Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The sun warms the ocean. Just like it always does. When heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted by changes in water salinity, water density and changes to wind patterns from changes in solar radiation either from changes in intensity or orbital forcing, then the planet enters a glacial cycle driven by extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation.Yes yes the ocean.
It just warms on it own.
Because the planet is returning to its pre-glacial temperature that heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic produces. Absent that circulation the planet enters into a glacial period driven by extensive northern hemisphere glaciation. When the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic is restored the planet slowly warms back up as all that ice that built up during the glacial event melts.Okay, why is it warming?
Volcanic activity?
Tilt of the earth?
Ocean current change?
Butterfly effect?
Your bullshit?
The sun warms the ocean. Just like it always does. When heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted by changes in water salinity, water density and changes to wind patterns from changes in solar radiation either from changes in intensity or orbital forcing, then the planet enters a glacial cycle driven by extensive northern hemisphere continental glaciation.
So you believe that the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic has been taking place in an oscillatory pattern that just happens to match the algebraic sum of the three Milankovitch cycles. But it's not due to the Milankovitch cycles. And when you used the term "orbital forcing" you didn't mean Milankovitch forcing but were talking about other orbital forcing.Because the planet is returning to its pre-glacial temperature that heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic produces. Absent that circulation the planet enters into a glacial period driven by extensive northern hemisphere glaciation. When the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic is restored the planet slowly warms back up as all that ice that built up during the glacial event melts.
Show me the math on how much orbital cycles warm or cool the planet. Because there is ample evidence on how ocean currents warm the northern hemisphere and ample evidence that changes to the ocean currents affect the planet's climate.So you believe that the heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic has been taking place in an oscillatory pattern that just happens to match the algebraic sum of the three Milankovitch cycles. But it's not due to the Milankovitch cycles. And when you used the term "orbital forcing" you didn't mean Milankovitch forcing but were talking about other orbital forcing.
Besides that, you have never explained why CO2 led warming here and why the CO2 and the warming has happened at a rate 7-10 times as fast as anything in the last million years. This is NOT a D-O event, so why is it happening so fast? We had continuously cooled for over 6,000 years. Why did it suddenly start warming again? There has been no radical change in ocean circulation till now. There has been no radical change in salinity or temperature till now.
So, try again. Tell us why glacial-interglacial is cyclical and what would cause the sudden warming and CO2 increase we have been witnessing for the last 150 years. Cause that bullshit don't do it.
I've covered this ad nauseum. Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 lagged temperature by 800 to 1000 years because of the solubility of CO2 in water versus temperature. When it was cold the ocean absorbed CO2. When it was warm the ocean released CO2. That's why CO2 was a function of temperature prior to the industrial revolution. Post industrial revolution CO2 was a function of emissions. Yes, increase CO2 does warm the planet slightly. For every doubling of CO2 surface temperature will rise 1C. Your error is attributing all warming to CO2 and no warming due to earth's natural glacial climate cycle.Besides that, you have never explained why CO2 led warming here and why the CO2 and the warming has happened at a rate 7-10 times as fast as anything in the last million years.
I have. Over and over again. And I will continue to do so despite your objections.So, try again. Tell us why glacial-interglacial is cyclical and what would cause the sudden warming and CO2 increase we have been witnessing for the last 150 years. Cause that bullshit don't do it.
I use the term orbital forcing because that's what it is. Orbital forcing, also known as Milankovitch cycles, is a term used to describe three variations in Earth's orbit that affect the amount of solar radiation that reaches the Earth over time:And when you used the term "orbital forcing" you didn't mean Milankovitch forcing but were talking about other orbital forcing.
Didn't say it was. They were much more rapid events in both directions than today. 5C up in a matter of decades and 5C down over a matter of decades.This is NOT a D-O event, so why is it happening so fast?
You're stalling. What do YOU believe could be driving such a rapid warming?Didn't say it was. They were much more rapid events in both directions than today. 5C up in a matter of decades and 5C down over a matter of decades.
Why don't you show us a link from an actual study that comes to that conclusion?D-O events are proof that glacial cycles are triggered by the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic and not from orbital forcing which may play a role in the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic but only from impacting wind patterns and not atmospheric temperatures.
Milankovitch does NOT produce rapid climate events. If not for the feedback of CO2 released from the warming oceans, they could not drive the glacial-interglacial cycle. But they get that feedback and thus they take place.Please explain to me how gradual changes in precession, obliquity and eccentricity can produce rapid climate events such as the initiation of a glacial event.
Not without showing WHAT IS CAUSING THE DISRUPTION.Because it's pretty easy to show how the disruption of heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic can cause such a rapid glacial event.
If I hear the term "uniquely configured" from you one more time, I'm going to puke. And, as I just noted, you have YET to explain what causes disruptions to heat circulation. All we ever get from you is "it happens" and that it happens precisely in synch with the Milankovitch cycles is a coincidence. And despite being asked repeatedly, you have NEVER presented a reason for the extraordinarily rapid warming 1880 - Present.The vast majority of heat is stored in the ocean, not the atmosphere. The northern hemisphere is uniquely configured for colder temperatures when heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted.
I don't accept the subjective term "rapid warming." This warming trend is no different than any other warming trend which the geologic record is littered with.You're stalling. What do YOU believe could be driving such a rapid warming?
Why don't you show us a link from an actual study that comes to that conclusion?
Milankovitch does NOT produce rapid climate events. If not for the feedback of CO2 released from the warming oceans, they could not drive the glacial-interglacial cycle. But they get that feedback and thus they take place.
Not without showing WHAT IS CAUSING THE DISRUPTION.
If I hear the term "uniquely configured" from you one more time, I'm going to puke. And, as I just noted, you have YET to explain what causes disruptions to heat circulation. All we ever get from you is "it happens" and that it happens precisely in synch with the Milankovitch cycles is a coincidence. And despite being asked repeatedly, you have NEVER presented a reason for the extraordinarily rapid warming 1880 - Present.
You're a fucking broken record. And you are not answering questions you ought to be able to answer. You need to think about why you cannot.I don't accept the subjective term "rapid warming." This warming trend is no different than any other warming trend which the geologic record is littered with.
Glacial cycles are not driven by CO2. CO2 followed temperature by 800 to 1000 years. Glacial cycles are triggered by the disruption of heat from the Atlantic to the Arctic.
The planet is NATURALLY returning to its pre-glacial temperature that heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic produces like it always does. The vast majority of heat is stored in the ocean, not the atmosphere. The northern hemisphere is uniquely configured for colder temperatures when heat circulation from the Atlantic to the Arctic gets disrupted.
www.environmentalgraphiti.org
What affects ocean currents? Changes in salinity and density which are temperature related and changes in wind patterns which are solar radiation intensity related.You're a fucking broken record. And you are not answering questions you ought to be able to answer. You need to think about why you cannot.
WHAT causes the disruption to heat flow?
WHAT is the cause of the rapid warming since the Industrial Revolution after 6,000 years of cooling if not CO2?
View attachment 959710
View attachment 959712Temperature record of the last 2,000 years - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
View attachment 959714Temperature and CO2 for Last 1000 Years — Environmental Graphiti
View all educational, climate change and environmental art about temperature of the earth and CO2 for the last 1000 years from Environmental Graphiti here.
Global temperatures over last 24,000 years show today's warming 'unprecedented'
A University of Arizona-led effort to reconstruct Earth's climate since the last ice age, about 24,000 years ago, highlights the main drivers of climate change and how far out of bounds human activity has pushed the climate system.phys.org
And if you actually cannot see the "rapid warming" there, then you are lying to us AND yourself.
Anyone see where the Little Ice age is on that graph? I don't. Must be a crappy reconstruction.
The planet returning NATURALLY to its pre-glacial temperature like it always does.WHAT is the cause of the rapid warming since the Industrial Revolution after 6,000 years of cooling if not CO2?
Your reconstructions are garbage. They smooth the variability. And don't match the data from the Arctic. Much of the last 10,000 years was warmer than today.And if you actually cannot see the "rapid warming" there, then you are lying to us AND yourself.
Find us a scientific study that supports those claimsYour reconstructions are garbage. They smooth the variability. And don't match the data from the Arctic. Much of the last 10,000 years was warmer than today.
I've never said such a thing. What I have said over and over again is that the current rate of warming is many times higher than any previous glacial -> interglacial warming in the past million years. And there is NO natural forcing factor that could POSSIBLY have caused it other than greenhouse warming from increased CO2.The last interglacial period was 2C warmer with 26ft higher seas and had 120 ppm LESS CO2 than today. How can you argue the planet is outside of its natural climate range?
It's in the geologic record, dummy. This isn't new news.Find us a scientific study that supports those claims
I've never said such a thing. What I have said over and over again is that the current rate of warming is many times higher than any previous glacial -> interglacial warming in the past million years. And there is NO natural forcing factor that could POSSIBLY have caused it other than greenhouse warming from increased CO2.
