authority... Authorities who use deceptions....
Keep digging mensa boy!

"Appeal to Authority" is NOT a Fallacy if that authority IS an actual authority on the Topic. (ie, NOAA on Climate).

IOW (and for You STUPID).. ie, Citing Einstein on Relativity would be a legitimate citation NOT "Appeal to Authority" Fallacy.

A Fallacy would be ALL your posts in the thread, and/or saying ie, "The moderator here says there is no warming."
THAT'S an appeal to Authority FALLACY.

It's No wonder you have Wrong and Stupid opinions on everything
You think using legitimate sources is a fallacy

You are SO STUPID it's Unbelivable.

You're just a 12 IQ Mouthy TROLL, like 90% of USMB.


`

LAST WORD away/Bury your Ignorance MOUTH boy.
That's Billy Bob's method.. just keep posting/posting over/Shout down.

`

`

An appeal to authority is a FALLACY ARGUMENT...

1. You have no understanding of the subject matter. Thus you have no informed way to evaluate it.

2. You use circular and fallacy arguments in an effort to hide your ignorance...

Game over...

The climate cult is self humiliating.

 

[SSDD]

So the OP uses a TWEET as his source.
WTF!
Where are you Right Wing Critics/Geniuses?
You accept that from your side you FILTHY HYPOCRITES?

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
Author: Rebecca Lindsey
August 1, 2018 Climate.gov NOAA
Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov

The global average atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2017 was 405.0 parts per million (ppm for short), with a range of uncertainty of plus or minus 0.1 ppm. Carbon dioxide levels today are higher than at any point in at least the past 800,000 years.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations in parts per million (ppm) for the past 800,000 years, based on EPICA (ice core) data. The peaks and valleys in carbon dioxide levels track the coming and going of ice ages (low carbon dioxide) and warmer interglacials (higher levels). Throughout these cycles, atmospheric carbon dioxide was Never Higher than 300 ppm; in 2017, it reached 405.0 ppm (black dot).
NOAA Climate.gov, based on EPICA Dome C data (Lüthi, D., et al., 2008) provided by NOAA NCEI Paleoclimatology Program.

In fact, the last time the atmospheric CO2 amounts were this high was more than 3 million years ago, when temperature was 2°–3°C (3.6°–5.4°F) higher than during the pre-industrial era, and Sea Level was 15–25 meters (50–80 feet) higher than today....​

Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!



`



`

I love it.. Tacking on an instrument record of yearly point plots to a record that has 250 year point plots to give the illusion of an emergency.

You are aware that our current rise has indeed happened before but due to its length (less than 150 years) can not be seen in the spatial resolution of the plot, dont you?

More Micheal Mann style fraud, deceptions and lies.. How about you average today's rise into the 250 year plot point and see what happens to your emergency. Miss Lindsay is using the same statisticians parlor trick Mann did and its outright deception.

I see that Mensa child, still triggered with his overuse of the funny button and bypasses debate, It is to be expected from people who are cut and paste artists, which is how they try to avoid debate at all, take note of his parting words in his latest post:

"Then of course, there's the IDIOTIC GIANT FALLACY that because nature did it before, man can't be doing it now.
Missing the whole point of the debate.
DUH!"

The debate free child once again runs away from making a coherent point ...................., Mensa my ass!

I personally know a few people who are certified Mensa, who can post better than this pretender Mensa child does, in their sleep.

It appears that his use of the funny button is a knee jerk defense mechanism...kind of like whistling by the grave yard....It is the internet equivalent to queasy stomach fear... it worries him that he has no response so he gives an impotent chuckle in an effort to reassure himself.

And the sheer number of times he does it suggests that it is a compulsion. The guy really has issues.

 

[watchingfromafar]

That is also the reason the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate false data to support their outrageous claims.

The only waco in the room is the one who denounces facts with bla, bla, bla and nothing else. This is a case in which one picks a side but knows nothing about the topic but still wants to be heard; sorry Flash, you picked the wrong side.
Flip your coin one more time, hopefully next time you will get lucky.
The world is running out of oil. The CO2 problem will correct itself and your grandchildren will be driving electric cars and you will go one record as the one and only one who flipped a coin and it landed standing straight up; neither heads nor tails
-

 

[SSDD]

That is also the reason the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate false data to support their outrageous claims.

The only waco in the room is the one who denounces facts with bla, bla, bla and nothing else. This is a case in which one picks a side but knows nothing about the topic but still wants to be heard; sorry Flash, you picked the wrong side.
Flip your coin one more time, hopefully next time you will get lucky.
The world is running out of oil. The CO2 problem will correct itself and your grandchildren will be driving electric cars and you will go one record as the one and only one who flipped a coin and it landed standing straight up; neither heads nor tails
-

To prove how wrong you are, I am going to ask for a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...and I am going to ask for it with perfect confidence that nether you...nor anyone else will be able to provide even one single piece of such evidence...

FLASH...if you had picked the right side...and made your choice based on facts, you would be as skeptical as those of us who have actually looked at the science

FLASH...you picked your side based on politics and as a result, have been duped and are playing the part of a useful idiot...

FLASH...think about that when you are not providing a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...and think about why there is no such evidence for you to shove in my face...

 

[TNHarley]

So carbon ppm is high again.
The same scientists that say we are killing our planet despite natural variability, say we contribute less than 5 percent of carbon. That's around 15 ppm.
Give me a break! Dumb shit warming cultists are complete subservient morons. Period.

 

[Flash]

That is also the reason the Environmental Wackos have to fabricate false data to support their outrageous claims.

The only waco in the room is the one who denounces facts with bla, bla, bla and nothing else. This is a case in which one picks a side but knows nothing about the topic but still wants to be heard; sorry Flash, you picked the wrong side.
Flip your coin one more time, hopefully next time you will get lucky.
The world is running out of oil. The CO2 problem will correct itself and your grandchildren will be driving electric cars and you will go one record as the one and only one who flipped a coin and it landed standing straight up; neither heads nor tails
-

Being an Environmental Engineer I picked the side of scientific fact, not Environmental Wacko bullshit. I have no problem accepting that theory but I have seen no real proof. I am not a climate expert but I am better read on the subject than most people. After retiring from being an Environmental Engineer for 30 years I taught a few college courses in Environmental Science. I researched the topic quite a bit and all I saw was bullshit.

We will run out of oil one day but it is not today. In the meantime it is the cheapest way to provide energy for the soon to be ten billion people on earth. Solar and wind and all that other silly "renewable" crap won't hack it.

There is no real proof that CO2 in the amounts produce by humans have any significant effect on climate change. That is why the wackos have to fabricate data and none of their predictions ever come true.

 

[Flash]

[Q

To prove how wrong you are, I am going to ask for a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...and I am going to ask for it with perfect confidence that nether you...nor anyone else will be able to provide even one single piece of such evidence...

FLASH...if you had picked the right side...and made your choice based on facts, you would be as skeptical as those of us who have actually looked at the science

FLASH...you picked your side based on politics and as a result, have been duped and are playing the part of a useful idiot...

FLASH...think about that when you are not providing a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the AGW hypothesis over natural variability...and think about why there is no such evidence for you to shove in my face...

You may a little confused. I don't accept that AGW scam.