The sun warms the ocean. Just like it always does. When heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted by changes in water salinity, water density and changes to wind patterns from changes in solar radiation either from changes in intensity or orbital forcing, then the planet enters a glacial cycle driven by extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation.
Its called NATURE!!!!
- Thread starter Dr.Destructo
- Start date
Because the planet is returning to its pre-glacial temperature that heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic produces. Absent that circulation the planet enters into a glacial period driven by extensive northern hemisphere glaciation. When the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic is restored the planet slowly warms back up as all that ice that built up during the glacial event melts.
So you believe that the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic has been taking place in an oscillatory pattern that just happens to match the algebraic sum of the three Milankovitch cycles. But it's not due to the Milankovitch cycles. And when you used the term "orbital forcing" you didn't mean Milankovitch forcing but were talking about other orbital forcing.
Besides that, you have never explained why CO2 led warming here and why the CO2 and the warming has happened at a rate 7-10 times as fast as anything in the last million years. This is NOT a D-O event, so why is it happening so fast? We had continuously cooled for over 6,000 years. Why did it suddenly start warming again? There has been no radical change in ocean circulation till now. There has been no radical change in salinity or temperature till now.
So, try again. Tell us why glacial-interglacial is cyclical and what would cause the sudden warming and CO2 increase we have been witnessing for the last 150 years. Cause that bullshit don't do it.
Show me the math on how much orbital cycles warm or cool the planet. Because there is ample evidence on how ocean currents warm the northern hemisphere and ample evidence that changes to the ocean currents affect the planet's climate.
I've covered this ad nauseum. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 lagged temperature by 800 to 1000 years because of the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature. When it was cold the ocean absorbed CO2. When it was warm the ocean released CO2. That's why CO2 was a function of temperature prior to the industrial revolution. Post industrial revolution CO2 was a function of emissions. Yes, increase CO2 does warm the planet slightly. For every doubling of CO2 surface temperature will rise 1C. Your error is attributing all warming to CO2 and no warming due to earth's natural glacial climate cycle.
The warming the planet is experiencing is no different than it has ever experienced.
I have. Over and over again. And I will continue to do so despite your objections.
I use the term orbital forcing because that's what it is. Orbital forcing, also known as Milankovitch cycles, is a term used to describe three variations in Earth's orbit that affect the amount of solar radiation that reaches the Earth over time:
- Eccentricity: The shape of Earth's orbit
- Obliquity: The angle of Earth's axis relative to its orbital plane
- Precession: The direction of Earth's axis of rotation
Didn't say it was. They were much more rapid events in both directions than today. 5C up in a matter of decades and 5C down over a matter of decades.
D-O events are proof that glacial cycles are triggered by the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic and not from orbital forcing which may play a role in the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic but only from impacting wind patterns and not atmospheric temperatures.
Please explain to me how gradual changes in precession, obliquity and eccentricity can produce rapid climate events such as the initiation of a glacial event. Because it's pretty easy to show how the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic can cause such a rapid glacial event.
The vast majority of heat is stored in the ocean, not the atmosphere. The northern hemisphere is uniquely configured for colder temperatures when heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted.
You're stalling. What do YOU believe could be driving such a rapid warming?
Why don't you show us a link from an actual study that comes to that conclusion?
Milankovitch does NOT produce rapid climate events. If not for the feedback of CO2 released from the warming oceans, they could not drive the glacial-interglacial cycle. But they get that feedback and thus they take place.
Not without showing WHAT IS CAUSING THE DISRUPTION.
If I hear the term "uniquely configured" from you one more time, I'm going to puke. And, as I just noted, you have YET to explain what causes disruptions to heat circulation. All we ever get from you is "it happens" and that it happens precisely in synch with the Milankovitch cycles is a coincidence. And despite being asked repeatedly, you have NEVER presented a reason for the extraordinarily rapid warming 1880 - Present.
I don't accept the subjective term "rapid warming." This warming trend is no different than any other warming trend which the geologic record is littered with.
Glacial cycles are not driven by CO2. CO2 followed temperature by 800 to 1000 years. Glacial cycles are triggered by the disruption of heat from the Atlantic to the Arctic.
The planet is NATURALLY returning to its pre-glacial temperature that heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic produces like it always does. The vast majority of heat is stored in the ocean, not the atmosphere. The northern hemisphere is uniquely configured for colder temperatures when heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted.
You're a ******* broken record. And you are not answering questions you ought to be able to answer. You need to think about why you cannot.
WHAT causes the disruption to heat flow?
WHAT is the cause of the rapid warming since the Industrial Revolution after 6,000 years of cooling if not CO2?
Temperature record of the last 2,000 years - Wikipedia
Temperature and CO2 for Last 1000 Years — Environmental Graphiti®
View all educational, climate change and environmental art about temperature of the earth and CO2 for the last 1000 years from Environmental Graphiti here.
www.environmentalgraphiti.org
Global temperatures over last 24,000 years show today's warming 'unprecedented'
A University of Arizona-led effort to reconstruct Earth's climate since the last ice age, about 24,000 years ago, highlights the main drivers of climate change and how far out of bounds human activity has pushed the climate system.
And if you actually cannot see the "rapid warming" there, then you are lying to us AND yourself.
What affects ocean currents? Changes in salinity and density which are temperature related and changes in wind patterns which are solar radiation intensity related.You're a ******* broken record. And you are not answering questions you ought to be able to answer. You need to think about why you cannot.
WHAT causes the disruption to heat flow?
WHAT is the cause of the rapid warming since the Industrial Revolution after 6,000 years of cooling if not CO2?
View attachment 959710
View attachment 959712Temperature record of the last 2,000 years - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
View attachment 959714Temperature and CO2 for Last 1000 Years — Environmental Graphiti®
View all educational, climate change and environmental art about temperature of the earth and CO2 for the last 1000 years from Environmental Graphiti here.
Global temperatures over last 24,000 years show today's warming 'unprecedented'
A University of Arizona-led effort to reconstruct Earth's climate since the last ice age, about 24,000 years ago, highlights the main drivers of climate change and how far out of bounds human activity has pushed the climate system.phys.org
And if you actually cannot see the "rapid warming" there, then you are lying to us AND yourself.
What happens when ocean circulation of heat distribution from the Atlantic to the Arctic is disrupted? The initiation of northern hemisphere continental glaciation.
Anyone see where the Little Ice age is on that graph? I don't. Must be a crappy reconstruction.
The planet returning NATURALLY to its pre-glacial temperature like it always does.
The sun warms the ocean. Just like it always does. When heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted by changes in water salinity, water density and changes to wind patterns from changes in solar radiation either from changes in intensity or orbital forcing, then the planet enters a glacial cycle driven by extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation. It takes a really long time for the planet to warm back up to its pre-glacial temperature after heat distribution is restored from the Atlantic to the Arctic.
Your reconstructions are garbage. They smooth the variability. And don't match the data from the Arctic. Much of the last 10,000 years was warmer than today.
The last interglacial period was 2C warmer with 26ft higher seas and had 120 ppm LESS CO2 than today. How can you argue the planet is outside of its natural climate range?
Find us a scientific study that supports those claims
I've never said such a thing. What I have said over and over again is that the current rate of warming is many times higher than any previous glacial -> interglacial warming in the past million years. And there is NO natural forcing factor that could POSSIBLY have caused it other than greenhouse warming from increased CO2.
It's in the geologic record, dummy. This isn't new news.
If the planet isn't outside of it's normal range and the temperature isn't warmer with 120 ppm more CO2 than it was in the previous interglacial periods, you don't have a leg to stand on. You're relying on crappy temperature reconstructions and fake correlations that don't agree with the planet's empirical climate record.
Similar threads
