AOC states we haven't seen Co2 levels like this since the Pliocene period

[Hutch Starskey]

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

You pulled that right out of your ass.

HER

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

You pulled that right out of your ass.

[URL='https://www.livescience.com/56219-earth-atmospheric-oxygen-levels-declining.html']HERE

you can learn much more than from acting "science guy".

Pulled what?

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

You didn't read past the headline, didn't you?

Typical of you.

E[/URL] you can learn much more than from acting "science guy".

Pulled what?

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

You didn't read past the headline, didn't you?

Typical of you.

You didn't read past the headline, didn't you?

Typical of you.

The whole thing is about O2.
Maybe you should just make a point

 

[Cellblock2429]

Pontificating at a Green New Deal rally on Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who just claimed on Sunday that her apocalyptic prediction in January that the world would end in 12 years unless serious action was taken to combat climate change had just been "dry humor," suddenly returned to her climate change hysteria, stating CO2 levels had reached the highest levels in recorded history and the last time the levels were this high "bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth."

Ocasio-Cortez ranted, “It was reported today that this weekend for the first time in human history we have reached atmospheric levels of carbon at 415 parts per million. This has never been seen in recorded human history. In fact meteorologist Eric Holthaus and journalist said simply about this measurement, ‘We do not know a planet like this.’ The last time our planet hit 415 we were in the Pliocene period. Oceans were 90 feet higher. Bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth. Humans did not exist. We have never seen a planet like this. And a planet like this is exactly what we are going to get, and it is exactly what we are going to inherit from previous generations if we do not act positively now."

Ocasio-Cortez Issues Another Apocalyptic Climate Rant. Is This More Of Her ‘Dry Humor’?

Only one question here: What technology and devices were used to make this measurement during the Pliocene period? I didn't even know what the pliocene period was. So I looked it up. It was a time frame between 2 and 5 million years. The wheel wasn't even invented yet.

Oceans were 90 feet higher? So why aren't oceans 90 feet higher today?

/——/ What does the dumb bunny, AOC, have to say about this? California braces for feet of snow from storms; 'significant severe weather event' to impact Plains

So, you are so fucking stupid that you think climate change is just being warmer. What a fool you are.

Funny how you Chicken Little's had to change "global warming' to "climate change" when the warming didn't happen like you promised it would!

Global Warming is a type of climate change.

Probably got tired of you assfucks posting it was cold outside so global warming is fake,

/——/ Your spin fails.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

These stupid Moon Bats don't like to think about things like that. Just like they don't like to think about the global warming during the Roman empire when CO2 levels were much lower than today or the Medieval Warming Period with lower CO2 levels. Facts like that doesn't fit into their AGW narrative so that is why they have to make up data today and make predictions that never come true.

The only thing accurate about the the AGW theory is that it is a scam.

So, your claim is because the Earth was nearly covered in ice means AGW is a hoax,. I get it. You are soooooooooooooooooo smart.

You think CO2 is the only factor driving our climate.

You are sooooooo smart that you think the Medieval Warming Period was global.

/——-/ what is the ideal temperature? When did the earth have the perfect climate?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

These stupid Moon Bats don't like to think about things like that. Just like they don't like to think about the global warming during the Roman empire when CO2 levels were much lower than today or the Medieval Warming Period with lower CO2 levels. Facts like that doesn't fit into their AGW narrative so that is why they have to make up data today and make predictions that never come true.

The only thing accurate about the the AGW theory is that it is a scam.

So, your claim is because the Earth was nearly covered in ice means AGW is a hoax,. I get it. You are soooooooooooooooooo smart.

You think CO2 is the only factor driving our climate.

You are sooooooo smart that you think the Medieval Warming Period was global.

/——/ It means the climate is always changing, and we can’t control it, you big dope

 

[iceberg]

so we go from:

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

to this a post or 2 later.

The whole thing is about O2.
Maybe you should just make a point

quite funny from the outside looking in.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Sorry, but it is proven fact.

When idiot "scientists" that admitted they fudge data create computer models then it is "shit in shit out" to their computer models. Besides, nobody has ever really created a good climate model for the earth. They always miss the boat. Atmospheric chemistry is too complex for the computer models that have been used. They don't really use accurate algorithms or input data.

If these stupid models were correct then all the horseshit predictions that were made decades ago would have come true but we haven't seen any of it. All we see is false input data and predictions that never come true. Meanwhile this solar minimum, which will cool off the earth for the next few decades, will render any of this AGW scammer stupidity to be moot.

When you create science based upon a stupid redistribution of world wide wealth instead of real facts you get shit and that is exactly what we see.

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing

Derp.....well there's yer problem.
Warming isn't attribiuted to solar output at all. Only a dope who doesn't understand even the basics would suggest such a thing.

It is the greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere that keeps the Earth warm enough to support life. Without them, the heat gained during the day would be lost at night. Earth would be a frozen wasteland.

The level of Co2 before the industrial revolution was the natural equilibrium that allowed life to flourish.That being said, increasing the concentrations by 50%( a huge amount BTW) would logically then cause further warming.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

so we go from:

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

to this a post or 2 later.

The whole thing is about O2.
Maybe you should just make a point

quite funny from the outside looking in.

What is funny about that? Both posts are about the same article, dope.
Do you have a point either?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

It doesn't seem like it is harder to breathe with the increase of Co2..

Should it be?

If oxygen content is reduced..yes

Not at 415ppm.

 

[Flopper]

Pontificating at a Green New Deal rally on Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who just claimed on Sunday that her apocalyptic prediction in January that the world would end in 12 years unless serious action was taken to combat climate change had just been "dry humor," suddenly returned to her climate change hysteria, stating CO2 levels had reached the highest levels in recorded history and the last time the levels were this high "bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth."

Ocasio-Cortez ranted, “It was reported today that this weekend for the first time in human history we have reached atmospheric levels of carbon at 415 parts per million. This has never been seen in recorded human history. In fact meteorologist Eric Holthaus and journalist said simply about this measurement, ‘We do not know a planet like this.’ The last time our planet hit 415 we were in the Pliocene period. Oceans were 90 feet higher. Bacteria and diseases we have never seen before roamed the Earth. Humans did not exist. We have never seen a planet like this. And a planet like this is exactly what we are going to get, and it is exactly what we are going to inherit from previous generations if we do not act positively now."

Ocasio-Cortez Issues Another Apocalyptic Climate Rant. Is This More Of Her ‘Dry Humor’?

Only one question here: What technology and devices were used to make this measurement during the Pliocene period? I didn't even know what the pliocene period was. So I looked it up. It was a time frame between 2 and 5 million years. The wheel wasn't even invented yet.

Oceans were 90 feet higher? So why aren't oceans 90 feet higher today?

CO2 levels prior to atmospheric measurements were determined by gas inclusion trapped in the Antarctic or Greenland ice sheets. The good news for deniers of climate change is they're melting pretty fast so you won't have any more of this data.

The Pliocene period lasted about 3 million years. Major changes took place both on land and the sea. It began with very warm temperatures and cooled over 3 degrees Celsius resulting in formation of ice sheets, large glaciers culminating in the ice age about 2.4 million years ago. With the formation of glaciers and sea ice, sea levels fell.

BTW She didn't mention that the temperatures in the Arctic recently hit 84 degrees breaking all records in recorded history.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

You pulled that right out of your ass.

HERE you can learn much more than from acting "science guy".

Pulled what?

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

your stupidity has become legendary and infamous.

and no, this is not something to be proud of. mostly means you'll need instructions on breathing when you get out of your pre-teen years.

Sure
That's really all you can say because it's obvious that you're afraid to touch the substance.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

When idiot "scientists" that admitted they fudge data create computer models then it is "shit in shit out" to their computer models. Besides, nobody has ever really created a good climate model for the earth. They always miss the boat. Atmospheric chemistry is too complex for the computer models that have been used. They don't really use accurate algorithms or input data.

If these stupid models were correct then all the horseshit predictions that were made decades ago would have come true but we haven't seen any of it. All we see is false input data and predictions that never come true. Meanwhile this solar minimum, which will cool off the earth for the next few decades, will render any of this AGW scammer stupidity to be moot.

When you create science based upon a stupid redistribution of world wide wealth instead of real facts you get shit and that is exactly what we see.

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

These stupid Moon Bats don't like to think about things like that. Just like they don't like to think about the global warming during the Roman empire when CO2 levels were much lower than today or the Medieval Warming Period with lower CO2 levels. Facts like that doesn't fit into their AGW narrative so that is why they have to make up data today and make predictions that never come true.

The only thing accurate about the the AGW theory is that it is a scam.

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

Exactly. Take the next step, dope. Now what do you imagine caused Co2 levels to be so high? What natural process was emitting such large amounts of Co2?

 

[Flopper]

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

It doesn't seem like it is harder to breathe with the increase of Co2..

Should it be?

If oxygen content is reduced..yes

Not at 415ppm.

Temperature change will be a much bigger problem. Even at 1000 ppm humans should be able to get enough oxygen, providing there're any left.

50-350 ppm: background (normal) outdoor air level
350-1,000 ppm: typical level found in occupied spaces with good air exchange.
1,000-2,000 ppm: level associated with complaints of drowsiness and poor air.

 

[iceberg]

so we go from:

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

to this a post or 2 later.

The whole thing is about O2.
Maybe you should just make a point

quite funny from the outside looking in.

What is funny about that? Both posts are about the same article, dope.
Do you have a point either?

yea, you ask what 02 has to do with the argument then you say it's all about the 02.

you are going both fucking directions.

 

[iceberg]

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

You pulled that right out of your ass.

HERE you can learn much more than from acting "science guy".

Pulled what?

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

your stupidity has become legendary and infamous.

and no, this is not something to be proud of. mostly means you'll need instructions on breathing when you get out of your pre-teen years.

Sure
That's really all you can say because it's obvious that you're afraid to touch the substance.

not at all. just not going to waste time on someone who doesn't understand what they are even talking about but just talking against whatever someone else says.

go be 3 without me now. i got other things to do.

 

[jasonnfree]

Here's our Heroine now....AOC. Seems like she's pretty strong in science also, so maybe she knows a few things about a few things when it comes to global warming?

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won a science-fair prize for research involving free radicals

 

[RealDave]

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

These stupid Moon Bats don't like to think about things like that. Just like they don't like to think about the global warming during the Roman empire when CO2 levels were much lower than today or the Medieval Warming Period with lower CO2 levels. Facts like that doesn't fit into their AGW narrative so that is why they have to make up data today and make predictions that never come true.

The only thing accurate about the the AGW theory is that it is a scam.

So, your claim is because the Earth was nearly covered in ice means AGW is a hoax,. I get it. You are soooooooooooooooooo smart.

You think CO2 is the only factor driving our climate.

You are sooooooo smart that you think the Medieval Warming Period was global.

/——/ It means the climate is always changing, and we can’t control it, you big dope

My weight tends to fluctuate over the years therefore the 40 Big Macs I ate last week can't be the cause of my recent weight gain.

 

[RealDave]

Model OUTPUT is not reality you idiot... It is proof of NOTHING!

Sorry, but it is proven fact.

When idiot "scientists" that admitted they fudge data create computer models then it is "shit in shit out" to their computer models. Besides, nobody has ever really created a good climate model for the earth. They always miss the boat. Atmospheric chemistry is too complex for the computer models that have been used. They don't really use accurate algorithms or input data.

If these stupid models were correct then all the horseshit predictions that were made decades ago would have come true but we haven't seen any of it. All we see is false input data and predictions that never come true. Meanwhile this solar minimum, which will cool off the earth for the next few decades, will render any of this AGW scammer stupidity to be moot.

When you create science based upon a stupid redistribution of world wide wealth instead of real facts you get shit and that is exactly what we see.

Data from different areas taken with different data collection must be adjusted.

Just like job data or any economic data is adjusted so it can be compared with data from different time frames.

Temps read in urban areas have to factor in the hear from the concrete. Etc.

It is science & I understand that you, being so stupid to be a Trump supporter, just don;t have a facilities to grasp this.

And really, solar minimums? I guess you think the scientists from NASA are too stupid to factor in solar cycles? Really?

The science of climate change has to do with the science of it. It is you & your band of ignorant fools allow fossil fuel industries to bring money into it.

Your a sock puppet that can blow out talking points but no facts.. Put out some real facts...

Here is a real fact:

As the suns fusion reaction burns its active area clouds with used materials and cools the reaction. This has been documented in the the plant life cycles of earths plants. It is also a potential cause of our 90 thousand year ice age and 11-16 thousand year interglacial cycles.

This cooling of the solar fusion cycle causes spectral changes in the suns output, primarily in the bands that affect ocean warming (0.2um to 0.8um - affects ocean warming to 700m). We have observed this decrease in the last three years and now we are looking at an 18% drop in energy in this band. A slight uptick in the 1.2um to 1.9um region (which is impeded in our atmosphere from hitting the ocean at depth) offsets the loss leaving the Total Solar Irradience nearly the same.

Without having an effect on the TSI, simple changes on the sun can have devastating impacts on earth. Below is the cooling of the oceans due to this change.

The oceans are cooling at a massive rate and its about to surface cooling our atmosphere massively.

Do you alarmist idiots really want to play the empirical evidence game with me?

No, they want want to spout the fabricated data that the scammers admitted was contrived.

As this solar minimum increases the credibility of the scammers, which is already very low, will be flushed down the toilet.

I called NASA & told them about solar cycles. They said "Wow I never thought of that" and wanted me to thank you for pointing this out.

Wait, that never happened.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Great.

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

LOL

Another Idiot.... Priceless...

Tell me, If all warming is attributed to solar output changes and the Ocean response to that change, what are you attributing to CO2? It's mere presence means nothing as we have dealt with levels above 7000ppm for millions of years and we didn't burn up then either...

Not only that but at one time the earth looked the ice planet Hoth from Star Wars and was almost entirely covered in ice and the CO2 levels were like 6,000 PPM.

These stupid Moon Bats don't like to think about things like that. Just like they don't like to think about the global warming during the Roman empire when CO2 levels were much lower than today or the Medieval Warming Period with lower CO2 levels. Facts like that doesn't fit into their AGW narrative so that is why they have to make up data today and make predictions that never come true.

The only thing accurate about the the AGW theory is that it is a scam.

So, your claim is because the Earth was nearly covered in ice means AGW is a hoax,. I get it. You are soooooooooooooooooo smart.

You think CO2 is the only factor driving our climate.

You are sooooooo smart that you think the Medieval Warming Period was global.

/——/ It means the climate is always changing, and we can’t control it, you big dope

My weight tends to fluctuate over the years therefore the 40 Big Macs I ate last week can't be the cause of my recent weight gain.

/——/ The equivalent of two bed bugs having sex on your scalp affecting your weight.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

None of that speaks to the effects of a 50% increase in atmospheric Co2.

You pulled that right out of your ass.

HERE you can learn much more than from acting "science guy".

Pulled what?

What does O2 have to do with any of this?

your stupidity has become legendary and infamous.

and no, this is not something to be proud of. mostly means you'll need instructions on breathing when you get out of your pre-teen years.

Sure
That's really all you can say because it's obvious that you're afraid to touch the substance.

not at all. just not going to waste time on someone who doesn't understand what they are even talking about but just talking against whatever someone else says.

go be 3 without me now. i got other things to do.

Fly away now, dope

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So, let's review:

stating CO2 levels had reached the highest levels in recorded history

Accurate.

The last time our planet hit 415 we were in the Pliocene period.

Accurate.

Oceans were 90 feet higher.

Accurate.

Humans did not exist. We have never seen a planet like this.

Accurate.