Proof Of Warmer Earlier Climate! Swiss Geologist Studies 10,800-Year Old Tree Trunk Under Alps Glacier

[Anomalism]

I am discussing it with you.

I am not a climate scientist so I'm not arrogant enough to get into a scientific debate with you on their behalf. If you want a scientific debate you should talk to the climate scientists that disagree with you. They know more than anybody else and there is a general agreement that AGW is happening.

 

[konradv]

I blame Fred Flinstone. Do the Envirowhackos ever get tired of being wrong about everything they preach in their religious cult? Previously hidden under a Swiss glacier, a 10,800-year old tree trunk was discovered and tells us the Alps were much warmer in the early Holocene than today.

Proof Of Warmer Earlier Climate! Swiss Geologist Studies 10,800-Year Old Tree Trunk Under Alps Glacier

Previously hidden under a Swiss glacier, a 10,800-year old tree trunk was discovered and tells us the Alps were much warmer in the early Holocene than today.

wattsupwiththat.com

No one claims that temps haven't varied over the eons. That's a given. The question is, what's the cause this time? Not all shifts in temp had the same cause. One of the most salient points in favor of AGW theory is the rapid time course of the rise, coinciding with an increase in greenhouse gases due to the Industrial Revolution, esp. CO2, such that human activity releases more in days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a normal year.
Do the Earth's volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? No.

Actually---------------the SUN answers most of it...As the earth hits warms periods so does the other planets.

The sun's intensity goes up and down, but the temps aren't. Do some research and you won't look so foolish in the future.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I blame Fred Flinstone. Do the Envirowhackos ever get tired of being wrong about everything they preach in their religious cult? Previously hidden under a Swiss glacier, a 10,800-year old tree trunk was discovered and tells us the Alps were much warmer in the early Holocene than today.

Proof Of Warmer Earlier Climate! Swiss Geologist Studies 10,800-Year Old Tree Trunk Under Alps Glacier

Previously hidden under a Swiss glacier, a 10,800-year old tree trunk was discovered and tells us the Alps were much warmer in the early Holocene than today.

wattsupwiththat.com

No one claims that temps haven't varied over the eons. That's a given. The question is, what's the cause this time? Not all shifts in temp had the same cause. One of the most salient points in favor of AGW theory is the rapid time course of the rise, coinciding with an increase in greenhouse gases due to the Industrial Revolution, esp. CO2, such that human activity releases more in days than all the volcanoes on earth do in a normal year.
Do the Earth's volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? No.

Actually---------------the SUN answers most of it...As the earth hits warms periods so does the other planets.

The sun's intensity goes up and down, but the temps aren't. Do some research and you won't look so foolish in the future.

Earth’s temperature is a constant?
Hilarious.

 

[ding]

I am discussing it with you.

I am not a climate scientist so I'm not arrogant enough to get into a scientific debate with you on their behalf. If you want a scientific debate you should talk to the climate scientists that disagree with you. They know more than anybody else and there is a general agreement that AGW is happening.

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

 

[Anomalism]

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

Do you think the scientists know?

 

[ding]

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

Do you think the scientists know?

Some do but I'm not asking them. I am asking you. Do you know?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

Do you think the scientists know?

Some do but I'm not asking them. I am asking you. Do you know?

He's scared.

Don't ask him any more questions.

 

[Rigby5]

Foolish thread because of course climate has been warm before, but we know why and that is not what is making it get hot now so quickly.

There is a natural ice age and warming cycle, but that is 110,000 years long, and it is supposed to be cooling now according to that.
The current warming is happenings in less than 200 years instead of 110,000 years.

There are ancient warm periods, but those have to do with high water vapor content in the air, with perpetual clouds. Do you see perpetual overcast now?

And while there have been catastrophic disasters in the past, that does not mean we should not try to avoid causing them now or in the future.

 

[Rigby5]

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

Do you think the scientists know?

Some do but I'm not asking them. I am asking you. Do you know?

We all know that the Earth at one time has a methane and ammonia atmosphere, which trapped heat.
We also had a lot more vulcanism due to gravitational pressure liquefying the planet core. During the Mesozoic, the planet was also much warmer due to being perpetually enshrouded by clouds, which retain heat.
But none of that is relevant now because those things are not supposed to be happening now.

 

[ding]

So then you don't know why the earth transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet ~3 million years ago and why that is relevant today?

Do you think the scientists know?

Some do but I'm not asking them. I am asking you. Do you know?

We all know that the Earth at one time has a methane and ammonia atmosphere, which trapped heat.
We also had a lot more vulcanism due to gravitational pressure liquefying the planet core. During the Mesozoic, the planet was also much warmer due to being perpetually enshrouded by clouds, which retain heat.
But none of that is relevant now because those things are not supposed to be happening now.

Yes, that is totally irrelevant to what I am talking about. The transition from a greenhouse planet to an ice house planet was driven by plate tectonics. Specifically the isolation of the polar regions from warm marine currents and the rise of the Himalayan mountain range and Panama Isthmus with a background atmospheric CO2 concentration of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today and are the reason we have had 33 glacial and interglacial cycles over the last 2.7 million years or so.

 

[whitehall]

When are proponents of the new religion of "MMGW" going to realize that the climate culprit is really that gigantic nuclear reactor in the sky? The Fukashima earthquake actually shifted the earth on it's axis a few degrees a couple of years ago and that should be a prime topic for current weather science but they don't give a damn since a celestial event doesn't lend itself to an earth bound political extortion scheme.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When are proponents of the new religion of "MMGW" going to realize that the climate culprit is really that gigantic nuclear reactor in the sky? The Fukashima earthquake actually shifted the earth on it's axis a few degrees a couple of years ago and that should be a prime topic for current weather science but they don't give a damn since a celestial event doesn't lend itself to an earth bound political extortion scheme.

The Fukashima earthquake actually shifted the earth on it's axis a few degrees

Not quite......

The earthquake had effects on a global scale. Seismic waves caused icebergs to break off in Antarctica, water in Norwegian fjords to splash back and forth, and wreckage from the tsunami washed up along the North American coastline. Another global consequence? The quake shortened Earth’s day by 1.8 microseconds (µs) and shifted its figure axis by 17 centimetres (cm).

How did the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake Change Earth’s Rotation? | EOS Blog | Earth Observatory of Singapore

 

[ReinyDays]

Foolish thread because of course climate has been warm before, but we know why and that is not what is making it get hot now so quickly.

There is a natural ice age and warming cycle, but that is 110,000 years long, and it is supposed to be cooling now according to that.
The current warming is happenings in less than 200 years instead of 110,000 years.

There are ancient warm periods, but those have to do with high water vapor content in the air, with perpetual clouds. Do you see perpetual overcast now?

And while there have been catastrophic disasters in the past, that does not mean we should not try to avoid causing them now or in the future.

Almost correct ... the cycle is 125,000 years long ... but it's a saw-tooth wave ... only about 20,000 years of warming, then 105,000 years of cooling ... the OP is correct that we're 10,000 years past peak interglaciation ... and, according to the ice core data, this past temperature peak was somewhat underwhelming ... it's been hotter in past cycles within the current ice age ... the sad part is we've known this since 1979 ...

There's areas along the West Coast with clear and distinct early Holocene beaches 20 to 30 feet over the current sea level ...

 

[ding]

Foolish thread because of course climate has been warm before, but we know why and that is not what is making it get hot now so quickly.

There is a natural ice age and warming cycle, but that is 110,000 years long, and it is supposed to be cooling now according to that.
The current warming is happenings in less than 200 years instead of 110,000 years.

There are ancient warm periods, but those have to do with high water vapor content in the air, with perpetual clouds. Do you see perpetual overcast now?

And while there have been catastrophic disasters in the past, that does not mean we should not try to avoid causing them now or in the future.

I question our ability to conclude it is getting "hot now so quickly" by making a comparison to past interglacial cycles. There isn't enough resolution in the data to be able to make that comparison. What we can know is that there were periods where temperature swung from glacial temperatures to near interglacial temperatures and back again over periods as short as several decades. So on it's face value it is bullshit to say we are warming more quickly now than ever before.

Climate during the last glacial period was far from stable. Heinrich and Dansgaard-Oeschger events, occurred repeatedly throughout most of this time. Scientists Willi Dansgaard and Hans Oeschger first reported the Dansgaard-Oeschger (D-O) events in Greenland ice cores. Each of the 25 observed D-O events consisted of an abrupt warming to near-interglacial conditions that occurred in a matter of decades and was followed by a gradual cooling.

Heinrich and Dansgaard–Oeschger Events | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) formerly known as National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)

Repeated global climate fluctuations during the last glacial period were possibly related to freshwater releases from land-based ice sheets.

www.ncdc.noaa.gov

 

[ding]

The oxygen isotope curve is well established for the Cenozoic. No one disputes it. It is the basis of the earth's temperature history. Notice the temperature scale at the bottom of the graph. Now look at the temperature swings of the last glacial / interglacial cycle at the top of the graph. Using the scale, we can see that temperatures swung by as much as 8 degC. So according to Heinrich and Dansgaard–Oeschger Events we may have had temperature swings of 8C over the span of a few decades. So I don't see how anyone can say - with a straight face - that we are getting "hot now so quickly."

Besides anyone who understands the radiative forcing relationship between CO2 and temperature knows that there is a logarithmic relationship between CO2 and temperature, such that the impact CO2 has on temperature diminishes on a unit basis as CO2 increases. As CO2 increases it takes more and more CO2 to get the same change.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 447418

The oxygen isotope curve is well established for the Cenozoic. No one disputes it. It is the basis of the earth's temperature history. Notice the temperature scale at the bottom of the graph. Now look at the temperature swings of the last glacial / interglacial cycle at the top of the graph. Using the scale, we can see that temperatures swung by as much as 8 degC. So according to Heinrich and Dansgaard–Oeschger Events we may have had temperature swings of 8C over the span of a few decades. So I don't see how anyone can say - with a straight face - that we are getting "hot now so quickly."

Besides anyone who understands the radiative forcing relationship between CO2 and temperature knows that there is a logarithmic relationship between CO2 and temperature, such that the impact CO2 has on temperature diminishes on a unit basis as CO2 increases. As CO2 increases it takes more and more CO2 to get the same change.

So I don't see how anyone can say - with a straight face - that we are getting "hot now so quickly."

Exactly!!