Skip to comments.
Soils give clean look at past carbon dioxide: It could take less of the greenhouse gas to reach a...
Nature News ^
| 30 December 2009
| Richard A. Lovett
Posted on 12/31/2009 6:51:49 PM PST by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
1
posted on
12/31/2009 6:51:50 PM PST
by
neverdem
To: neverdem
Dirt can’t possibly be clean.
2
posted on
12/31/2009 6:56:32 PM PST
by
Paladin2
To: neverdem
Actually, during the hothouse eras of prehistory, CO2 levels were often lower than they were during the pre-industrial era, so this news which is made to sound like it demonstrates global warming, actually does the opposite.
3
posted on
12/31/2009 7:00:11 PM PST
by
dangus
(Nah, I'm not really Jim Thompson, but I play him on FR.)
To: neverdem
Nature was led like a poodle into AGW by Mann and his scamster cohorts, they’re still in deep.
4
posted on
12/31/2009 7:03:45 PM PST
by
Brett66
(Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
To: neverdem
5
posted on
12/31/2009 7:04:07 PM PST
by
Jim Robinson
(Join the TEA Party Rebellion!! May God and TEA save the Republic!!)
To: neverdem
Carbon dioxide is rising, temperatures are dropping, so how is this happening? What possibly could be affecting the temperature not just on Earth but on Venus and Mars.. Somethings driving the climate change...
It must mean we need cap and trade legislation to control it, and the initial drop is our curbing energy use and our experiments in carbon credits.
As for Venus and Mars, it must mean the data from the probes must be corrected for these abnormalities in temperature. Oh, and it's forbidden for the general public to look at solar data anymore. It might hurt their eyes, and this regulation is for their protection.
6
posted on
12/31/2009 7:04:15 PM PST
by
kingu
(Favorite Sticker: Lost hope, and Obama took my change.)
To: neverdem
"Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are rising today, and the new finding suggests that climate might be considerably more sensitive to changes in carbon dioxide than previously thought..."
Really? I call BS, because today's CO2 is around 0.038% but the Earth's early atmosphere is largely agreed to have been around 10%.
And look how we didn't turn into Venus.
7
posted on
12/31/2009 7:06:49 PM PST
by
Psycho_Bunny
(ALSO SPRACH ZEROTHUSTRA)
To: neverdem
The scaremongers are still shoveling the Manure.
8
posted on
12/31/2009 7:10:07 PM PST
by
Venturer
To: neverdem
I thought it hasn’t changed in 160 years?
9
posted on
12/31/2009 7:10:07 PM PST
by
GeronL
(http://libertyfic.proboards,com)
To: dangus
Good point - it is quite possible that there is NO correlation between CO2 levels and atmospheric temperatures!
AGW researcher loads gun, lifts foot high into the atmosphere and fires - OUCH!
10
posted on
12/31/2009 7:21:39 PM PST
by
J Edgar
To: dangus
I thought it was soundly demonstrated in the record that CO
2 is a
trailing indicator. The charts show it starts going up about 800 -1000 years after the temps start on their rise. So CO
2 couldn't be the cause of the temperature rise. You can't cause something by coming along 800 years after it happens.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.
11
posted on
12/31/2009 7:38:00 PM PST
by
Mrs. Don-o
(We cant account for the lack of warming, and it is a travesty that we cant. Dr Kevin Trenberth, IPCC)
To: neverdem
Notice the number of wiggle words used the opening alone...no scientific statements or proof at all, just "maybes".
"It could take less of the greenhouse gas to reach a particular levelof warming.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels may have been lower in warm eras of the Earth's distant past than once believed, scientists reported this week.
The finding raises concern that carbon dioxide levels from fossil fuel burning may, in the near future, be closer to those associated with ancient hothouse climates.
Hey, enviroweenies...give it up...you've been busted big time, and there ain't no going back...Al Capones vault was empty, and so is Al Gores global warming.
12
posted on
12/31/2009 7:39:46 PM PST
by
FrankR
(Time waits for no man...or man-child, including kenyans.)
To: neverdem
Hey! This is probably the last craptastic global warming hoax post for 2009!
13
posted on
12/31/2009 7:42:07 PM PST
by
sgtyork
(The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage. Thucydides)
To: neverdem; All
Were the Chesapeake, Popigai and Toms River major meteor impact events factored into the Eocene/Oligocen transition data? Time around 35 million years ago.
To: Mrs. Don-o
Well, we do have an experiment going on where we apparently increase the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and wait to see what happens. 50 to 100 years should provide a good indication. After we correct for the sun and all other drivers, of course.
15
posted on
12/31/2009 8:03:34 PM PST
by
Paladin2
To: neverdem
Math is hard.... eliminate 100% of Man (including what we exhale) and nothing changes.
I am so glad that I have fewer and fewer years left before I leave this existence and move on to the next...
Ignorance may be bliss but it sure is hard to watch.
16
posted on
12/31/2009 8:05:29 PM PST
by
TexasTransplant
(Parse every sentence uttered by a politician)
To: neverdem
Not buying a syllable of it.
"We've lied about everything so far...but this time, the models are different so we need less CO2 for a catastrophe!"
F.E.T.E., as The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler would say.
Cheers!
...and Happy New Year.
17
posted on
12/31/2009 8:23:55 PM PST
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: Paladin2
But "No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 160 Years, New Research Finds" (according to
Science Daily, 12/31/2009). They found the CO2 is absorbed by plants and oceans. Who'd'a thunk it.
18
posted on
12/31/2009 8:31:15 PM PST
by
Mrs. Don-o
(Mammalia Primatia Hominidae Homo sapiens. Still working on the "sapiens" part.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
They will say that warming does produce CO2, but to some extent CO2 also causes warming. Al Gore doesn’t even understand what the so-called “climate scientists” are claiming.
19
posted on
12/31/2009 9:12:07 PM PST
by
ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
(Joe Wilson said "You lie!" in a room full of 500 politicians. Was he talking to only one person?)
To: neverdem; SunkenCiv; All
OK, now I have read the second link regarding the Eocene-Oligocene climate transition.
It was definitely immediately subsequent to the major boloid strikes of the 34 to 35 million year ago period. The Chesapeake Meteor and Popigai both left craters 60 miles in diameter, and the Toms River meteor left a crater almost 10 miles in diameter. This was more than enough to cause a nuclear winter type event with the formation of a major Antarctic ice sheet. As to what influence this had on the state of CO2 is not addressed, but since they did not even mention these boloid events in the article it does not make sense to make any major attributions to CO2 and temperature causation.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson