How do we Know Human are Causing Climate Change?

[abu afak]

Here's an interesting excerpt from one of the charts on the link you provided;
...

I provided a HUGE amount of charts: a fair unbiased search term.

co2 temperature - Google Search

www.google.com

Those look pretty damn consistent to any fair observer and Refute Stryder25.

At least the first 30 Confirmed you the Dishonest Cherry-picker you are.
AND Continue to be/do it again!
You got Crushed Flat Earth boy.
And cherry-picking a few more only proves MY point.

And No doubt you're going to see a Picture show below.
Trying to Bury/COMPENSATE the fact with Color and Volume... as Stryder12.5 did in his first group of crayolas.

(thx for the page top)


PS: WHY this warming is DIFFERENT than other 'cycles' (isn't a cycle) is also explained Multiple times in the OP.




`

 

[ding]

FFS people... we are in an ice age and you want the planet to be colder?

Actually, that remains a bit debatable. Per this chart, we may still be in an "inter-glacial"~'warm period', but as the chart shows, for the past half million years about 80-90 percent of the time spent in either trans-glacial (that 30-20 degree band) easing into or jumping out of the glacials=Ice Ages, or actually in a glacial=ice age.

Some of those warmer "inter-glacials" a bit short lived, about 5,000 years or so, and others a bit longer in the 20-40,000 years or so. At the present, we've been in one of about 12-15,000 years duration, depending when and whom is doing the counting. But we could easily be on the verge of a decline and sometimes the drop can happen within a life-time, century or so.
Climate Crash

Climate Crash: Abrupt Climate Change and What It Means …

As scientists carefully search for clues in the sun and…

www.goodreads.com

Notice also that per this graph, three of the past four "inter-glacial" warm periods show temperatures that were higher~warmer than what the world is experiencing now.

However, your point is one for concern, as if we aren't careful and engage too much poorly conceived geo-engineering to counter the hypothesis of ACC/AGW we could trigger that sudden and rapid descent into another glaciation~ice age.

The term ice age can refer to the period from ~2.7 million years ago until today which is when the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet. There have actually been ~30 glacial / intergalcial cycles since that time. The term ice age can also refer to a glacial cycle during the present ice age which is how you took it. But I am really talking about is the bigger picture of how our planet is currently configured for bipolar glaciation. It is literally idiotic to want to reduce atmospheric CO2 and make the planet colder.

Most people think there have only been 4 glacial cycles or so but those are just the major ones of the past 400,000 years. Clearly the trend has been towards bigger and more severe glacial cycles. But they began happening ~2.7 million years ago. It coincided with the planet becoming susceptible to bipolar glaciation which is a new thing for the planet. The background conditions which led to it are isolated polar regions from the warmer marine waters, rise of panama isthmus, rise of the Himalayan mountains and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. Extensive continental glaciation occurs at the south pole at ~600 ppm and 280 ppm at the north pole. The different thresholds of glaciation is because the south pole has a continent parked on top of it whereas the north pole has an ocean which is mostly isolated from the warmer marine currents. So it's harder for ice to form at the north pole than it is the south pole. Not surprisingly, it is the northern hemisphere glaciation which drives the climate of the earth.

Since becoming an ice house planet ~2.7 million years ago temperature swings have become more drastic and more frequent. The planet is poised to become cold. The planet is not poised to become hot.

 

[ding]

Here's an interesting excerpt from one of the charts on the link you provided;
...

I provided a HUGE amount of charts: a fair unbiased search term.

co2 temperature - Google Search

www.google.com

At least the first 30 Confirmed you the Dishonest Cherry-picker you are.
AND Continue to be/do it again!
You got Crushed Flat Earth boy.
And cherry-picking a few more only proves MY point.

(thx for the page top)



`

Let's talk climate, dude. Why you keep running away?

 

[ding]

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/what-did-the-continents-look-like-millions-of-years-ago/279892/

 

[Stryder50]

Here's an interesting excerpt from one of the charts on the link you provided;
...

I provided a HUGE amount of charts: a fair unbiased search term.

co2 temperature - Google Search

www.google.com

At least the first 30 Confirmed you the Dishonest Cherry-picker you are.
AND Continue to be/do it again!
You got Crushed Flat Earth boy.
And cherry-picking a few more only proves MY point.

(thx for the page top)



`

A "HUGE amount of charts " from a range of sources and biases.
Actual, #24 (of those first 30) is this which I've provided a couple of times;

From: https://www.researchgate.net/figure...llion-years-Source-MacRae-2008_fig1_280548391

Only one "crushed" is you by your ignorance, or delusions.
FWIW, I'm just the opposite of "Flat Earth boy " since I'm the one whom advocates that Earth is not a good metric for exobiology as being the only example of plate tectonics and near co-planetary orbiting satellite puts our wold in a very unique category. Such as the tidal hydrosphere with tidal based biosphere making such things like geoducs possible and a hot connoisseur item on Rigel 7 and Alpha-Centauri B 3.

Meanwhile you fail to prove how one molecule's IR retention cause the other 2,499 molecules in ratio to also become warmer. You may want to refresh on basic sciences and maths.

As for: "(thx for the page top)" ~ anything to help you show how much a fool and flop you are.

 

[Stryder50]

FFS people... we are in an ice age and you want the planet to be colder?

Actually, that remains a bit debatable. Per this chart, we may still be in an "inter-glacial"~'warm period', but as the chart shows, for the past half million years about 80-90 percent of the time spent in either trans-glacial (that 30-20 degree band) easing into or jumping out of the glacials=Ice Ages, or actually in a glacial=ice age.

Some of those warmer "inter-glacials" a bit short lived, about 5,000 years or so, and others a bit longer in the 20-40,000 years or so. At the present, we've been in one of about 12-15,000 years duration, depending when and whom is doing the counting. But we could easily be on the verge of a decline and sometimes the drop can happen within a life-time, century or so.
Climate Crash

Climate Crash: Abrupt Climate Change and What It Means …

As scientists carefully search for clues in the sun and…

www.goodreads.com

Notice also that per this graph, three of the past four "inter-glacial" warm periods show temperatures that were higher~warmer than what the world is experiencing now.

However, your point is one for concern, as if we aren't careful and engage too much poorly conceived geo-engineering to counter the hypothesis of ACC/AGW we could trigger that sudden and rapid descent into another glaciation~ice age.

The term ice age can refer to the period from ~2.7 million years ago until today which is when the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet. There have actually been ~30 glacial / intergalcial cycles since that time. The term ice age can also refer to a glacial cycle during the present ice age which is how you took it. But I am really talking about is the bigger picture of how our planet is currently configured for bipolar glaciation. It is literally idiotic to want to reduce atmospheric CO2 and make the planet colder.

Most people think there have only been 4 glacial cycles or so but those are just the major ones of the past 400,000 years. Clearly the trend has been towards bigger and more severe glacial cycles. But they began happening ~2.7 million years ago. It coincided with the planet becoming susceptible to bipolar glaciation which is a new thing for the planet. The background conditions which led to it are isolated polar regions from the warmer marine waters, rise of panama isthmus, rise of the Himalayan mountains and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. Extensive continental glaciation occurs at the south pole at ~600 ppm and 280 ppm at the north pole. The different thresholds of glaciation is because the south pole has a continent parked on top of it whereas the north pole has an ocean which is mostly isolated from the warmer marine currents. So it's harder for ice to form at the north pole than it is the south pole. Not surprisingly, it is the northern hemisphere glaciation which drives the climate of the earth.

Since becoming an ice house planet ~2.7 million years ago temperature swings have become more drastic and more frequent. The planet is poised to become cold. The planet is not poised to become hot.

OK ~ Given that context I see what you meant and agree totally.
It's that undercurrent of warmer water at the North Pole which makes for a thin ice sheet which the USS Nautilus, first USN nuclear powered submarine, was able to punch through back about 1954ish.

Not only has Earth's surface~continents been in continual flux~change over the past 4+ billion years, but so has the corresponding atmosphere and climates.
...
Second atmosphere

Outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids, produced the next atmosphere, consisting largely of nitrogen plus carbon dioxide and inert gases.[41] A major part of carbon-dioxide emissions dissolved in water and reacted with metals such as calcium and magnesium during weathering of crustal rocks to form carbonates that were deposited as sediments. Water-related sediments have been found that date from as early as 3.8 billion years ago.[42]

About 3.4 billion years ago, nitrogen formed the major part of the then stable "second atmosphere". The influence of life has to be taken into account rather soon in the history of the atmosphere, because hints of early life-forms appear as early as 3.5 billion years ago.[43] How Earth at that time maintained a climate warm enough for liquid water and life, if the early Sun put out 30% lower solar radiance than today, is a puzzle known as the "faint young Sun paradox".

The geological record however shows a continuous relatively warm surface during the complete early temperature record of Earth – with the exception of one cold glacial phase about 2.4 billion years ago. In the late Archean Eon an oxygen-containing atmosphere began to develop, apparently produced by photosynthesizing cyanobacteria (see Great Oxygenation Event), which have been found as stromatolite fossils from 2.7 billion years ago. The early basic carbon isotopy (isotope ratio proportions) strongly suggests conditions similar to the current, and that the fundamental features of the carbon cycle became established as early as 4 billion years ago.

Ancient sediments in the Gabon dating from between about 2.15 and 2.08 billion years ago provide a record of Earth's dynamic oxygenation evolution. These fluctuations in oxygenation were likely driven by the Lomagundi carbon isotope excursion.[44]
...

Atmosphere of Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Stryder50]

https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...nents-look-like-millions-of-years-ago/279892/

EXCELLENT graphic showing how Earth has transitioned over the eons.
I'll try to remember to "quote" again later so you can have those "top of the page" honors.

 

[ding]

FFS people... we are in an ice age and you want the planet to be colder?

Actually, that remains a bit debatable. Per this chart, we may still be in an "inter-glacial"~'warm period', but as the chart shows, for the past half million years about 80-90 percent of the time spent in either trans-glacial (that 30-20 degree band) easing into or jumping out of the glacials=Ice Ages, or actually in a glacial=ice age.

Some of those warmer "inter-glacials" a bit short lived, about 5,000 years or so, and others a bit longer in the 20-40,000 years or so. At the present, we've been in one of about 12-15,000 years duration, depending when and whom is doing the counting. But we could easily be on the verge of a decline and sometimes the drop can happen within a life-time, century or so.
Climate Crash

Climate Crash: Abrupt Climate Change and What It Means …

As scientists carefully search for clues in the sun and…

www.goodreads.com

Notice also that per this graph, three of the past four "inter-glacial" warm periods show temperatures that were higher~warmer than what the world is experiencing now.

However, your point is one for concern, as if we aren't careful and engage too much poorly conceived geo-engineering to counter the hypothesis of ACC/AGW we could trigger that sudden and rapid descent into another glaciation~ice age.

The term ice age can refer to the period from ~2.7 million years ago until today which is when the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet. There have actually been ~30 glacial / intergalcial cycles since that time. The term ice age can also refer to a glacial cycle during the present ice age which is how you took it. But I am really talking about is the bigger picture of how our planet is currently configured for bipolar glaciation. It is literally idiotic to want to reduce atmospheric CO2 and make the planet colder.

Most people think there have only been 4 glacial cycles or so but those are just the major ones of the past 400,000 years. Clearly the trend has been towards bigger and more severe glacial cycles. But they began happening ~2.7 million years ago. It coincided with the planet becoming susceptible to bipolar glaciation which is a new thing for the planet. The background conditions which led to it are isolated polar regions from the warmer marine waters, rise of panama isthmus, rise of the Himalayan mountains and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. Extensive continental glaciation occurs at the south pole at ~600 ppm and 280 ppm at the north pole. The different thresholds of glaciation is because the south pole has a continent parked on top of it whereas the north pole has an ocean which is mostly isolated from the warmer marine currents. So it's harder for ice to form at the north pole than it is the south pole. Not surprisingly, it is the northern hemisphere glaciation which drives the climate of the earth.

Since becoming an ice house planet ~2.7 million years ago temperature swings have become more drastic and more frequent. The planet is poised to become cold. The planet is not poised to become hot.

OK ~ Given that context I see what you meant and agree totally.
It's that undercurrent of warmer water at the North Pole which makes for a thin ice sheet which the USS Nautilus, first USN nuclear powered submarine, was able to punch through back about 1954ish.

Not only has Earth's surface~continents been in continual flux~change over the past 4+ billion years, but so has the corresponding atmosphere and climates.
...
Second atmosphere

Outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids, produced the next atmosphere, consisting largely of nitrogen plus carbon dioxide and inert gases.[41] A major part of carbon-dioxide emissions dissolved in water and reacted with metals such as calcium and magnesium during weathering of crustal rocks to form carbonates that were deposited as sediments. Water-related sediments have been found that date from as early as 3.8 billion years ago.[42]

About 3.4 billion years ago, nitrogen formed the major part of the then stable "second atmosphere". The influence of life has to be taken into account rather soon in the history of the atmosphere, because hints of early life-forms appear as early as 3.5 billion years ago.[43] How Earth at that time maintained a climate warm enough for liquid water and life, if the early Sun put out 30% lower solar radiance than today, is a puzzle known as the "faint young Sun paradox".

The geological record however shows a continuous relatively warm surface during the complete early temperature record of Earth – with the exception of one cold glacial phase about 2.4 billion years ago. In the late Archean Eon an oxygen-containing atmosphere began to develop, apparently produced by photosynthesizing cyanobacteria (see Great Oxygenation Event), which have been found as stromatolite fossils from 2.7 billion years ago. The early basic carbon isotopy (isotope ratio proportions) strongly suggests conditions similar to the current, and that the fundamental features of the carbon cycle became established as early as 4 billion years ago.

Ancient sediments in the Gabon dating from between about 2.15 and 2.08 billion years ago provide a record of Earth's dynamic oxygenation evolution. These fluctuations in oxygenation were likely driven by the Lomagundi carbon isotope excursion.[44]
...

Atmosphere of Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here's a good graphic you can use to illustrate the point.

 

[Sunsettommy]

FFS people... we are in an ice age and you want the planet to be colder?

Actually, that remains a bit debatable. Per this chart, we may still be in an "inter-glacial"~'warm period', but as the chart shows, for the past half million years about 80-90 percent of the time spent in either trans-glacial (that 30-20 degree band) easing into or jumping out of the glacials=Ice Ages, or actually in a glacial=ice age.

Some of those warmer "inter-glacials" a bit short lived, about 5,000 years or so, and others a bit longer in the 20-40,000 years or so. At the present, we've been in one of about 12-15,000 years duration, depending when and whom is doing the counting. But we could easily be on the verge of a decline and sometimes the drop can happen within a life-time, century or so.
Climate Crash

Climate Crash: Abrupt Climate Change and What It Means …

As scientists carefully search for clues in the sun and…

www.goodreads.com

Notice also that per this graph, three of the past four "inter-glacial" warm periods show temperatures that were higher~warmer than what the world is experiencing now.

However, your point is one for concern, as if we aren't careful and engage too much poorly conceived geo-engineering to counter the hypothesis of ACC/AGW we could trigger that sudden and rapid descent into another glaciation~ice age.

The term ice age can refer to the period from ~2.7 million years ago until today which is when the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet. There have actually been ~30 glacial / intergalcial cycles since that time. The term ice age can also refer to a glacial cycle during the present ice age which is how you took it. But I am really talking about is the bigger picture of how our planet is currently configured for bipolar glaciation. It is literally idiotic to want to reduce atmospheric CO2 and make the planet colder.

Most people think there have only been 4 glacial cycles or so but those are just the major ones of the past 400,000 years. Clearly the trend has been towards bigger and more severe glacial cycles. But they began happening ~2.7 million years ago. It coincided with the planet becoming susceptible to bipolar glaciation which is a new thing for the planet. The background conditions which led to it are isolated polar regions from the warmer marine waters, rise of panama isthmus, rise of the Himalayan mountains and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. Extensive continental glaciation occurs at the south pole at ~600 ppm and 280 ppm at the north pole. The different thresholds of glaciation is because the south pole has a continent parked on top of it whereas the north pole has an ocean which is mostly isolated from the warmer marine currents. So it's harder for ice to form at the north pole than it is the south pole. Not surprisingly, it is the northern hemisphere glaciation which drives the climate of the earth.

Since becoming an ice house planet ~2.7 million years ago temperature swings have become more drastic and more frequent. The planet is poised to become cold. The planet is not poised to become hot.

OK ~ Given that context I see what you meant and agree totally.
It's that undercurrent of warmer water at the North Pole which makes for a thin ice sheet which the USS Nautilus, first USN nuclear powered submarine, was able to punch through back about 1954ish.

Not only has Earth's surface~continents been in continual flux~change over the past 4+ billion years, but so has the corresponding atmosphere and climates.
...
Second atmosphere

Outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids, produced the next atmosphere, consisting largely of nitrogen plus carbon dioxide and inert gases.[41] A major part of carbon-dioxide emissions dissolved in water and reacted with metals such as calcium and magnesium during weathering of crustal rocks to form carbonates that were deposited as sediments. Water-related sediments have been found that date from as early as 3.8 billion years ago.[42]

About 3.4 billion years ago, nitrogen formed the major part of the then stable "second atmosphere". The influence of life has to be taken into account rather soon in the history of the atmosphere, because hints of early life-forms appear as early as 3.5 billion years ago.[43] How Earth at that time maintained a climate warm enough for liquid water and life, if the early Sun put out 30% lower solar radiance than today, is a puzzle known as the "faint young Sun paradox".

The geological record however shows a continuous relatively warm surface during the complete early temperature record of Earth – with the exception of one cold glacial phase about 2.4 billion years ago. In the late Archean Eon an oxygen-containing atmosphere began to develop, apparently produced by photosynthesizing cyanobacteria (see Great Oxygenation Event), which have been found as stromatolite fossils from 2.7 billion years ago. The early basic carbon isotopy (isotope ratio proportions) strongly suggests conditions similar to the current, and that the fundamental features of the carbon cycle became established as early as 4 billion years ago.

Ancient sediments in the Gabon dating from between about 2.15 and 2.08 billion years ago provide a record of Earth's dynamic oxygenation evolution. These fluctuations in oxygenation were likely driven by the Lomagundi carbon isotope excursion.[44]
...

Atmosphere of Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here's a good graphic you can use to illustrate the point.

View attachment 461888

The arctic ocean is slated to mostly disappear in the future as the Canadian North will cover the region, then a similar permanent ice field will develop causing a probable permanent glaciation situation.

 

[abu afak]

Here's an interesting excerpt from one of the charts on the link you provided;
...

I provided a HUGE amount of charts: a fair unbiased search term.

co2 temperature - Google Search

www.google.com

At least the first 30 Confirmed you the Dishonest Cherry-picker you are.
AND Continue to be/do it again!
You got Crushed Flat Earth boy.
And cherry-picking a few more only proves MY point.

(thx for the page top)



`

A "HUGE amount of charts " from a range of sources and biases.
Actual, #24 (of those first 30) is this which I've provided a couple of times;

From: https://www.researchgate.net/figure...llion-years-Source-MacRae-2008_fig1_280548391

Only one "crushed" is you by your ignorance, or delusions.
FWIW, I'm just the opposite of "Flat Earth boy " since I'm the one whom advocates that Earth is not a good metric for exobiology as being the only example of plate tectonics and near co-planetary orbiting satellite puts our wold in a very unique category. Such as the tidal hydrosphere with tidal based biosphere making such things like geoducs possible and a hot connoisseur item on Rigel 7 and Alpha-Centauri B 3.

Meanwhile you fail to prove how one molecule's IR retention cause the other 2,499 molecules in ratio to also become warmer. You may want to refresh on basic sciences and maths.

As for: "(thx for the page top)" ~ anything to help you show how much a fool and flop you are.

So 29 out of 30 agree with AGW, not that the one you CHERRY PICKED doesn't.

You used the 'Berner' graph which is Not in conflict with current climate warming theory.

​

Yale Obit: "...Arguably his broadest impact has been in the area of carbon cycling. For example, Bob spearheaded the quantitative interpretation of the CO2 content of the atmosphere over the last 600 million years of Earth history. His work provided the basis for virtually all modern carbon cycling research going on today. This understanding of past CO2 levels and paleoclimates has provided an invaluable baseline of comparison for determining the impact of today’s anthropogenic CO2 emissions on the atmosphere and the associated climate change.”.."​

In memoriam: Robert Berner, a ‘giant of geology’​

That would be the same Yale in the OP!
Global warming isn't just a natural cycle » Yale Climate Connections


What you stupidly or disingenuously picked was a scaling error.
A 600 Million year old graph to look at whether the CO2/GHGs from the 150 yr old Industrial revolution affected climate of the last thousands, tens/hundreds of Thousands!
Like looking at a long distance astronomical photo of earth to decide if people are dying of bee stings in the 21st Century.
A huge non-analogous comparison that doesn't show all the other Major conditions that affected temp over hundreds of millions of years: now irrelevant.

Like the two IDIOTIC posts of 'ding,' with' continental drift. (YOU thanked)
That does NOT go to CO2 or other GHGs warming the climate in the last century+.
It's Numb Nuts/Irrelevant unless I was claiming there are/were NO other factors in warming.. ever!

That's why we can see the Co2 (other GHG) fantastic correlation on shorter scale/more analogous graphs of OUR age and those closer. The other 29 of 30 graphs (You ***hole).

That answers you, Ding-bat and Tommy.

I must say Stryder6.25, since you aren't ignorant, you must understand the above, and see the overwhelming evidence of the Google Link Graphs, that you are being DISHONEST for argument sake (not ignorant) because you're a RW Partisan Hack/Blinded.
But you're not smart enough to pull it off against me.

Gameover #8476.

`

 

[ding]

FFS people... we are in an ice age and you want the planet to be colder?

Actually, that remains a bit debatable. Per this chart, we may still be in an "inter-glacial"~'warm period', but as the chart shows, for the past half million years about 80-90 percent of the time spent in either trans-glacial (that 30-20 degree band) easing into or jumping out of the glacials=Ice Ages, or actually in a glacial=ice age.

Some of those warmer "inter-glacials" a bit short lived, about 5,000 years or so, and others a bit longer in the 20-40,000 years or so. At the present, we've been in one of about 12-15,000 years duration, depending when and whom is doing the counting. But we could easily be on the verge of a decline and sometimes the drop can happen within a life-time, century or so.
Climate Crash

Climate Crash: Abrupt Climate Change and What It Means …

As scientists carefully search for clues in the sun and…

www.goodreads.com

Notice also that per this graph, three of the past four "inter-glacial" warm periods show temperatures that were higher~warmer than what the world is experiencing now.

However, your point is one for concern, as if we aren't careful and engage too much poorly conceived geo-engineering to counter the hypothesis of ACC/AGW we could trigger that sudden and rapid descent into another glaciation~ice age.

The term ice age can refer to the period from ~2.7 million years ago until today which is when the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet. There have actually been ~30 glacial / intergalcial cycles since that time. The term ice age can also refer to a glacial cycle during the present ice age which is how you took it. But I am really talking about is the bigger picture of how our planet is currently configured for bipolar glaciation. It is literally idiotic to want to reduce atmospheric CO2 and make the planet colder.

Most people think there have only been 4 glacial cycles or so but those are just the major ones of the past 400,000 years. Clearly the trend has been towards bigger and more severe glacial cycles. But they began happening ~2.7 million years ago. It coincided with the planet becoming susceptible to bipolar glaciation which is a new thing for the planet. The background conditions which led to it are isolated polar regions from the warmer marine waters, rise of panama isthmus, rise of the Himalayan mountains and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. Extensive continental glaciation occurs at the south pole at ~600 ppm and 280 ppm at the north pole. The different thresholds of glaciation is because the south pole has a continent parked on top of it whereas the north pole has an ocean which is mostly isolated from the warmer marine currents. So it's harder for ice to form at the north pole than it is the south pole. Not surprisingly, it is the northern hemisphere glaciation which drives the climate of the earth.

Since becoming an ice house planet ~2.7 million years ago temperature swings have become more drastic and more frequent. The planet is poised to become cold. The planet is not poised to become hot.

OK ~ Given that context I see what you meant and agree totally.
It's that undercurrent of warmer water at the North Pole which makes for a thin ice sheet which the USS Nautilus, first USN nuclear powered submarine, was able to punch through back about 1954ish.

Not only has Earth's surface~continents been in continual flux~change over the past 4+ billion years, but so has the corresponding atmosphere and climates.
...
Second atmosphere

Outgassing from volcanism, supplemented by gases produced during the late heavy bombardment of Earth by huge asteroids, produced the next atmosphere, consisting largely of nitrogen plus carbon dioxide and inert gases.[41] A major part of carbon-dioxide emissions dissolved in water and reacted with metals such as calcium and magnesium during weathering of crustal rocks to form carbonates that were deposited as sediments. Water-related sediments have been found that date from as early as 3.8 billion years ago.[42]

About 3.4 billion years ago, nitrogen formed the major part of the then stable "second atmosphere". The influence of life has to be taken into account rather soon in the history of the atmosphere, because hints of early life-forms appear as early as 3.5 billion years ago.[43] How Earth at that time maintained a climate warm enough for liquid water and life, if the early Sun put out 30% lower solar radiance than today, is a puzzle known as the "faint young Sun paradox".

The geological record however shows a continuous relatively warm surface during the complete early temperature record of Earth – with the exception of one cold glacial phase about 2.4 billion years ago. In the late Archean Eon an oxygen-containing atmosphere began to develop, apparently produced by photosynthesizing cyanobacteria (see Great Oxygenation Event), which have been found as stromatolite fossils from 2.7 billion years ago. The early basic carbon isotopy (isotope ratio proportions) strongly suggests conditions similar to the current, and that the fundamental features of the carbon cycle became established as early as 4 billion years ago.

Ancient sediments in the Gabon dating from between about 2.15 and 2.08 billion years ago provide a record of Earth's dynamic oxygenation evolution. These fluctuations in oxygenation were likely driven by the Lomagundi carbon isotope excursion.[44]
...

Atmosphere of Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Here's a good graphic you can use to illustrate the point.

View attachment 461888

The arctic ocean is slated to mostly disappear in the future as the Canadian North will cover the region, then a similar permanent ice field will develop causing a probable permanent glaciation situation.

Yep, it's going to get colder.

 

[ding]

Here's an interesting excerpt from one of the charts on the link you provided;
...

I provided a HUGE amount of charts: a fair unbiased search term.

co2 temperature - Google Search

www.google.com

At least the first 30 Confirmed you the Dishonest Cherry-picker you are.
AND Continue to be/do it again!
You got Crushed Flat Earth boy.
And cherry-picking a few more only proves MY point.

(thx for the page top)



`

A "HUGE amount of charts " from a range of sources and biases.
Actual, #24 (of those first 30) is this which I've provided a couple of times;

From: https://www.researchgate.net/figure...llion-years-Source-MacRae-2008_fig1_280548391

Only one "crushed" is you by your ignorance, or delusions.
FWIW, I'm just the opposite of "Flat Earth boy " since I'm the one whom advocates that Earth is not a good metric for exobiology as being the only example of plate tectonics and near co-planetary orbiting satellite puts our wold in a very unique category. Such as the tidal hydrosphere with tidal based biosphere making such things like geoducs possible and a hot connoisseur item on Rigel 7 and Alpha-Centauri B 3.

Meanwhile you fail to prove how one molecule's IR retention cause the other 2,499 molecules in ratio to also become warmer. You may want to refresh on basic sciences and maths.

As for: "(thx for the page top)" ~ anything to help you show how much a fool and flop you are.

So 29 out of 30 agree with AGW, not that the one you CHERRY PICKED doesn't.

You used the 'Berner' graph which is Not in conflict with current climate warming theory.

​

Yale Obit: "...Arguably his broadest impact has been in the area of carbon cycling. For example, Bob spearheaded the quantitative interpretation of the CO2 content of the atmosphere over the last 600 million years of Earth history. His work provided the basis for virtually all modern carbon cycling research going on today. This understanding of past CO2 levels and paleoclimates has provided an invaluable baseline of comparison for determining the impact of today’s anthropogenic CO2 emissions on the atmosphere and the associated climate change.”.."​

In memoriam: Robert Berner, a ‘giant of geology’​

That would be the same Yale in the OP!
Global warming isn't just a natural cycle » Yale Climate Connections


What you stupidly or disingenuously picked was a scaling error.
A 600 Million year old graph to look at whether the CO2/GHGs from the 150 yr old Industrial revolution affected climate of the last thousands, tens/hundreds of Thousands!
Like looking at a long distance astronomical photo of earth to decide if people are dying of bee stings in the 21st Century.
A huge non-analogous comparison that doesn't show all the other Major conditions that affected temp over hundreds of millions of years: now irrelevant.

Like the two IDIOTIC posts of 'ding,' with' continental drift. (YOU thanked)
That does NOT go to CO2 or other GHGs warming the climate in the last century+.
It's Numb Nuts/Irrelevant unless I was claiming there are/were NO other factors in warming.. ever!

That's why we can see the Co2 (other GHG) fantastic correlation on shorter scale/more analogous graphs of OUR age and those closer. The other 29 of 30 graphs (You ***hole).

That answers you, Ding-bat and Tommy.

I must say Stryder6.25, since you aren't ignorant, you must understand the above, and see the overwhelming evidence of the Google Link Graphs, that you are being DISHONEST for argument sake (not ignorant) because you're a RW Partisan Hack/Blinded.
But you're not smart enough to pull it off against me.

Gameover #8476.

`

Hey dummy, CO2 has never driven climate change and the earth is uniquely configured to be colder. That's why you don't want to debate me heads up. In 50 years you will be arguing you knew all along the real risk was a colder planet.

 

[ding]

Let's talk climate abu afak

 

[ding]

abu afak you seem to be losing the debate on climate. Would you like to tell me more about computer simulations?

Speaking of computer simulations? What atmospheric CO2 concentration does extensive continental glaciation occur at at the south and north poles and why aren't the thresholds the same? Hmmmmm?

 

[ding]

abu afak why does the coldest average temperature of the planet occur when the south pole receives the most sunlight?

Hmmm? Do you know?

 

[ding]

abu afak why has there been increased climate fluctuation over the last 2.7 million years?

Do you know?

 

[ding]

abu afak ? Are you still there?

 

[San Souci]

so many clowns, new and old here, say it's all natural
"it goes up, it goes down"
but scientists have actually looked into WHY this cycle is different than the others.

About 615,000,000 results (0.30 seconds)
Search Results
Web results

How We Know Today's Climate Change Is Not Natural
https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2017/04/.../how-we-know-climate-change-is-not-natural/Apr 4, 2017 - Last week, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, chaired by climate contrarian Lamar Smith, R-Texas, held a hearing on ...

How do we know global warming is not a natural cycle? | Climate ...
www.climatecentral.org/library/faqs/how_do_we_know_it_is_not_a_natural_cycleNov 7, 2009 - Answer. If the Earth's temperature had been steady for millions of years and only started rising in the past half century or so, the answer would ...

How do we know? - Evidence | Facts – Climate Change: Vital Signs of ...
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. ...Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up .... the Earth's natural greenhouse effect and suggested that slight changes in the ...

Human fingerprints on climate change rule out natural cycles
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-natural-cycle.htmHowever, internal forces do not cause climate change. ... and oceanic emissions of CO2 and know that they are small compared to anthropogenic emissions, but ...
[.....]
How Do We Know Humans Are Causing Climate Change? | Climate ...
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/.../how-do-we-know-humans-are-causing-climat...Feb 1, 2019 - Yes, we know humans are responsible for the climate changewe see ... as if we're wrapping another, not-so-natural blanket around the Earth.

Global warming isn't just a natural cycle » Yale Climate Connections
https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/.../global-warming-isnt-just-a-natural-cycle/Sep 18, 2018 - Here's how we know that. ... Global warming isn't just anatural cycle. By Sara Peach on Sep ... The earth's temperature changesnaturally over time. Variations ... Earth's warming: How scientists know it'snot the sun. From Yale ...

How Do We Know that Humans Are the Major Cause of Global ...
https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science.../human-contribution-to-gw-faq.htmlJump to Natural and human factors that influence the climate (known as ...- Natural climate drivers include the energy ... in snow and ice cover thatchange how much ... if it were not for these human-made and natural tiny particles.

[.....]
`

Since there is no such thing ,who cares?

 

[Rambunctious]

 

[Flash]

The reason we know for certain that there is no AGW is because the idiot climate scientists that are saying there is have made up data. Blatant fraudulent data manipulation.