Very warm, no modern day trees, no ice, high seas

[Captain Caveman]

Watching a video on the Chicxulub asteroid and at the 3:00 mark, very interesting to hear that the planet was very warm, no modern day trees and too warm for ice to remain at the poles. Oh, and sea levels some 200 metres higher.

So why the discrepancy with the climate scientists of today? Why the claim of pending doom and gloom?



Can any climate alarmist here explain?

 

[percysunshine]

Watching a video on the Chicxulub asteroid and at the 3:00 mark, very interesting to hear that the planet was very warm, no trees and too warm for ice to remain at the poles. Oh, and sea levels some 200 metres higher.

So why the discrepancy with the climate scientists of today? Why the claim of pending doom and gloom?



Can any climate alarmist here explain?

You are not watching reality. It is one of many numerical simulations.

Kind of like a Disney generated image.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Who knows how accurate the video is? No human was alive at that time, the artist is just making things up as best he can.

 

[toobfreak]

Watching a video on the Chicxulub asteroid and at the 3:00 mark, very interesting to hear that the planet was very warm, no trees and too warm for ice

Where does he say there were no trees? He said that most modern trees hadn't appeared yet. What do you think all those long-necked dinosaurs were reaching for? By the time of the Cretaceous when the impactor struck Yucatan, the land was covered with conifers, ginko bilobas and the like.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

The Chicken Club Asteroid?

Weird.

Who knows...it's all theory any who.

 

[Esdraelon]

It is one of many numerical simulations.

Like the current projections on AGW? How is it different?

 

[percysunshine]

Like the current projections on AGW? How is it different?

It isn't.

 

[Captain Caveman]

You are not watching reality. It is one of many numerical simulations.

Kind of like a Disney generated image.

Science already determined the co2 levels, oxygen levels, temperature etc.. before the asteroid impact, but today's climate scientists and alarmists, have concluded pending death as levels rise, which are 5 to 6 times lower than 66 million years ago.

So my question is, why the discrepancy?

 

[Captain Caveman]

Where does he say there were no trees? He said that most modern trees hadn't appeared yet. What do you think all those long-necked dinosaurs were reaching for? By the time of the Cretaceous when the impactor struck Yucatan, the land was covered with conifers, ginko bilobas and the like.

Sorry, I missed the word modern so I've edited the op. But still irrelevant to my thread question, why the discrepancy?

 

[Captain Caveman]

Who knows how accurate the video is? No human was alive at that time, the artist is just making things up as best he can.

You've inadvertently missed the thread question

 

[percysunshine]

Science already determined the co2 levels, oxygen levels, temperature etc.. before the asteroid impact, but today's climate scientists and alarmists, have concluded pending death as levels rise, which are 5 to 6 times lower than 66 million years ago.

So my question is, why the discrepancy?

Probably because scientists have very little information on what those numbers were 66 million years ago.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Probably because scientists have very little information on what those numbers were 66 million years ago.

Co2 was 2,400ppm (today's is 440), temperatures averaged 4c higher, oxygen was about 3 times the concentration and sea levels were 200 metres higher than today due to no ice at either pole.

Yet, as we trickle over 440ppm co2, 1.02c temperature increase, sea level rise in the last century of 6 1⁄2 – 8 1⁄2 inches, why the prediction of pending doom and gloom in a matter of a handful of decades? Does anyone know why?

 

[Confederate Soldier]

Who knows how accurate the video is? No human was alive at that time, the artist is just making things up as best he can.

So why when folks try to argue creationism, do people froth at the mouth, and act like they were there for the first evolving protozoa? You can't be hypocritical when it comes to things like that.

 

[percysunshine]

Co2 was 2,400ppm (today's is 440), temperatures averaged 4c higher, oxygen was about 3 times the concentration and sea levels were 200 metres higher than today due to no ice at either pole.

Yet, as we trickle over 440ppm co2, 1.02c temperature increase, sea level rise in the last century of 6 1⁄2 – 8 1⁄2 inches, why the prediction of pending doom and gloom in a matter of a handful of decades? Does anyone know why?

And you, being a 66 million year old cave man, with no contemperary instruments, measured these levels.

Bull shit.

 

[westwall]

Co2 was 2,400ppm (today's is 440), temperatures averaged 4c higher, oxygen was about 3 times the concentration and sea levels were 200 metres higher than today due to no ice at either pole.

Yet, as we trickle over 440ppm co2, 1.02c temperature increase, sea level rise in the last century of 6 1⁄2 – 8 1⁄2 inches, why the prediction of pending doom and gloom in a matter of a handful of decades? Does anyone know why?

Money

 

[Old Rocks]

It is the rate of change, and what that does to the existing ecology that is the problem. No, life will not cease. But there may well be a major extinction event if we keep on our present course. And our present standard of living will be affected very negatively.

 

[ding]

It is the rate of change, and what that does to the existing ecology that is the problem. No, life will not cease. But there may well be a major extinction event if we keep on our present course. And our present standard of living will be affected very negatively.

Climate fluctuations and environmental uncertainty are hallmarks of a bipolar glaciated world where the poles have different thresholds for extensive continental glaciation.

 

[ReinyDays]

It is the rate of change, and what that does to the existing ecology that is the problem. No, life will not cease. But there may well be a major extinction event if we keep on our present course. And our present standard of living will be affected very negatively.

The rate of change was larger during the 1910-1940 period of global warming ... between 1940 and 1980 temperatures went down ... we're back to global warming again but the rate isn't as high as in the beginning of the 20th Century ... God, you suck at math ...

We sift our oceans taking out (and eating) every living thing larger than a mouse ... THAT'S why the oceans are dying ... not CO2 ...

 

[Turtlesoup]

Who knows how accurate the video is? No human was alive at that time, the artist is just making things up as best he can.

Babe, eyewitness accounts are often subject to fraud and cluelessness anyways.....asteroids and Life itself leaves hard evidence of their existence and destruction upon the planet.

 

[Captain Caveman]

And you, being a 66 million year old cave man, with no contemperary instruments, measured these levels.

Bull shit.

Scientists did from ice cores, bubbles in amber etc . Next stoopid question please.