Historically, no Antarctic ice shelf when CO2 is above 400 ppm

[ReinyDays]

It's a well known FACT that computers don't run when CO2 is below 300 ppm ... the internet crashes under natural atmospheric conditions .,..

 

[ding]

The OP is blatantly incorrect. Total rubbish. He doesn't know the difference between the Arctic and the Antarctic. So dumb.

OP claims Historically, no Antarctic ice shelf when CO2 is above 400 ppm​

Nope.

 

[Crick]

No one has records from 45 million years ago you idiot.

Is that why you've rejected the existence of the dinosaurs and the entire field of paleonotology? Of course we have records.

 

[miketx]

Is that why you've rejected the existence of the dinosaurs and the entire field of paleonotology? Of course we have records.

You're the biggest gd liar here. There are NO records from that long ago you imbecile.

 

[bripat9643]

An examination of the temperature and CO2 record back to 45 million years indicates that CO2 levels above 400 ppm will not allow the continued existence of the Antarctic ice shelves. The loss of those shelves, even without a catastrophic collapse of the WAIS, will facilitate an enormous movement of land-based glacial ice into the seas raising global sea level by tens of feet.

Our Atmospheric CO2 is now past the point that in the Deep Past has Meant the Melting of the Antarctic Ice Sheets

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) - So as a historian, I am particularly interested in what the past tells us about the present. I've taught courses on climate change in history. But of course my kind of history doesn't go back very far from the point of view of physical scientists. The academic...

www.juancole.com

The temperature record shows no correlation with C02 concentration.

 

[bripat9643]

You're the biggest gd liar here. There are NO records from that long ago you imbecile.

He believes the temperatures they infer from certain mineral concentrations constitute a temperature record.

 

[ReinyDays]

You're the biggest gd liar here. There are NO records from that long ago you imbecile.

The first human records were accounting documents from ≈ 6,000 BP ... temperature has to wait for the scientifically accurate thermometers ≈ 300 BP ...

He is the biggest liar ... for sure ... he really is smart enough to know better ... not lazy, just a LIAR ...

 

[Crick]

You're the biggest gd liar here. There are NO records from that long ago you imbecile.

Are you really this stupid? As BriPat told you, scientists are able to determine temperatures from ratios of certain chemical components laid down in sedimentary rock. Did you never wonder where all those diagrams of temperature you see on this forum, going back hundreds of millons of years, come from? Did you actually think I was claiming someone had a thermometer and was writing the daily temps down in a big book?

 

[bripat9643]

Are you really this stupid? As BriPat told you, scientists are able to determine temperatures from ratios of certain chemical components laid down in sedimentary rock. Did you never wonder where all those diagrams of temperature you see on this forum, going back hundreds of millons of years, come from? Did you actually think I was claiming someone had a thermometer and was writing the daily temps down in a big book?

Those diagrams showing the temperatures from millions of years ago don't support AGW theory.

 

[jc456]

Is that why you've rejected the existence of the dinosaurs and the entire field of paleonotology? Of course we have records.

 

[miketx]

Are you really this stupid? As BriPat told you, scientists are able to determine temperatures from ratios of certain chemical components laid down in sedimentary rock. Did you never wonder where all those diagrams of temperature you see on this forum, going back hundreds of millons of years, come from? Did you actually think I was claiming someone had a thermometer and was writing the daily temps down in a big book?

Now the liar changes his story. First you said records from 45 million years ago.

 

[ReinyDays]

Are you really this stupid? As BriPat told you, scientists are able to determine temperatures from ratios of certain chemical components laid down in sedimentary rock. Did you never wonder where all those diagrams of temperature you see on this forum, going back hundreds of millons of years, come from? Did you actually think I was claiming someone had a thermometer and was writing the daily temps down in a big book?

Wrong ... liar ... scientists use "blah blah blah" as PROXIES of temperature ... they never say "determined" ... that claim is reserved for scientifically accurate direct measure ... should I be afraid to go near anything you've engineered? ...

 

[Crick]

Wrong ... liar ... scientists use "blah blah blah" as PROXIES of temperature ... they never say "determined" ... that claim is reserved for scientifically accurate direct measure ... should I be afraid to go near anything you've engineered? ...

Yes, be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

Do you not realize when you try to make a huge stink out of a nothingburger like that, that it only makes you look desperately unable to produce a real argument to the point under discussion. I will give you that "determine" was the wrong word to use. "Estimate" would have been more accurate. But that certainly didn't justify "liar" and I personally think the overreaction makes you look like quite the asshole.

 

[ReinyDays]

Yes, be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

Do you not realize when you try to make a huge stink out of a nothingburger like that, that it only makes you look desperately unable to produce a real argument to the point under discussion. I will give you that "determine" was the wrong word to use. "Estimate" would have been more accurate. But that certainly didn't justify "liar" and I personally think the overreaction makes you look like quite the asshole.

LIAR is based on the volume of misinformation you post here ... no quarter stupid motherfucker ...

 

[Crick]

LIAR is based on the volume of misinformation you post here ... no quarter stupid motherfucker ...

Your call. But I guess you've probably built up some tolerance considering how many people must hold opinions of you similar to the one I'm beginning to develop.

Look out now, here comes some of my famous misinformation. Of course, the one I really want to read this is poster miketx.

How Do Scientists Study Ancient Climates?

Paleoclimatologists study ancient climates by looking for clues in Earth’s natural environmental records.

www.ncei.noaa.gov

Paleoclimatology | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

NCEI manages the world's largest archive of climate and paleoclimatology data. Our mission is to preserve and make this data and information available in order to understand and model environmental variability on an interannual to millennial time scale. The Paleoclimatology team operates the...

www.ncei.noaa.gov

Paleoclimatology - Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Understanding how climate naturally varied over thousands and millions of years teaches us how Earth’s climate system works and sheds light on current, human-induced changes.

www.whoi.edu

Paleoclimatology: Climate Proxies

Created by Monica Bruckner, Montana State University. What is Paleoclimatology? Paleoclimatology is the study of past climates. Since it is not possible to go back in time to see what climates were like, ...

serc.carleton.edu

Investigating Past Climates | Center for Science Education

To understand how and why the climate has changed in the past scientists study evidence such as ice cores, coral reefs, and more. Learn about different types of paleoclimate proxies and how they tell the story of Earth's past climate.

scied.ucar.edu

Paleoclimatology - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Methods for Determining Past Climates - Lesson | Study.com

Paleoclimatology is the study of climate change throughout history. Explore scientists' methods for determining past climates, such as studying ice...

study.com

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[Crick]

Now the liar changes his story. First you said records from 45 million years ago.

And now I'm saying from hundreds of millions of years. Are we confused?

 

[Crick]

Those diagrams showing the temperatures from millions of years ago don't support AGW theory.

Neither I nor the article linked in the OP said they did. What the study shows is that the paleoclimatic RECORD shows that for the last 45 million years, any time CO2 got above 400 ppm, the Antarctic ice shelf disappeared. This would be a comment about the effects of increasing GHGs and the warming they cause, not an attempt to support the greenhouse effect (cause it doesn't need support) or that we are warming (cause that's undeniable) or that this warming will hurt us (also undeniable, though many fools will try).

 

[ReinyDays]

Your call.

Feel free to STOP replying to my posts ... I really don't want to hear your stupidity ... filthy filthy liar ...

 

[bripat9643]

Neither I nor the article linked in the OP said they did. What the study shows is that the paleoclimatic RECORD shows that for the last 45 million years, any time CO2 got above 400 ppm, the Antarctic ice shelf disappeared. This would be a comment about the effects of increasing GHGs and the warming they cause, not an attempt to support the greenhouse effect (cause it doesn't need support) or that we are warming (cause that's undeniable) or that this warming will hurt us (also undeniable, though many fools will try).

C02 follows temperature. Temperature doesn't cause changes in C02. For 4 billion years C02 hasn't been tracking temperature.

 

[miketx]

And now I'm saying from hundreds of millions of years. Are we confused?

not at all, you're just lying.