Climate Change Brings Warmer Global Temps

[Cardinal Carminative]

Did you ever take Earth science in school?

Just a few classes. Let's see:

Intro geology
Historical geology
Mineralogy
Petrology
Stratigraphy
Sedimentology (undergrad and grad)
Geophysics
Organic Geochemistry
Coal geology
Organic petrography
Optical mineralogy
Geomorphology
Field Methods
Structural Geology
Economic Geology
Geochemical Thermodynamics
Theoretical Geochemistry

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Just a few classes. Let's see:

Intro geology
Historical geology
Mineralogy
Petrology
Stratigraphy
Sedimentology (undergrad and grad)
Geophysics
Organic Geochemistry
Coal geology
Organic petrography
Optical mineralogy
Geomorphology
Field Methods
Structural Geology
Economic Geology
Geochemical Thermodynamics
Theoretical Geochemistry

So why dont you know about the Earth 4.5 billion years ago?

Feel free to explain your reasoning there.

Early Earth

The very early earth was entirely different than it is now. It was extremely hot, about 1,800°C.

I dont think we are even close to that temp, and have seen considerable cooling since then.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

So why dont you know about the Earth 4.5 billion years ago?

Because it was an accretionary blob of cooling and partially melted rocks. Didn't even have an atmosphere.

Early Earth I dont think we are even close to that temp, and have seen considerable cooling since then.

Why on earth would you compare today to a time when the planet didn't even have an atmosphere and was still just accreting?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Because it was an accretionary blob of cooling and partially melted rocks. Didn't even have an atmosphere.



Why on earth would you compare today to a time when the planet didn't even have an atmosphere and was still just accreting?

Because you had said that 10,000 years of data wasn't comparable to the length of time that the Earth has been around. 10,000 years is a lot longer than you have ever been around, or the DATA sets you progressives use for global warming religion.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Because you had said that 10,000 years of data wasn't comparable to the length of time that the Earth has been around. 10,000 years is a lot longer than you have ever been around, or the DATA sets you progressives use for global warming religion.

You are not really tracking the conversation here. Sorry.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

You are not really tracking the conversation here. Sorry.

Dude, it was found out that the East Anglia Science center, was cooking the books on Global Warming because they had fudged the numbers. Why the fuck should we believe anything a progressive says? You lie all the fucking time.

Are you invested in the Clean Energy Scam?

Fudging the Global Temperature Record

How did the UN’s IPCC make it seem as if global temperatures skyrocketed in conjunction with rising CO2 emissions? Simply massage and then bury the data — again and again. ...

thenewamerican.com

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Dude, it was found out that the East Anglia Science center, was cooking the books on Global Warming because they had fudged the numbers. Why the fuck should we believe anything a progressive says? You lie all the fucking time.

I don't believe you are correct there. Could you point us to the finding about East Anglia? (I'm not talking about your favorite cherry-picked-out-of-context e-mails because you wouldn't understand what they are ACTUALLY talking about...no I'm asking for the actual finding of fraud).

Are you invested in the Clean Energy Scam?

Well, let's just say I have paid exactly 2 power bills in the last 5 years (most of the time I pay nothing) and I drive for free every single day (no gas, very little maintenance cost). All of that thanks to PV Solar and EV car.

But if you like paying ever increasing gas prices then by all means do so. It's your money.

Fudging the Global Temperature Record

How did the UN’s IPCC make it seem as if global temperatures skyrocketed in conjunction with rising CO2 emissions? Simply massage and then bury the data — again and again. ...

thenewamerican.com

Why don't you try actually reading science.

 

[Flash]

Things are normal. We had a normal winter here in Florida. My wife's family in Indiana had a colder than normal winter.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Things are normal. We had a normal winter here in Florida. My wife's family in Indiana had a colder than normal winter.

View attachment 631017

I like that you highlight the CRETACEOUS there. The CO2 levels in the atmosphere were 3-6 times what they are now.

It's almost as if Greenhouse gases like CO2 can impact climate!!!

WOAH!

 

[Flash]

I like that you highlight the CRETACEOUS there. The CO2 levels in the atmosphere were 3-6 times what they are now.

It's almost as if Greenhouse gases like CO2 can impact climate!!!

WOAH!

There were times when the CO2 levels were almost ten times what they are now and the earth was cooler.

There have been times when the earth was warmer and the CO2 levels lower than they are now.

In fact the data shows that CO2 level changes usually lags temperature changes.

It is like that CO2 has very little effect on the earth's climate.

WOAH!

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

There were times when the CO2 levels were almost ten times what they are now and the earth was cooler.

When?

In fact the data shows that CO2 level changes usually lags temperature changes.

So it seems that you haven't ever had a chemistry class?

CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. Meaning it CAN AND DOES cause warming at the surface. But CO2 can also LAG increased temperatures because when you raise the temperature the oceans get warmer and dissolved CO2 comes out of solution.

I know that's a lot of extremely complex science for you there, but if you read it a couple times you may understand.

It is like that CO2 has very little effect on the earth's climate.

WOAH!

Wrong. By a HUGE margin. CO2 and H2O are primary gases responsible for the earth's surface temperature. If our atmosphere lacked greenhouse gases and ONLY had O2 and N2 the average surface temperature would be about -20degC.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I don't believe you are correct there. Could you point us to the finding about East Anglia? (I'm not talking about your favorite cherry-picked-out-of-context e-mails because you wouldn't understand what they are ACTUALLY talking about...no I'm asking for the actual finding of fraud).



Well, let's just say I have paid exactly 2 power bills in the last 5 years (most of the time I pay nothing) and I drive for free every single day (no gas, very little maintenance cost). All of that thanks to PV Solar and EV car.

But if you like paying ever increasing gas prices then by all means do so. It's your money.



Why don't you try actually reading science.

Do you know what cooked the books mean?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Do you know what cooked the books mean?

I know that people like you who only heard about the climategate e-mails through denialist blogs don't understand any of the technical details of that particular kerfluffle.

Again, if you have any actual FINDING OF FRAUD from that present it. Or just go to your fave denialist blog and recycle something that went out of style about 10 years ago.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I know that people like you who only heard about the climategate e-mails through denialist blogs don't understand any of the technical details of that particular kerfluffle.

Again, if you have any actual FINDING OF FRAUD from that present it. Or just go to your fave denialist blog and recycle something that went out of style about 10 years ago.

Denialists" Bwaaahhaaaaa. Do you believe men with tits are women? Yes or No?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Denialists" Bwaaahhaaaaa. Do you believe men with tits are women? Yes or No?

Wow. Whiplash there.

Does this feel like linear thinking to you?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

That is what i thought....How to stump a Progressive....Ask them a question about biology.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Wow. Whiplash there.

Does this feel like linear thinking to you?

Just a simple Yes or No, and you just cant answer. Are you related to the new Supreme Court Jester?

 

[Flash]

When?



So it seems that you haven't ever had a chemistry class?

CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. Meaning it CAN AND DOES cause warming at the surface. But CO2 can also LAG increased temperatures because when you raise the temperature the oceans get warmer and dissolved CO2 comes out of solution.

I know that's a lot of extremely complex science for you there, but if you read it a couple times you may understand.



Wrong. By a HUGE margin. CO2 and H2O are primary gases responsible for the earth's surface temperature. If our atmosphere lacked greenhouse gases and ONLY had O2 and N2 the average surface temperature would be about -20degC.

During "Snowball Earth" the CO2 levels were about 4000 PPM.

In recent times, like during the Roman Warming Era and Medieval Warming Period, CO2 was lower than it is now but the earth was warmer.

You are confused about CO2. It has not been proven to be a greenhouse gas at the levels we see now. It certainly has not been proven that the amount of CO2 created by humans have led to any contribution to greenhouse. There is a stupid correlation based upon fabricated and cherry picked data and a lot of shit in shit out computer models funded by lucrative research grants but nothing scientific.

Scientists are just like politicians. They can be bought to give you whatever you want. We have seen this big time with Climate Scientists and they even admitted in the Climategate revelations that is what they do.

As an Environmental Engineer that did a lot of research on this before teaching college classes in Environmental Science I saw nothing of substance. There are a lot of dumbass statements made about man made CO2 levels contributing to a warming of the climate but nothing backed up by real indisputable science.

The chemistry of CO2 in the atmosphere is a lot more complicated than these simple models that the AGW scammers pass of as researched science.

However, if you want to believe in this silly ass AGW bullshit then go ahead. Like the man said "there is a sucker born every minute".

I don't really care.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

That is what i thought....How to stump a Progressive....Ask them a question about biology.

Or just ask them random questions based on whatever Q-anon fear topic comes up on the wheel that spins in your heads all the time.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

During "Snowball Earth" the CO2 levels were about 4000 PPM.

That's probably because CO2 wasn't providing sufficient positive forcing to overcome the forcings due to position of the continents and ocean currents at the time.

In recent times, like during the Roman Warming Era and Medieval Warming Period, CO2 was lower than it is now but the earth was warmer.

The MWP may not have been global in extent. Researchers think it was limited to northern hemisphere and mostly Europe and north Atlantic.

You are confused about CO2. It has not been proven to be a greenhouse gas at the levels we see now.

It is a greenhouse gas at ALL levels. Please read some basic science. It's because the C=O bonds absorb IR effectively.

It certainly has not been proven that the amount of CO2 created by humans have led to any contribution to greenhouse.

Wrong.

There is a stupid correlation based upon fabricated and cherry picked data and a lot of shit in shit out computer models funded by lucrative research grants but nothing scientific.

And you know exactly what about any of that?

Scientists are just like politicians. They can be bought to give you whatever you want.

I love it when people say that. It means that in YOUR PROFESSION there must be mostly people who will lie for money.

If you think that is how scientists behave it must mean that that is how YOU behave. Tsk tsk tsk.

We have seen this big time with Climate Scientists and they even admitted in the Climategate revelations that is what they do.

You are so wrong it's not even funny.

As an Environmental Engineer that did a lot of research on this before teaching college classes in Environmental Science I saw nothing of substance.

Interesting. You are an environmental engineer? How could you be so uninformed on the basic science? Honestly, as an environmental engineer I KNOW you had to take an intro chemistry class. How could you miss the part about CO2 exsolving from water AND the part about CO2 absorbing IR?

The chemistry of CO2 in the atmosphere is a lot more complicated than these simple models that the AGW scammers pass of as researched science.

So you don't know anything about the models? OK.

However, if you want to believe in this silly ass AGW bullshit then go ahead. Like the man said "there is a sucker born every minute".

I don't really care.

Sounds like you do. But the problem is you seem to have skipped a LOT of basic science classes. Not sure how you got your BS but I am willing to guess you spent most of your enviro engineering time sitting a drill rig and collecting bailer samples and not a lot else.