Scientists Prove Warmer Eras Prior to Industrial Age, Disproves AGW

[Montrovant]

I'm not sure how the Earth being warmer 3 million years ago disproves that mankind may be causing warming now. Does manmade global warming mean only warming that is greater than it has been at any point in the past?

Regardless of whether humanity is contributing to the warming of the planet, the fact that it was warmer 3 million years ago neither proves nor disproves the idea.

But it does disprove the idea that it’s going to be catastrophic for the environment and cause mass extinctions of many species, which is what the fear mongers are peddling in order to get more control over people’s lives. The globalists could care less about the environment, they just want to use the issue to push their Agenda.

Does it? What if there were mass extinctions 3 million years ago when the planet warmed? Also, the distribution of life on the planet is quite different now than it was 3 million years ago, that could influence how strong an effect global warming has on the planet's life, regardless of the source of that warming.

The only thing this study seems to disprove would be the idea that the sort of warming we're seeing today is unprecedented.

Yeah well gonna have to roll the dice and hope for the best because nobody showing any interest in forking over their wallet to combat something imaginary. Now....maybe it's not imaginary to you and some other climate crusaders, but most in the public could not possibly yawn any bigger when it comes to climate change action.....we know this!

This story simply increases the hordes of people who have become skeptics over the last 10 years.

Whether AGW is real or imaginary has no real impact on whether this particular study disproved AGW.

 

[Aletheia4u]

Lol, so now we know for a FACT that while humans were still evolving into higher life forms, the Earth was warmer and had more CO2, along with the note that Mars and Earth seem to h ave the same warming/cooling cycles.

If AGW can be falsifiable, meaning it is real science and not psuedo science, then this should do it.

But we all know it is a secular religion and has nothing to do with science and never did.

Nolte: Scientists Prove Man-Made Global Warming Is a Hoax

Current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million (ppm) were last seen on Earth three million years ago, according to the most detailed reconstruction of the Earth’s climate by researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and published in Science Advances.

Yes, you read that correctly, three million — million — years ago CO2 levels on Earth were the same as they are today, but there is one major difference between three million years ago and today…

Three million years ago, we humans were not driving cars or eating the meat that requires cow farts; we weren’t barbecuing or refusing to recycle or building factories; there was no Industrial Age, no plastic, no air conditioning, no electricity, no lumber mills, no consumerism, no aerosols.​

But then again, maybe Mamoth farts were worse than cars?

roflmao

Harry Wexler told the government to explode 2 hydrogen bombs in order to make a hole in the earth's atmosphere to make the glaciers to melt in the antarctic. And they did it. But we have several meteorites each year hitting the atmosphere. Creating small nuclear explosions. Overtime, our atmosphere is shrinking by these tiny explosions. But it is not cause by gassy cows.

.FAQ - Meteoroids/Meteorites

A Very Scary Light Show: Exploding H-Bombs In Space

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/the-big-questions/how-do-we-destroy-asteroid-it-destroys-earth-n704846

 

[skookerasbil]

The biggest flaw in this silly AGW scam is that it can't be proven that man made levels of CO2 emissions results in any measurable climate change.

100% wrong. But thanks for stopping by.

Actually s0n.....Flash's post pwn'd you. The public views AGW as a scam which is the only thing that matters. You and a few others might be convinced on AGW, but to the public it's a collective yawn. Your scientists have yet to make the case...........and we know because all of these climate treaties ( like Paris ) are a joke and there has been zero US legislation in climate change since forever. Too, renewable energy still laughable.

So though you dismiss Flash's sentiments, his side is wInNiNg huge!

 

[Flash]

[, renewable energy still laughable.

The world is powered by fossil fuels with a little help from nuclear. The stupid Moon Bat's hope of the silly promise of renewables is indeed a joke. No wind or solar project can make it on its own with massive government subsidizes. A Moon Bat's wet dream.

As you said this whole silly AGW is a scam and most Americans know it. That is why it is never going anywhere except in the the demented minds of idiot ignorant Libtard shitheads.

 

[skookerasbil]

[, renewable energy still laughable.

The world is powered by fossil fuels with a little help from nuclear. The stupid Moon Bat's hope of the silly promise of renewables is indeed a joke. No wind or solar project can make it on its own with massive government subsidizes. A Moon Bat's wet dream.

As you said this whole silly AGW is a scam and most Americans know it. That is why it is never going anywhere except in the the demented minds of idiot ignorant Libtard shitheads.

Hey stop into the ENVIRONMENT forum! Skeptics dominate in there.....lots of laughs making fun of the AGW k00ks! It's a hoot! Lots of social oddball climate crusaders......

 

[Flash]

[, renewable energy still laughable.

The world is powered by fossil fuels with a little help from nuclear. The stupid Moon Bat's hope of the silly promise of renewables is indeed a joke. No wind or solar project can make it on its own with massive government subsidizes. A Moon Bat's wet dream.

As you said this whole silly AGW is a scam and most Americans know it. That is why it is never going anywhere except in the the demented minds of idiot ignorant Libtard shitheads.

Hey stop into the ENVIRONMENT forum! Skeptics dominate in there.....lots of laughs making fun of the AGW k00ks! It's a hoot! Lots of social oddball climate crusaders......

Environmental wackos. The idiots of the Left.

 

[Flash]

Speaking of Environmental Wacko morons talking out their ass about things they know nothing about.

John Kerry has always been a dimwit, in addition to being an asshole and a traitorous scumbag but now he is trying to pass himself off as climate expert and he got called on it by somebody that is a real scientist.


John Kerry clashes with Rep. Thomas Massie on his college degree, climate change: ‘Are you serious?’

John Kerry clashes with Rep. Thomas Massie on his college degree, climate change: ‘Are you serious?’

Former Secretary of State John Kerry and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., had a heated exchange Tuesday over Kerry's education and climate change.

Kerry, 75, appeared before the House Oversight and Reform Committee hearing to talk about climate change. The incredible exchange began when Massie read a quote Kerry said regarding President Trump’s advisers.

“It sounds like you’re questioning the credentials of the president’s advisers, but I don’t think we should question your credentials today. Isn’t it true you have a science degree from Yale?” Massie asked Kerry.

“It sounds like you’re questioning the credentials of the president’s advisers, but I don’t think we should question your credentials today. Isn’t it true you have a science degree from Yale?” Massie asked Kerry.

Kerry replied that he had a bachelor of arts degree from the university.

“Is it a political science degree?” Massie, who has two engineering degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, asked.

“Yes, it’s political science,” the former Massachusetts senator said.

“So, how do you get a bachelor of arts in science?” the congressman asked.

“Well it’s liberal arts education and - it’s a bachelor,” Kerry said.

“So, it’s not really science. I think it’s somewhat appropriate that somebody with a pseudoscience degree is here pushing pseudoscience in front of our committee,” Massie said before Kerry fired back.

“Are you serious? I mean this is really happening here?” the former secretary of state asked.

The two men continued their back and forth before Massie asked Kerry if he was saying the president “doesn’t have educated adults there now.”

“I don’t know who he has there because it's secret,” he replied. “Why would he have to have a secret analysis of climate change?”

The two then began to discuss carbon dioxide levels on the planet today versus millions of years ago.

“But there weren’t human beings; that was a different world, folks,” Kerry said.

“So — how’d it get to 2,000 parts per million if we humans weren’t here? … Did geology stop when we got on the planet?” Massie asked.

“This is just not a serious conversation,” Kerry fired back.

Kerry tweeted about the exchange Wednesday.

“It’s almost as if someone said, ‘Congress has hit rock bottom’ and Massie replies with ‘hold my beer,’” he wrote.

Massie replied to Kerry’s tweet saying, “It’s almost as if someone said, ‘No one has less knowledge of science, a higher opinion of himself, and a bigger carbon footprint than Al Gore’ and Kerry replies ‘hold my champagne, I’m going to testify as a climate change expert.”

 

[Deno]

Lol, so now we know for a FACT that while humans were still evolving into higher life forms, the Earth was warmer and had more CO2, along with the note that Mars and Earth seem to h ave the same warming/cooling cycles.

If AGW can be falsifiable, meaning it is real science and not psuedo science, then this should do it.

But we all know it is a secular religion and has nothing to do with science and never did.

Nolte: Scientists Prove Man-Made Global Warming Is a Hoax

Current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million (ppm) were last seen on Earth three million years ago, according to the most detailed reconstruction of the Earth’s climate by researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and published in Science Advances.

Yes, you read that correctly, three million — million — years ago CO2 levels on Earth were the same as they are today, but there is one major difference between three million years ago and today…

Three million years ago, we humans were not driving cars or eating the meat that requires cow farts; we weren’t barbecuing or refusing to recycle or building factories; there was no Industrial Age, no plastic, no air conditioning, no electricity, no lumber mills, no consumerism, no aerosols.​

But then again, maybe Mamoth farts were worse than cars?

roflmao

The Tards are all so very gullible...

They suck up Bull Shit like a Hoover Super Deluxe with headers.....

They are so Stupid and their puppet masters know it.....

They actually have many of the Tards believing we only have 12 years to live............

Think about the kind of Dumb Ass that eats that shit up......

Tards will be Tards.............

They can’t fight Nature...

 

[skookerasbil]

Lol, so now we know for a FACT that while humans were still evolving into higher life forms, the Earth was warmer and had more CO2, along with the note that Mars and Earth seem to h ave the same warming/cooling cycles.

If AGW can be falsifiable, meaning it is real science and not psuedo science, then this should do it.

But we all know it is a secular religion and has nothing to do with science and never did.

Nolte: Scientists Prove Man-Made Global Warming Is a Hoax

Current CO2 levels of 410 parts per million (ppm) were last seen on Earth three million years ago, according to the most detailed reconstruction of the Earth’s climate by researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) and published in Science Advances.

Yes, you read that correctly, three million — million — years ago CO2 levels on Earth were the same as they are today, but there is one major difference between three million years ago and today…

Three million years ago, we humans were not driving cars or eating the meat that requires cow farts; we weren’t barbecuing or refusing to recycle or building factories; there was no Industrial Age, no plastic, no air conditioning, no electricity, no lumber mills, no consumerism, no aerosols.​

But then again, maybe Mamoth farts were worse than cars?

roflmao

The Tards are all so very gullible...

They suck up Bull Shit like a Hoover Super Deluxe with headers.....

They are so Stupid and their puppet masters know it.....

They actually have many of the Tards believing we only have 12 years to live............

Think about the kind of Dumb Ass that eats that shit up......

Tards will be Tards.............

They can’t fight Nature...

I'd say it's about 50/50 with these types. Half just tend to the hysterical so naturally just get bamboozled by alarmist rhetoric. The other half are Alinsky devotees who know well pursuit of clean energy places many millions in the poor house.....many Californians pay nearly 10% of their income on electrcity. So it's an effective way to collapse the system which they desire. Either way....these types are dangerous as fuck. Fortunately though, not winning!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Good idea......if you put Manhatten on 50 ft. stilts I think it would be pretty safe after that from sandy-like storm. Would only cost about 500 billion or so.

Luckily someone came up with a better idea. Sandy cost NYC $19 billion so I guess they figured $1 billion in prevention is a bargain.

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

The only reason Katrina and Sandy cost so much is that there was advanced infrastructure coupled with government incompetence.

Socialism will reduce these costs mostly by destroying property values through the implementation of socialism.

 

[skookerasbil]

The goofballs still dont know dick about tornados....damn things still slaughtering folks. When the science can get to the point of being able to predict tornados, maybe then the public will give some credence to the science of AGW. Doy

 

[alang1216]

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

 

[skookerasbil]

Nah

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

Nah....after Katrina, the AGW community jumped out of their shoes predicting more frequent and more Cat 5 hurricanes. That was 2005. We didnt see a hurricane anywhere near the US for almost 13 years and the Atlantic was quiet as hel.. So they are still guessing on this shit and praying mother nature cooperates and backs them up.

 

[alang1216]

Nah

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

Nah....after Katrina, the AGW community jumped out of their shoes predicting more frequent and more Cat 5 hurricanes. That was 2005. We didnt see a hurricane anywhere near the US for almost 13 years and the Atlantic was quiet as hel.. So they are still guessing on this shit and praying mother nature cooperates and backs them up.

So the smart thing is to do nothing and hope for the best? React not plan. Hope that there won't be another cycle of hurricanes, tell scientists to stop studying the issue, and don't look for or fund any 'low hanging fruit' that might harden the most vulnerable areas. Infrastructure takes years or decades to build.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So the smart thing is to do nothing and hope for the best? React not plan. Hope that there won't be another cycle of hurricanes, tell scientists to stop studying the issue, and don't look for or fund any 'low hanging fruit' that might harden the most vulnerable areas. Infrastructure takes years or decades to build.

What we need to do is risk/cost analysis.

Destroying our economy to a void a risk that would cost us far less and has a negligible chance of actually happen is not good risk/cost analysis.

 

[Montrovant]

So the smart thing is to do nothing and hope for the best? React not plan. Hope that there won't be another cycle of hurricanes, tell scientists to stop studying the issue, and don't look for or fund any 'low hanging fruit' that might harden the most vulnerable areas. Infrastructure takes years or decades to build.

What we need to do is risk/cost analysis.

Destroying our economy to a void a risk that would cost us far less and has a negligible chance of actually happen is not good risk/cost analysis.

Wait, space research and travel are going to destroy the economy?

Maybe attempting interstellar travel with current technology would, but is that what we're discussing?

 

[james bond]

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

Haha. So wrong. AGW has to do with climate, not weather. You believe in weather myths. It difficult enough to forecast a hurricane forming let alone the strength of a hurricane, but weather satellites, movement patterns and other formation patterns help make a forecast.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So the smart thing is to do nothing and hope for the best? React not plan. Hope that there won't be another cycle of hurricanes, tell scientists to stop studying the issue, and don't look for or fund any 'low hanging fruit' that might harden the most vulnerable areas. Infrastructure takes years or decades to build.

What we need to do is risk/cost analysis.

Destroying our economy to a void a risk that would cost us far less and has a negligible chance of actually happen is not good risk/cost analysis.

Wait, space research and travel are going to destroy the economy?

Maybe attempting interstellar travel with current technology would, but is that what we're discussing?

No, space exploration and the development of our off shore ocean shelves would be beneficial.

Placing our economy under the governments control under catastrophic carbon reduction regs would be a disaster.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm not sure how the Earth being warmer 3 million years ago disproves that mankind may be causing warming now. Does manmade global warming mean only warming that is greater than it has been at any point in the past?

Regardless of whether humanity is contributing to the warming of the planet, the fact that it was warmer 3 million years ago neither proves nor disproves the idea.

If CO2 was as high 3 million years ago, how did it get that high? Maybe man isn't causing the rise of CO2 now but some natural phenomena is.

Mark

That might be. My point was that the level of CO2 3 million years ago doesn't prove whether or not man is contributing to it now.

Correct. Since we know that CO2 levels can vary without mans "help", I would say it would be damn near impossible to say with certainty that we are the cause of CO2 rise.

Mark

Not impossible at all. Ever heard of Carbon 14? The carbon we add by burning fossil fuels has no C14 in it because it is millions of years old. These levels can be measured. The ratio of C14 in atmospheric CO2 is dropping even as the amount of CO2 increases.

The question is how much is man contributing.

 

[BlindBoo]

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

It has been disproven that AGW theoy predicts more hurricanes, which is fortunate for AGW proponents since we ahve had fewere hurricanes these last ten years, not more.

GW may or may not predict more hurricanes but it does predict more intense hurricanes.

"We also conclude that it is likely that climate warming will cause Atlantic hurricanes in the coming century have higher rainfall rates than present-day hurricanes, and medium confidence that they will be more intense (higher peak winds and lower central pressures) on average. In our view, it is uncertain how the annual number of Atlantic tropical storms will change over the 21st century. All else equal, tropical cyclone surge levels should increase with sea level rise as projected for example by IPCC AR5. These assessment statements are intended to apply to climate warming of the type projected for the 21st century by prototype IPCC mid-range warming scenarios, such as A1B or RCP4.5."

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Likelihood Statements
The terminology here for likelihood statements generally follows the conventions used in the IPCC assessments, i.e., for the assessed likelihood of an outcome or result:

• Very Likely: > 90%,
• Likely: > 66%
• More Likely Than Not (or Better Than Even Odds) > 50%

Global Warming and Hurricanes – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory