- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 14,697
- Reaction score
- 5,704
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Earth has been warming since the last ice age and I suppose a "worse case scenario" is we will enter another Pliocene era. I put quotes around worse case scenario because that is subjective and in reality there is nothing worse about it just different. Earth has been much warmer before and flourished so all this scary talk about earth getting warmer is not scary at all to anyone who can see the big picture. The climate changes dramatically and it does so often. It's kind of like been there done that, yawn.
"The global average temperature in the mid-Pliocene (3.3–3 mya) was 2–3 °C higher than today,[SUP][7][/SUP] global sea level 25 m higher[SUP][8][/SUP] and the Northern hemisphere ice sheet was ephemeral before the onset of extensive glaciation over Greenland that occurred in the late Pliocene around 3 Ma.[SUP][9][/SUP] The formation of an Arctic ice cap is signaled by an abrupt shift in oxygen isotope ratios and ice-rafted cobbles in the North Atlantic and North Pacific ocean beds.[SUP][10][/SUP] Mid-latitude glaciation was probably underway before the end of the epoch. The global cooling that occurred during the Pliocene may have spurred on the disappearance of forests and the spread of grasslands and savannas."[SUP][/SUP]
Odd that someone who is so prescient to see the 'big picture' neglects the fact that humans werent around in the pliocene and the issue is the rate of warming much more than the extent.
Maybe you need to back up a bit and see the edges of your picture.
Thank you for getting my point in your own way. Yes the earth was warmer before man ever got here. Now read the OP again and notice the passages in bold. Here I'll give you a hint. Things in the past before man did happen fast.
"abrupt shift"
Odd that someone who is so prescient to see the 'big picture' neglects the fact that humans werent around in the pliocene and the issue is the rate of warming much more than the extent.
Maybe you need to back up a bit and see the edges of your picture.
Ah...."Pliocene". For a second there I thought we were heading into the "Pillowcene" and was kind of looking forward to the nap.
I think you NEED a nap.:lol:
Co2 was once over 1000ppm. So clearly 1000ppm is good for us.
Oh wait. No. I guess things are more complicated than that so this kind of discussion is silly. Never mind.
Funny how someone who pretends to know so much about science neglects to consider the fact that it is impossible to extract decadal rate changes from the paleoclimate record so any claim of abnormal rate change is simply a base display of ignorance.
If you are saying the hysteria over 400 parts per million being reached is silly, I agree.
Will you change your mind about Global Warming if the second decade of the 21st century is filled with disasterous weather throughout North American and Europe?
Will you change your mind about Global Warming if the second decade of the 21st century is filled with disasterous weather throughout North American and Europe?
There is always "disastrous weather". Earth is a wild place and we are little ants scurrying around trying not to get swept off the planet. I lived through Mt St Helens, you wanna talk about disastrous weather. Being in a 6 inch ash fall sucks, trust me on this.
What evidence would you have to see to believe that global warming is manmade?
We have had this conversation in another thread. This thread is about rising C02 level alarmist and the fact that it is possible we could go into another very warm era, it's not like it hasn't happened before. No offense Kan but you are new here and I try to be polite but I have had the conversation you want to have countless times in here with people that come and go. I am tired of having it with every newbie that walks through the door. Look for a newbie that doesn't believe in AGW and you guys just go at it OK.
Once again.... do I believe NASA, NOAA and the AAAS, or jmotivator?
They all seem to think its a real problem. They actually DO the science.
Gosh. its a tough choice.
Is this your way of telling me that no amount of evidence would convince you that global warming is manmade?
No its his way of telling you he doesnt want yet another futile repeat conversation with the latest blinkered AGW evangelist to show up and I know how he feels :roll:
I had hoped that you and others who deny AGW would be interested in an intelligent conversation about GW.
And I am sure I will be when I see some being presented here. So far its just the same old cliches presented in the same old fashion
And I am sure I will be when I see some being presented here. So far its just the same old cliches presented in the same old fashion
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?