Mauna Loa shows that reducing economic Activity has NO EFFECT on CO2

Don't know much about the Nile but they dredge the Mississippi so that it doesn't change course to Morgan City which is where it WILL eventually go despite man's best efforts to deny nature. It's not a question of if but when.
Aswan Dam
It's really a question of math. Mother Nature has a tremendous resource of energy she can throw at us. The energy we can expend is limited by money.
No, it's a question of priorities. If you want immortality and you're the Pharaoh, you can build one of the wonders of the world. They could have done plenty of other projects that that was their priority.

I only gave examples of man choosing to alter his world (burning forests for pasture land is another) but there are examples of man ignorantly changing his world: there used to be lush forests on the Greek Islands until they cut down the trees for warships and let their topsoil wash into the sea. They literally changed their climate.
 
Wrong. Recent studies have shown a link between ocean surface temperatures and tropical storm intensity – warmer waters fuel more energetic storms.

Cool story.
There should be a larger number of more energetic storms over the last ten years than the decade before....or the decade before....or the decade before....so post the proof.
 
Aswan Dam

No, it's a question of priorities. If you want immortality and you're the Pharaoh, you can build one of the wonders of the world. They could have done plenty of other projects that that was their priority.

I only gave examples of man choosing to alter his world (burning forests for pasture land is another) but there are examples of man ignorantly changing his world: there used to be lush forests on the Greek Islands until they cut down the trees for warships and let their topsoil wash into the sea. They literally changed their climate.
Aren't the pyramids eroding? Do you suppose they will outlast mother nature?

Did the Greeks actually change their climate?
 
Aswan Dam

No, it's a question of priorities. If you want immortality and you're the Pharaoh, you can build one of the wonders of the world. They could have done plenty of other projects that that was their priority.

I only gave examples of man choosing to alter his world (burning forests for pasture land is another) but there are examples of man ignorantly changing his world: there used to be lush forests on the Greek Islands until they cut down the trees for warships and let their topsoil wash into the sea. They literally changed their climate.

Pharaoh didn't build the Pyramids or the Sphinx, they were there for millennium before the Egyptians arrived
 
Pharaoh didn't build the Pyramids or the Sphinx, they were there for millennium before the Egyptians arrived

The Pyramids are absolutely Fourth Dynasty ... there's no question of that in anyone's minds ...

The Sphinx may have been started a little earlier, First or Second Dynasty ...

John Anthony West first proposed an older Sphinx in the 1970's based on René Schwaller de Lubicz work Her-Bak ... both of whom were self-trained Egyptologists ... it was Robert Schoch of Boston U. that did the formal research in the early 1990's into the apparent water erosion on the Sphinx compound ... his conclusion was that water erosion probably did occur before the Fourth Dynasty, but no evidence this occurred before the First Dynasty ... the erosion itself is from sheet flooding over the edge of the Sphinx compound ...

Still unanswered is what the carving was before the Fourth Dynasty ... the sphinx symbolism is usually associated with worship of the Sun god Ra ... which didn't really catch hold until the Fourth Dynasty ... it was Khafre who repaired and finished the carving on the Sphinx as part of his pyramid building ... and Khafre who established that Pharaoh was the living embodiment of Ra ...

Malkowski, Edward; Before the Pharaohs; Bear and Co. Publishers; 2006
 
Aliens as in ET?

Look, you're not too bright so I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this. I never said anything about aliens, so I don't believe you are a serious person.

The world abounds with archaeological sites that defy conventional "wisdom". There are 2 in particular that, decades ago, convinced me conventional "wisdom" is as wrong as Paul Krugman: Sacsayhuaman in Peru and Baalbek in Lebanon. Both site show relatively recent human construction built ON TOP of far superior foundations. The weathering of foundation stones at Baalbek show that they were probably underwater for sometime.
 
Look, you're not too bright so I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this. I never said anything about aliens, so I don't believe you are a serious person.
It was you who said there were structures in Egypt before there were Egyptians. Seriously?
The world abounds with archaeological sites that defy conventional "wisdom". There are 2 in particular that, decades ago, convinced me conventional "wisdom" is as wrong as Paul Krugman: Sacsayhuaman in Peru and Baalbek in Lebanon. Both site show relatively recent human construction built ON TOP of far superior foundations. The weathering of foundation stones at Baalbek show that they were probably underwater for sometime.
It is rather common for humans to build on what came before them and in a very different manor. Here's some historical trivia, North American natives had a culture that built large earthen mounds. When the Europeans arrived that culture had long ago vanished and the natives had no idea who built the mounds. Knowing the native were too 'primitive' to build mounds there were plenty of theories, one of which we know today as Mormonism.
 
It was you who said there were structures in Egypt before there were Egyptians. Seriously?

It is rather common for humans to build on what came before them and in a very different manor. Here's some historical trivia, North American natives had a culture that built large earthen mounds. When the Europeans arrived that culture had long ago vanished and the natives had no idea who built the mounds. Knowing the native were too 'primitive' to build mounds there were plenty of theories, one of which we know today as Mormonism.

Why is it so hard for you to believe that the Pyramids predate the Egyptians? The land today is called Egypt - so what?

This isn't the thread for how wrong conventional wisdom is with respect to human history.

I still haven't heard one single explanation regarding the OP
 
Why is it so hard for you to believe that the Pyramids predate the Egyptians? The land today is called Egypt - so what?
You haven't said who built them is not the Egyptians. The art and writings of the pyramids certainly continued relatively unchanged for 3,000 years.
 
You haven't said who built them is not the Egyptians. The art and writings of the pyramids certainly continued relatively unchanged for 3,000 years.

The civilizations who built them - let's just call them the Atlanteans, an imaginary race of humans ancestors who were much larger and much smarter than we are.

Here's what I think of when it's mentioned that the pyramids were "tombs of the Pharaohs". Like the Inca's in Peru the Egyptians and the Romans at Baalbek, they each found construction in situ and either built on top or tried to appropriate them.

960003A1-ADDE-9E41-178382A298574EFF.jpg


Another interesting and inexplicable site is Puma Punku. They were able to cut and shape intricate stonework there. I don't they they used deer antlers or sand to cut those shapes and corners

puma-punku-14%25255B6%25255D.jpg
 
The civilizations who built them - let's just call them the Atlanteans, an imaginary race of humans ancestors who were much larger and much smarter than we are.
Odd they didn't leave us any large bones or teeth. What tools or knowledge did they possess that the later Egyptians did not?

Here's what I think of when it's mentioned that the pyramids were "tombs of the Pharaohs". Like the Inca's in Peru the Egyptians and the Romans at Baalbek, they each found construction in situ and either built on top or tried to appropriate them.
Pyramids were certainly labor intensive but the knowledge the Egyptians possessed was adequate to build them.

Another interesting and inexplicable site is Puma Punku. They were able to cut and shape intricate stonework there. I don't they they used deer antlers or sand to cut those shapes and corners
Quite explicable I think:
Some of the stones are in an unfinished state, showing some of the techniques used to shape them. They were initially pounded by stone hammers—which can still be found in numbers on local andesite quarries—, creating depressions, and then slowly ground and polished with flat stones and sand​
 
The selling of the clean energy is everywhere. I try to watch the Weather Channel and they are in full carbon emissions propaganda mode. This channel does everything but weather.
 
Odd they didn't leave us any large bones or teeth. What tools or knowledge did they possess that the later Egyptians did not?


Pyramids were certainly labor intensive but the knowledge the Egyptians possessed was adequate to build them.


Quite explicable I think:
Some of the stones are in an unfinished state, showing some of the techniques used to shape them. They were initially pounded by stone hammers—which can still be found in numbers on local andesite quarries—, creating depressions, and then slowly ground and polished with flat stones and sand​

Again, this is derailing, but there is overwhelming evidence of our human ancestors being "giants"

The Egyptians greatest accomplishment - and not for good, was to reshape the head of the Sphinx into a human form.

Amazing relatively recent discoveries at Saqqara where the "tombs" are made from granite or andesite (nearest quarry is I think 800km away) highly polished and carved at perfect right angles.

In elementary school, I wanted to be an Egyptologist, but I was dissuaded from that -- probably for the best I think
 
Still, none of the AGW Cultist can explain why we should cut CO2 when a global economic shutdown did not move the needle on CO2

co2_trend_mlo.png
 
co2_trend_mlo.png


Not sure how much clearer is can be that human activity has NO EFFECT on CO2 which in turn has no ability to drive temperature and climate on planet Earth

Did it not occur to you that even just the additional amount of CO2 humans have added to the atmosphere accumulated over 150 years. And since the gas has a lifetime in the atmosphere measured in centuries, it wasn't going to go away when our contributions dropped by a few percent.
 
Just to throw a little math in here. During the pandemic, GHG emissions fell by a maximum of 5.4 percent. The current annual rate of CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere is 2.5 ppm. So the pandemic caused a maximum drop of 2.5 x 0.054 or 0.135 ppm. That would be about one-fourth of the smallest division on the OP's graph, and it came on and off gradually. Anyone here think that should be visible? It's about the size of one of those bumps on the black line and is almost the full width of the chart.
 
Did it not occur to you that even just the additional amount of CO2 humans have added to the atmosphere accumulated over 150 years. And since the gas has a lifetime in the atmosphere measured in centuries, it wasn't going to go away when our contributions dropped by a few percent.
See, that’s EXACTLY why I highlighted it.

Our contribution didn’t just drop a few points, it fell off the cliff in 20 and 21. Yet the reading at Moana Lao looked as if mankind had no impact whatsoever on the annual numbers.

Do we need to have zero carbon for 150 years to move that needle?
 

Forum List

Back
Top