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 landmass configuration is not oscillating in a manner that would produce the roughly 30 glacial-interglacial cycles.The glacial cycle began 3 million years ago and it is a function of the planet's landmass configuration which resulted in thermally isolated polar regions which lowered the temperature threshold for extensive continental glaciation.
Left that part out.Salinity is a function of temperature because ice melt is a function of temperature.
I am VERY interested in the truth, but the problem is you don't have a shred of it. You have NOT explained the cause of global cycles in ANY amount of detail. Your posts on this topic are filled with handwaving and "then it happens".I have explained the cause of glacial cycles in great detail. You aren't interested in the truth.
You must be the only person on the planet who believes that thermal isolation of the polar regions and heat circulation don't matter.The landmass configuration is not oscillating in a manner that would produce the roughly 30 glacial-interglacial cycles.
Left that part out.
I am VERY interested in the truth, but the problem is you don't have a shred of it. You have NOT explained the cause of global cycles in ANY amount of detail. Your posts on this topic are filled with handwaving and "then it happens".
What I do NOT believe is that either process is responsible in any way for the warming of the last 150 years.You must be the only person on the planet who believes that thermal isolation of the polar regions and heat circulation don't matter.
You butt fuck truth.
Then you are a fool. The geologic record is littered with warming and cooling trends not caused by CO2.What I do NOT believe is that either process is responsible in any way for the warming of the last 150 years.
Jesus H Christ! So the fuck WHAT?Then you are a fool. The geologic record is littered with warming and cooling trends not caused by CO2.
So you can't assume all warming is from an incremental 120 ppm which is literally what they assume in their models.Jesus H Christ! So the fuck WHAT?
It is not an unfounded assumption. It is an extremely well supported and extremely widely accepted theory; one which mainstream science now treats as an irrefutable fact.So you can't assume all warming is from an incremental 120 ppm which is literally what they assume in their models.
It is comments like this that demonstrate to everyone here that you lack some really fundamental skills in analysis. I hope you're familiar with Mamooth's analogy. If what has happened in the past is all that can happen in the present or in the future, then the fact that forest fires took place before humans existed means humans do not cause forest fires. Surely you see the blatant flaw in that reasoning, yet that is PRECISELY what you are trying to push here.So you can't assume all warming is from an incremental 120 ppm which is literally what they assume in their models.
The geologic record says otherwise.It is not an unfounded assumption. It is an extremely well supported and extremely widely accepted theory; one which mainstream science now treats as an irrefutable fact.
Then publish your scientific article.The geologic record says otherwise.
The oxygen isotope curve is already in the public domain. What more do you need?Then publish your scientific article.
Very simple.
Why haven't you?
Take a look at the oxygen isotope curve and then tell me my analysis of a cooling planet is unfounded. Because from where I sit it's unfounded to say an incremental 120 PARTS PER MILLION OF A RELATIVELY WEAK GHG will reverse a 50 million year trend of a cooling planet.It is comments like this that demonstrate to everyone here that you lack some really fundamental skills in analysis. I hope you're familiar with Mamooth's analogy. If what has happened in the past is all that can happen in the present or in the future, then the fact that forest fires took place before humans existed means humans do not cause forest fires. Surely you see the blatant flaw in that reasoning, yet that is PRECISELY what you are trying to push here.
Haha, tell everyone you have no idea how publishing science works without just saying it.The oxygen isotope curve is already in the public domain. What more do you need?
HilariousYou must be the only person on the planet who believes that thermal isolation of the polar regions and heat circulation don't matter.
You butt fuck truth.
Ding thinks he beguiles peope with 3 talking points parroted from a blogger.Hilarious
Step outside.
HilariousTake a look at the oxygen isotope curve and then tell me my analysis of a cooling planet is unfounded. Because from where I sit it's unfounded to say an incremental 120 PARTS PER MILLION OF A RELATIVELY WEAK GHG will reverse a 50 million year trend of a cooling planet.
Have you ever been published? I have.Haha, tell everyone you have no idea how publishing science works without just saying it.
You take data and analyze it and draw conclusions, using arguments.
You don't say, "the data is out there already, hee haw, just look at it right!"
Then you publish your article, for peer review and scrutiny.
Why won't you?
I was just out there.Hilarious
Step outside.
