Rate of change in the Ordovician extinction

[elektra]

You aren't helping opposition to AGW by denying data from the geologic record, dummy.

You are hurting yourself by lying about me. You cant find one post where I denied any data. What I did do is ask your boyfriend old crock for a study that he/she made claims about. Ding-a-ling then posted a picture with zero explanation

What exactly did your picture do to show that old crock was correct about the study? Nothing ding-a-ling.

Ding-a-ling, I never commented on your Pic or on co2.

Ding-a-ling, you are either very stupid for not understanding that your pic is not a study or you are very stupid thinking you can post the same pics then cry that I am attacking you personally when I point out why you are stupid.

Try again ding-a-ling

 

[ding]

What is even more amazing is your pictures do not prove what you think.

Post the study the pics came from ding-a-ling so we can have a real discussion.

1. So the data doesn't show that the planet cooled for millions of years with atmospheric CO2 greater than 600 ppm?
2. The data doesn't show different thresholds for glaciation at each pole?
3. The data doesn't show that the present temperature is 2C cooler than the last interglacial period with 26 ft shallower seas and 120 ppm of more CO2?
4. The data doesn't show that the northern hemisphere has driven the climate of the planet for the last 3 million years?
5. The data doesn't show climate fluctuations increased after the planet became a bipolar glaciated icehouse planet?
6. The data doesn't show that prior to the industrial revolution CO2 lagged temperature by 1000 years because CO2 was a function of temperature due to the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature?
7. The data doesn't show that after the industrial revolution the correlation between temperature and CO2 was broken?

Weird. What do you think it shows?

 

[ding]

You are hurting yourself by lying about me. You cant find one post where I denied any data. What I did do is ask your boyfriend old crock for a study that he/she made claims about. Ding-a-ling then posted a picture with zero explanation

What exactly did your picture do to show that old crock was correct about the study? Nothing ding-a-ling.

Ding-a-ling, I never commented on your Pic or on co2.

Ding-a-ling, you are either very stupid for not understanding that your pic is not a study or you are very stupid thinking you can post the same pics then cry that I am attacking you personally when I point out why you are stupid.

Try again ding-a-ling

 

[elektra]

View attachment 1120573

I dont discuss colored drawings. If you wish to make a point with me you must be able to articulate your point. When you feel you need help then you should quote a study. A study is not the news article, the abstract, or a rainbow pyramid

 

[ding]

I dont discuss colored drawings. If you wish to make a point with me you must be able to articulate your point. When you feel you need help then you should quote a study. A study is not the news article, the abstract, or a rainbow pyramid

And apparently you can't understand what the data is showing.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Damn those Ordovicians and their big gas-guzzling SUVs!

That's how you can tell the whole "American high per capita CO2 is killing the planet" Cult is insane

 

[ding]

What exactly did your picture do to show that old crock was correct about the study? Nothing ding-a-ling.

That you made a stupid statement about the number of years of CO2 data.

 

[ding]

Ding-a-ling, you are either very stupid for not understanding that your pic is not a study or you are very stupid thinking you can post the same pics then cry that I am attacking you personally when I point out why you are stupid.

I tried to educate you on where the CO2 data comes from.

 

[ding]

What is even more amazing is your pictures do not prove what you think.

Are you going to ever tell me what you believe I got wrong?

 

[elektra]

That you made a stupid statement about the number of years of CO2 data.

Hahahaha, I stated that the data was a tiny fraction of the earth's history and you posted a picture to show i was wrong and you did not include an explanation as to what the picture represented

Now that is dumb.

I stated that the co2 record is a tiny percentage of the earth's history. Your picture did not show my statement was inaccurate at all. Posting co2 levels in picture form does not show how small an amount of information that picture is.

The amount of information we have saved is insignificant in comparison to the amount of information we were never able to collect.

Posting pictures ding-a-ling and arguing pictures is really really stupid. Almost as stupid as people who think solar and wind have a commercial application enhancing our electricity supply. Oops, that is you? Right? You are still angry about that? Or is that not your position, you dont advocate for dirty inefficient failed electricity scams?

 

[ding]

Hahahaha, I stated that the data was a tiny fraction of the earth's history and you posted a picture to show i was wrong and you did not include an explanation as to what the picture represented

Now that is dumb.

I stated that the co2 record is a tiny percentage of the earth's history. Your picture did not show my statement was inaccurate at all. Posting co2 levels in picture form does not show how small an amount of information that picture is.

The amount of information we have saved is insignificant in comparison to the amount of information we were never able to collect.

Posting pictures ding-a-ling and arguing pictures is really really stupid. Almost as stupid as people who think solar and wind have a commercial application enhancing our electricity supply. Oops, that is you? Right? You are still angry about that? Or is that not your position, you dont advocate for dirty inefficient failed electricity scams?

You are embarrassing yourself.

You said, "And how long is the recorded history of co2? 30 years. Maybe 36?"

Arguing the CO2 data is wrong or the planet isn't warming or the seas aren't rising are idiotic arguments. If you need to know the correct argument let me know. But please stop making opponents of AGW look bad.

 

[elektra]

I tried to educate you on where the CO2 data comes from.

You posted a picture with zero comments. Pretty hard to figure out why you posted a pic with no comment.

I never asked where the data came from so the fact you tried to answer a question not asked made your replies look even dumber.

But what does that have to do with this thread. You lost that argument. Let it go. I did until you brought it up again, here.

 

[ding]

You posted a picture with zero comments. Pretty hard to figure out why you posted a pic with no comment.

I never asked where the data came from so the fact you tried to answer a question not asked made your replies look even dumber.

But what does that have to do with this thread. You lost that argument. Let it go. I did until you brought it up again, here.

Then maybe you should have asked me about it instead of acting like an emotional twat.

 

[ding]

But what does that have to do with this thread. You lost that argument. Let it go. I did until you brought it up again, here.

Bad move.

 

[ding]

What is even more amazing is your pictures do not prove what you think.

Are you going to ever tell me what you believe I got wrong?

 

[elektra]

You are embarrassing yourself.

You said, "And how long is the recorded history of co2? 30 years. Maybe 36?"

In reply to a person referencing co2 data from a satellite. Excellent cherry picking ding-a-ling. The satellite record is 22 years long. Your random pic was dumb

You picked a fight ding-a-ling. You are upset about something else and picked a fight.

 

[ding]

In reply to a person referencing co2 data from a satellite. Excellent cherry picking ding-a-ling. The satellite record is 22 years long. Your random pic was dumb

You picked a fight ding-a-ling. You are upset about something else and picked a fight.

I don't believe he was. He even told you about the proxies. You fucked up.

 

[ding]

You picked a fight ding-a-ling. You are upset about something else and picked a fight.

Not even close. You didn't like being corrected. You made it personal. You are still making it personal. You are making a mistake by doing so, but it's your mistake to make. You'll figure that out soon enough.

Hey, did you ever tell me what I got wrong about those "pretty pictures?" Because that is 100% relevant to this thread.

 

[elektra]

Hey, did you ever tell me what I got wrong about those "pretty pictures?"

Why would I have to comment here on a random picture that you posted in another thread with no explanation?

In this thread I would like old crock to post a link to the study. Why you wish to discuss your idiocy from another thread shows you have a bit of a personal problem

 

[ding]

Why would I have to comment here on a random picture that you posted in another thread with no explanation?

In this thread I would like old crock to post a link to the study. Why you wish to discuss your idiocy from another thread shows you have a bit of a personal problem

Use whatever you like to answer these questions.

1. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show that the planet cooled for millions of years with atmospheric CO2 greater than 600 ppm?
2. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show different thresholds for glaciation at each pole?
3. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show that the present temperature is 2C cooler than the last interglacial period with 26 ft shallower seas and 120 ppm of more CO2?
4. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show that the northern hemisphere has driven the climate of the planet for the last 3 million years?
5. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show climate fluctuations increased after the planet became a bipolar glaciated icehouse planet?
6. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show that prior to the industrial revolution CO2 lagged temperature by 1000 years because CO2 was a function of temperature due to the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature?
7. Does the empirical climate evidence from the geologic record show that after the industrial revolution the correlation between temperature and CO2 was broken?