If you still believe in deadly climate change, this will help you sleep.

[catatomic]

And I'd say Chat GPT gave a great answer though I haven't verified any of this myself!

:

how did the CO2 levels go back down after their peak 50 million years ago?

ChatGPT said:​

Great question! CO₂ levels were indeed much higher during the Eocene Epoch, peaking around 50 million years ago. Since then, they gradually declined. Here's how it happened:

1.​

• Around that time, major tectonic changes occurred — for example, the collision of India with Asia began building the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau.
• Mountain building increases rock weathering, a natural process that pulls CO₂ from the atmosphere.
• Silicate rocks (like granite) react with CO₂ and water to form carbonates, locking the carbon away in sediments.

2.​

• Weathering of uplifted silicate rocks consumes atmospheric CO₂.
• This process increases with warm temperatures and rain — both abundant during the Eocene.
• The byproducts (like bicarbonates) get washed into the oceans and eventually form limestone, sequestering carbon for millions of years.

3.​

• Marine plankton and other organisms use carbon to form calcium carbonate shells.
• When they die, their remains sink to the ocean floor, forming limestone and other sediments, trapping carbon long-term.

4.​

• Over time, volcanic CO₂ emissions decreased.
• Volcanic outgassing is a major long-term source of CO₂, so less volcanism means slower input of CO₂ into the atmosphere.

5.​

• As CO₂ dropped, Earth's climate gradually cooled.
• This led to the formation of polar ice sheets around 34 million years ago (Oligocene), which increased Earth's reflectivity (albedo) and further reinforced cooling.
• Cooler climates further reduced CO₂ through more efficient weathering and biological processes.

---

Want a visual timeline or a breakdown of how this compares to today's CO₂ changes?

 

[ding]

And I'd say Chat GPT gave a great answer though I haven't verified any of this myself!

:

how did the CO2 levels go back down after their peak 50 million years ago?

ChatGPT said:​

Great question! CO₂ levels were indeed much higher during the Eocene Epoch, peaking around 50 million years ago. Since then, they gradually declined. Here's how it happened:

1.​

• Around that time, major tectonic changes occurred — for example, the collision of India with Asia began building the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau.
• Mountain building increases rock weathering, a natural process that pulls CO₂ from the atmosphere.
• Silicate rocks (like granite) react with CO₂ and water to form carbonates, locking the carbon away in sediments.

2.​

• Weathering of uplifted silicate rocks consumes atmospheric CO₂.
• This process increases with warm temperatures and rain — both abundant during the Eocene.
• The byproducts (like bicarbonates) get washed into the oceans and eventually form limestone, sequestering carbon for millions of years.

3.​

• Marine plankton and other organisms use carbon to form calcium carbonate shells.
• When they die, their remains sink to the ocean floor, forming limestone and other sediments, trapping carbon long-term.

4.​

• Over time, volcanic CO₂ emissions decreased.
• Volcanic outgassing is a major long-term source of CO₂, so less volcanism means slower input of CO₂ into the atmosphere.

5.​

• As CO₂ dropped, Earth's climate gradually cooled.
• This led to the formation of polar ice sheets around 34 million years ago (Oligocene), which increased Earth's reflectivity (albedo) and further reinforced cooling.
• Cooler climates further reduced CO₂ through more efficient weathering and biological processes.

---

Want a visual timeline or a breakdown of how this compares to today's CO₂ changes?

The question I asked was if CO2 is so dominant why did the planet cool with elevated levels of CO2.

 

[Sunsettommy]

The question I asked was if CO2 is so dominant why did the planet cool with elevated levels of CO2.

He isn't going to answer it as he is too busy with his education fantasy he is currently on.

 

[catatomic]

The question I asked was if CO2 is so dominant why did the planet cool with elevated levels of CO2.

Because the CO2 went down, and I've explained why the CO2 went down.

 

[ding]

Because the CO2 went down, and I've explained why the CO2 went down.

But atmospheric CO2 decreased because the ocean got colder and absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere. What made the ocean get colder in the first place? Especially with CO2 levels that were far greater than today.

 

[Dr.Destructo]

Prager had an expert detail the crock of crap sold as climate change.
I have said lots of times, if it was happening, you would see this at Death Valley. Why that Valley? Because it holds the world record for heat.

So to help you sleep, watch this video.

...It Must Be Climate Change! | PragerU

What do hurricanes, wildfires, floods, extreme cold, extreme heat, and even airplane turbulence have in common? According to environmental activists, they’re…

www.prageru.com

I don't need to see the video, but I will watch it. They put out some pretty good "bitch slapping" videos of truth.

I don't need no stinkin scientific degree to know this "climate change" is what SANE people call WEATHER!!!

 

[ding]

why the CO2 went down.

No you didn't.

 

[mamooth]

You are just like Mamooth who claims he has a PHD in Physics

Obviously, I never did that.

This is just another example of Tommy's ongoing pathological dishonesty. At this stage, everyone has learned to initially just assume that whatever Tommy says is a lie, unless independent evidence shows otherwise, because experience shows that's almost always the case.

Tommy is a cult parrot, so it doesn't take a Ph.D. in physics to humiliate him. Merely passing freshman physics will give someone enough knowledge to understand how clueless Tommy is on the topic of physics.

Tommy, if you didn't lie about the Ph.D. thing, you can easily demonstrate that you didn't lie, and that I did lie. Just link to where I supposedly said that.

You can run now, cult boi. You always do.

 

[mamooth]

Is 420 ppm of CO2 unprecedented?

Why do you think that question isn't stupid, and that it doesn't make you look like a cult mouthbreather?

Because it does. It uses the "DERP! DERP! Climate changed in the past, so humans can't change climate! DEEEEERRRRRRRRRP!" fallacy.

See what I just did there? I made a point clearly and directly. Not being a gutless cultist, I can do that. Deniers can't. All they can do is deflect and cry.

 

[mamooth]

I see you manage another rebuttal free reply because as many here knows you have been given the official data many times

Can I call it? Yes, I can.

I said tommy would cry and use insults as cover to run away, and he did.

It wasn't a difficult prediction to make, given it's all he ever does.

Tommy is part of hate-cult. He no longer cares at all about the science. He just cares about the hating.

The official data does NOT show a "hot spot", and you know it since you never challenge it factually.

This is such an easy lie to debunk, you have to wonder why Tommy keeps using it.

New study finds a hot spot in the atmosphere | John Abraham

John Abraham: The temperature in the tropical atmosphere is rising roughly 80% faster than at the Earth’s surface

www.theguardian.com

Climate scientists find elusive tropospheric hot spot

Researchers have published results in Environmental Research Letters confirming strong warming in the upper troposphere, known colloquially as the tropospheric hotspot. The hot has been long expected as part of global warming theory and appears in many global climate models.

phys.org

Understanding the significance of the tropospheric hot spot

<p>Satellite measurements match model results apart from in the tropics. There is uncertainty with the tropic data due to how various teams correct for satellite drift. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program conclude the discrepancy is most likely due to data errors.</p>

skepticalscience.com

You know what Tommy will do now. Same thing he always does. Like the brainwashed are ordered to do, he'll claim that any data that contradicts cult teachings is faked. Then he'll repeat his conspiracy theory again, as if it hadn't been debunked over and over. Then he'll scream hatred at anyone who dared contradict his cult teachings with actual science.

Anways, it's the same with every single claim Tommy makes. He'll post propagada from a conspiracy website, and then declare how all the actual science that refutes it is obviously a fraud. That's why we rarely bother refuting him yet another time. What's the point? He'll just ignore the refutation again, and then keep reposting his cult nonsense as gospel truth. At this stage, Tommy is mainly useful as a psychological study in cult brainwashing.

You glossed over the total absence of the Positive Feedback Loop because it has never existed from day one

And by "glossed over", you mean "addressed it directly, causing Tommy to run". Same old same old.

But go on. Tell us. What evidence do you have that no positive feedback occurs. I certainly have evidence the other way. I just point out that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that raises temp, and CO2 solubility in water decreases and temp goes up. Hence, positive feedback.

You know what to do, Tommy. At all costs, avoid addressing what I actually say, because you can't. Just scream insults and run again. Everyone expects that of you, so you won't be disappointing anyone.

 

[mamooth]

The question I asked was if CO2 is so dominant why did the planet cool with elevated levels of CO2.

Orbital cycles, the logarithmic nature of CO2 forcing, and feedback.

Orbital cycles cool the planet a bit. More CO2 goes into the oceans, the planet cools more, and the feedback cycle continues.

This is basic stuff, and all the deniers fail at in completely. They really have no business annoying the grownups.

 

[catatomic]

Enough ding, you just want perpetual argument. I am not scientifically illiterate.

 

[Dorian Mode]

If Climate Change was such a danger, the billionaire elitists pushing it wouldn't be travelling everywhere in private jets. When they start worrying about their carbon emissions, so will I.

 

[catatomic]

If Climate Change was such a danger, the billionaire elitists pushing it wouldn't be travelling everywhere in private jets. When they start worrying about their carbon emissions, so will I.

Dorian, when people say that, I just want to reach out to them and tell them that I love them.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Can I call it? Yes, I can.

I said tommy would cry and use insults as cover to run away, and he did.

It wasn't a difficult prediction to make, given it's all he ever does.

Tommy is part of hate-cult. He no longer cares at all about the science. He just cares about the hating.



This is such an easy lie to debunk, you have to wonder why Tommy keeps using it.

New study finds a hot spot in the atmosphere | John Abraham

John Abraham: The temperature in the tropical atmosphere is rising roughly 80% faster than at the Earth’s surface

www.theguardian.com

Climate scientists find elusive tropospheric hot spot

Researchers have published results in Environmental Research Letters confirming strong warming in the upper troposphere, known colloquially as the tropospheric hotspot. The hot has been long expected as part of global warming theory and appears in many global climate models.

phys.org

Understanding the significance of the tropospheric hot spot

<p>Satellite measurements match model results apart from in the tropics. There is uncertainty with the tropic data due to how various teams correct for satellite drift. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program conclude the discrepancy is most likely due to data errors.</p>

skepticalscience.com

You know what Tommy will do now. Same thing he always does. Like the brainwashed are ordered to do, he'll claim that any data that contradicts cult teachings is faked. Then he'll repeat his conspiracy theory again, as if it hadn't been debunked over and over. Then he'll scream hatred at anyone who dared contradict his cult teachings with actual science.

Anways, it's the same with every single claim Tommy makes. He'll post propagada from a conspiracy website, and then declare how all the actual science that refutes it is obviously a fraud. That's why we rarely bother refuting him yet another time. What's the point? He'll just ignore the refutation again, and then keep reposting his cult nonsense as gospel truth. At this stage, Tommy is mainly useful as a psychological study in cult brainwashing.



And by "glossed over", you mean "addressed it directly, causing Tommy to run". Same old same old.

But go on. Tell us. What evidence do you have that no positive feedback occurs. I certainly have evidence the other way. I just point out that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that raises temp, and CO2 solubility in water decreases and temp goes up. Hence, positive feedback.

You know what to do, Tommy. At all costs, avoid addressing what I actually say, because you can't. Just scream insults and run again. Everyone expects that of you, so you won't be disappointing anyone.

Sherwoods paper was long ago exposed as a failed try to bring in his bogus kridging excercise to rescue the Hot spot which doesn't show on actual satellite data sets while the NOAA and NASA doesn't accept it is still using the standard data.

I have challenged many climate cult fools who grab this bogus paper to show that his stupid science malpractice was accepted by the NOAA no one tries, you will be latest to run away from the challenge because it never happened.

You apparently fail to spot the difference between Positive Feedback which is real and part of Meteorology to the Positive Feedback LOOP which doesn't exist except in fevered climate cultists small heads.

My god you are so far behind it is pathetic.

LOL

 

[Sunsettommy]

Orbital cycles, the logarithmic nature of CO2 forcing, and feedback.

Orbital cycles cool the planet a bit. More CO2 goes into the oceans, the planet cools more, and the feedback cycle continues.

This is basic stuff, and all the deniers fail at in completely. They really have no business annoying the grownups.

All you did was post an empty word salad, you got anything better .....

 

[Sunsettommy]

Here is that garbage Sherwoods paper you are in swoon over, it is pathetic!

AMS

Robust Tropospheric Warming Revealed by Iteratively Homogenized Radiosonde Data​

Excerpt:

Abstract​

Results are presented from a new homogenization of data since 1959 from 527 radiosonde stations. This effort differs from previous ones by employing an approach specifically designed to minimize systematic errors in adjustment, by including wind shear as well as temperature, by seasonally resolving adjustments, and by using neither satellite information nor station metadata. Relatively few artifacts were detected in wind shear, and associated adjustments were indistinguishable from random adjustments. Temperature artifacts were detected most often in the late 1980s–early 1990s. Uncertainty was characterized from variations within an ensemble of homogenizations and used to test goodness of fit with satellite data using reduced chi squared......

The rest of his junk paper here, LINK

==============

The NOAA doesn't accept it even after 17 years....

 

[Sunsettommy]

To pile it on showing that up to 5 years after his 2008 paper the official data (which remains unchanged) still show NO Hot Spot for Channel 3

LINK

The other areas,

LINK

LINK

 

[mamooth]

All you did was post an empty word salad, you got anything better .....

I understand. I was talking about science at a college freshman level, so it whooshed over your head.

Sherwoods paper was long ago exposed as a failed try

See? I said you'd insta-scream "FRAUD" at any science that contridicted your cult's sacred scripture, and you didn't disappoint.

But don't worry. Tommy has evidence! One of his conspiracy websites saidso! Needless to say, Tommy isn't capable of explaining the issue in simple English. He thinks that a cut-and-paste of something he doesn't understand settles the issue. He didn't even read it. If he did, he'd understand that it didn't say what he claimed. That's always the case with the stuff Tommy pastes.

You apparently fail to spot the difference between Positive Feedback which is real and part of Meteorology to the Positive Feedback LOOP which doesn't exist except in fevered climate cultists small heads.

So I descibe the feedback loops for you in small words, and you still can't grasp it.

Tommy, I'm sure you're a nice boy, and good-looking, so don't be too upset about being shortchanged in the smarts department.

Now, what news from the flat-earth front? And the antivaxxer front? After all, they use the same tactics you do, so I figure you'll be joining them soon. Like denialism, antivaxxism is more or less a required belief for the extreme-right-fringe now. Flat-earthism isn't a required belief yet, but it's getting there, so I figure a go-getter like you might want to get ahead of the crowd.

Oh, I'm still waiting for you to show where I claimed to have a Ph.D. You recently made that direct claim twice now, and you've run away twice when challenged to back it up. That's typical of you.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I understand. I was talking about science at a college freshman level, so it whooshed over your head.



See? I said you'd insta-scream "FRAUD" at any science that contridicted your cult's sacred scripture, and you didn't disappoint.

But don't worry. Tommy has evidence! One of his conspiracy websites saidso! Needless to say, Tommy isn't capable of explaining the issue in simple English. He thinks that a cut-and-paste of something he doesn't understand settles the issue. He didn't even read it. If he did, he'd understand that it didn't say what he claimed. That's always the case with the stuff Tommy pastes.



So I descibe the feedback loops for you in small words, and you still can't grasp it.

Tommy, I'm sure you're a nice boy, and good-looking, so don't be too upset about being shortchanged in the smarts department.

Now, what news from the flat-earth front? And the antivaxxer front? After all, they use the same tactics you do, so I figure you'll be joining them soon. Like denialism, antivaxxism is more or less a required belief for the extreme-right-fringe now. Flat-earthism isn't a required belief yet, but it's getting there, so I figure a go-getter like you might want to get ahead of the crowd.

Oh, I'm still waiting for you to show where I claimed to have a Ph.D. You recently made that direct claim twice now, and you've run away twice when challenged to back it up. That's typical of you.

You made the claim at another forum being a PHD holder in Physics.

The rest of your post is all word salad while avoiding my NOAA challenge, while ignoring the databased links and ignoring Sherwood's Abstract stupidity as he badly misused the concept of Kridging.

All you offer is spittle and bluster.

LOL