Posted on 03/02/2015 6:34:18 AM PST by rickmichaels
For more than 2 million years our earth has cycled in and out of Ice Ages, accompanied by massive ice sheets accumulating over polar landmasses and a cold, desert-like global climate. Although the tropics during the Ice Age were still tropical, the temperate regions and sub-tropical regions were markedly different than they are today. There is a strong correlation between temperature and CO2 concentrations during this time.
Historically, glacial cycles of about 100,000 years are interupted by brief warm interglacial periods-- like the one we enjoy today. Changes in both temperatures and CO2 are considerable and generally synchronized, according to data analysis from ice and air samples collected over the last half century from permanent glaciers in Antarctica and other places. Interglacial periods of 15,000- 20,000 years provide a brief respite from the normal state of our natural world-- an Ice Age Climate. Our present interglacial vacation from the last Ice Age began about 18,000 years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at geocraft.com ...
Don’t think I have 100,000 years to read the article. How about the executive summary, or is it worthwhile?
"There is a strong correlation between temperature and CO2 concentrations during this time."
At some point maybe the retarded population of the planet (or at least writers) will learn to read the solubility curve for CO2 in water.
I won't hold my breath... as much as they wish I would... you know, to prevent more unregulated CO2 emissions.
Gee. Imagine analysis that doesn’t presuppose the conclusion before the analysis has been completed. C02 - Global Warming. Which one is the cause? - which one is the effect?
My own personal impression of this AGW thing, or now AGCC as the proponents have rather embarrassingly switched to (due to uncooperative weather), is summed up by that one song, “The Galaxy Song” by Eric Idle.
It reminds me of the utter arrogant effrontery of AGW/CC proponents to assert human activity in the last couple hundred years or so could affect the huge expanse of our atmosphere, our planet’s oceans, AND while pooh-poohing the influence of dear old SOL on it all.
Utter, bullying arrogance stemming from a deep seeded psychotic desire to control the lives of others while they sit in their G5s on the way to some “save the planet from cow fart symposium”.
If I had my way, we’d round up these people and remove this planet’s task of having to process their C02.
My read was that increase in temperatures causes the increase in CO2. IOW to me it isn’t pro AGW.
Basically this article and most AGW/CC advocates work under the theory: “If your lies don’t work the first time, LIE HARDER AND LOUDER!”
Do rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations cause increasing global temperatures, or could it be the other way around? This is one of the questions being debated today. Interestingly, CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes -- confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases. One thing is certain -- earth's climate has been warming and cooling on it's own for at least the last 400,000 years, as the data below show.
|
How is the premise that rising temperatures cause rise in C02 levels pro-AGW?
I don’t understand how this article could be construed as pro AGW/CC. It seems like the best evidence to be used against it.
The main point of this article, as I see it is: We should be far more concerned about the coming return to Ice Age conditions... which, are more the 'norm' for Earth.
We are due... perhaps, over-due. And the trends don't look good.
GW from the outset was a leftist political movement. The whole world knows it’s a scam now.Even a UN rep said it was to destroy capitalism.
The ultimate aim is to regulate the breath right out of you.
Correlation isn't causal. For example, a lot of trash at the curb correlates to a big Christmas at my house, but placing a lot of trash at my curb in July, does not mean anyone got presents.
I like this line from the article:
Interestingly, CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes— confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases.
Yes, that is interesting. It shows that the glow-bull warming fanatics are lying.
As soon as I read that I stopped reading. Starting an article and basing said article on a false premise makes me not want to read the rest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
