Climate Change

[Buster Highmen]

Attachment 207775

But where is this one figure you are stuck on from, can you provide a source?

here: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/309/5734/600

Abstract
The relation between the partial pressure of atmospheric carbon dioxide (pCO2) and Paleogene climate is poorly resolved. We used stable carbon isotopic values of di-unsaturated alkenones extracted from deep sea cores to reconstruct pCO2 fromthe middle Eocene to the late Oligocene (∼45 to 25 million years ago). Our results demonstrate that pCO2 ranged between 1000 to 1500 parts per million by volume in the middle to late Eocene, then decreased in several steps during the Oligocene, and reached modern levels by the latest Oligocene. The fall in pCO2 likely allowed for a critical expansion of ice sheets on Antarctica and promoted conditions that forced the onset of terrestrial C4 photosynthesis.

[Mofro261]

here: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/309/5734/600

Abstract
The relation between the partial pressure of atmospheric carbon dioxide (pCO2) and Paleogene climate is poorly resolved. We used stable carbon isotopic values of di-unsaturated alkenones extracted from deep sea cores to reconstruct pCO2 fromthe middle Eocene to the late Oligocene (∼45 to 25 million years ago). Our results demonstrate that pCO2 ranged between 1000 to 1500 parts per million by volume in the middle to late Eocene, then decreased in several steps during the Oligocene, and reached modern levels by the latest Oligocene. The fall in pCO2 likely allowed for a critical expansion of ice sheets on Antarctica and promoted conditions that forced the onset of terrestrial C4 photosynthesis.

No Buster, that science article is focused on the period between 25-45 Million years ago and does not contain the any of the data used to generate that graph in question which attempts to superimpose 540my-present carbon and temperature histories. My point is that figure in question has been made via the web and not via scientific publication and is not supported by the two independent sets of data it cites.

[shroom]

Ok: they are wrong.
Clear enough?

go re-read buster's post, bro (#176) - at least the last paragraph. dude ain't being belligerent or anything (at least on this page).

[Buster Highmen]

No Buster, that science article is focused on the period between 25-45 Million years ago and does not contain the any of the data used to generate that graph in question which attempts to superimpose 540my-present carbon and temperature histories. My point is that figure in question has been made via the web and not via scientific publication and is not supported by the two independent sets of data it cites.

Hmmm.
I read the references in this figure.


In particular, Mark Pagani et al 'Marked Decline in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentrations During the Paleogene'.
Whch is what I linked.

No?
Jeez.

The reason I linked it is exactly because Paganis abstract dictates exactly the reverse of what that graph purports to support.

[Buster Highmen]

The other weird thing about all this is that this graph is constantly cited by climate change deniers as evidence that temperature is not correlated to CO2.

Independent of Paganis abstract, the way I read the graph, particularly during carboniferous (late Paleozoic) and cretaceous through cenozoic I do see a correlation where temperature lags a little but follows CO2 density.
Just draw a straight line approximation from the start to the end of the Cenozoic for temperature and they have similar slopes (decreasing).

So I don't follow the logic of the climate change deniers..

[stuckathuntermtn]

go re-read buster's post, bro (#176) - at least the last paragraph. dude ain't being belligerent or anything (at least on this page).

Wasn't directed at Buster.

[pfluffenmeister]

klar, your posts are informative and your patience is saintly.

[goldengatestinx]

All the (accurate) science in the world won't change the fact that 'carbon taxing' the lower and middle classes so the funds can be 'granted' to friends of politicians, siphoned off for jets, multiple mansions and conferences in exotic locales won't change or improve anything.

When organizations 'correct' data from decades ago based on 'computer models' that have been shown to be incorrect multiple times and increase the alarm (since the actual data show decreases in growth, fewer and less intense hurricanes, etc, going against the meme) I call bullshit. Prove it for real.

[californiagrown]

All the (accurate) science in the world won't change the fact that 'carbon taxing' the lower and middle classes so the funds can be 'granted' to friends of politicians, siphoned off for jets, multiple mansions and conferences in exotic locales won't change or improve anything.

When organizations 'correct' data from decades ago based on 'computer models' that have been shown to be incorrect multiple times and increase the alarm (since the actual data show decreases in growth, fewer and less intense hurricanes, etc, going against the meme) I call bullshit. Prove it for real.

An analogy would be you are diagnosed with cancer, but refuse to believe the tests, write off any symptoms because they weren't perfectly predicted by doctors beforehand (but do fit with your cancer), and then once deemed terminal and in hospice, you are finally convinced you do have cancer and decide you want to fight it. Unfortunately, its too late.

But hey, why listen to people maginitudes smarter than you who have spent their lives in the relevant field of study? Just keep saying "don't talk about it, be about it" to the climate and im sure it will all work out fine. Lol. Just cause something is painful doesn't make it false.

[goldengatestinx]

An analogy would be you are diagnosed with cancer, but refuse to believe the tests, write off any symptoms because they weren't perfectly predicted by doctors beforehand (but do fit with your cancer), and then once deemed terminal and in hospice, you are finally convinced you do have cancer and decide you want to fight it. Unfortunately, its too late.

But hey, why listen to people maginitudes smarter than you who have spent their lives in the relevant field of study? Just keep saying "don't talk about it, be about it" to the climate and im sure it will all work out fine. Lol. Just cause something is painful doesn't make it false.

Funny about your last sentence, I just said essentially the same thing in another thread about blacks being violent and causing their own problems. They called me a racist. Are you a climate racist? Just kidding.

But you didn't address my statement about carbon taxing and where the funds actually end up. If the $$ goes to the political drones, Al Gores, etc, how does that help reduce warming? (And not only those types, Solyndra executives made off with millions in bonuses from government subsidies while leaving a toxic waste dump here in Colorado when they drove the company into bankruptcy.)

I'm all for doing positive things, but tossing boat loads of my dollars into something that doesn't actually do anything or holding the people responsible for the funds is stupid, regardless if the celebs, politicians, etc say it's for the children.

[mall walker]

^ primary goal of carbon tax is economic deterrent similar to excise taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, no?

[Sirshredalot]

^ primary goal of carbon tax is economic deterrent similar to excise taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, no?

Yes. If you set the price right, you can just refund the dough to every income taxpayer in the form of a refundable credit. Then you're fully revenue-neutral and you're achieving your emissions reduction. That's how the one on the ballot in WA was structured - for the life of me, I'm pissed at the Sierra Club and some of the other clowns for not going to bat for it.

[californiagrown]

Funny about your last sentence, I just said essentially the same thing in another thread about blacks being violent and causing their own problems. They called me a racist. Are you a climate racist? Just kidding.

But you didn't address my statement about carbon taxing and where the funds actually end up. If the $$ goes to the political drones, Al Gores, etc, how does that help reduce warming? (And not only those types, Solyndra executives made off with millions in bonuses from government subsidies while leaving a toxic waste dump here in Colorado when they drove the company into bankruptcy.)

I'm all for doing positive things, but tossing boat loads of my dollars into something that doesn't actually do anything or holding the people responsible for the funds is stupid, regardless if the celebs, politicians, etc say it's for the children.

So your only issue is with where the taxed money goes? that is a very legitimate concern, though I think that the marketing aspect of AGW is needed in some capacity in order to convince the willfully ignorant... which brings us back to what you said about not believing in the climate change science that has been published and analyzed to date. Smh.

I personally would like to see carbon/emissions tax money go to NASA, which has a much broader mission than just space travel. How about yourself, where would you like to see the carbon/emission tax money go?

Also, about the racist thing. folks want you to look at the why. It is multi layered and complex. Its not as simple as black guy shoots black guy, therefore blacks cause their own problems. But that's obviously another topic for another forum

[Grape_Ape]

I personally wouldn't waste even a second of my time engaging with someone posting pepe memes.

Yep.

[rideit]

Well, this is as good of a place as any to post this. Curious if it will have ANY effect on the swamp...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.1c7a4906a326

[Aus George]

TGR sure has changed (for the better). I remember some 5 years ago I posted some climate change information and asked other skiers what they thought... Promptly got told to "fuck off." Guess people were in the denial stage back then, now we're into acceptance where things can actually happen and change for the better

[k2skier112]

https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm

1859
Tyndall discovers that some gases block infrared radiation. He suggests that changes in the concentration of the gases could bring climate change

1938
Callendar argues that CO2 greenhouse global warming is underway, reviving interest in the question.

1965
Boulder, Colo. meeting on causes of climate change: Lorenz and others point out the chaotic nature of climate system and the possibility of sudden shifts

1974
Serious droughts since 1972 increase concern about climate, with cooling from aerosols suspected to be as likely as warming; scientists are doubtful as journalists talk of a new ice age

1981
Election of Reagan brings backlash against environmental movement to power. Political conservatism is linked to skepticism about global warming.

1985
Ramanathan and collaborators announce that global warming may come twice as fast as expected, from rise of methane and other trace greenhouse gases.
Villach Conference declares consensus among experts that some global warming seems inevitable, calls on governments to consider international agreements to restrict emissions
Antarctic ice cores show that CO2 and temperature went up and down together through past ice ages, pointing to powerful biological and geochemical feedbacks

2008
Climate scientists (although not the public) recognize that even if all greenhouse gas emissions could be halted immediately, global warming will continue for millennia

2015
Mean global temperature is 14.8°C, the warmest in thousands of years. Level of CO2 in the atmosphere reaches 400 ppm, the highest in millions of years.

[Mazderati]

TGR sure has changed (for the better). I remember some 5 years ago I posted some climate change information and asked other skiers what they thought... Promptly got told to "fuck off." Guess people were in the denial stage back then, now we're into acceptance where things can actually happen and change for the better

Join date Dec 2014.

[Aus George]

Join date Dec 2014.

I had an old account I stopped using cause I got sick of the BS... Then a few years later came back (forgot old email, name etc) cause I love the BS now haha

[wickstad]

Hold in your toots. You are doing all of us a favor.

[The SnowShow]

Depressing stuff. Can’t help but feel we’re on the downhill with no hope in turning things around.

https://grist.org/article/the-world-...hange-is-here/

[Sirshredalot]

Depressing stuff. Can’t help but feel we’re on the downhill with no hope in turning things around.

https://grist.org/article/the-world-...hange-is-here/

Yep. It is hard not to feel overwhelmed by panic and despair right now, especially as a somewhat-young person with very-young kids.

I have the option to move wherever I want (within reason), but I do not think there is a place to go where we won't feel the effects. For now, we are staying put and preparing to eat the rest of this shit sandwich. Sucks

[kidwoo]

Depressing stuff. Can’t help but feel we’re on the downhill with no hope in turning things around.

https://grist.org/article/the-world-...hange-is-here/

Yep pretty much.

We kind of missed the action decades. And most of us know why. I had a chemistry teacher in the 90s who laid this stuff out pretty well. We've known this for a long time. And now we listen to BS about the anthropological influence. The denial is still going on.

[The SnowShow]

And people get all jazzed because they stopped using plastic straws...wow, we’re saved!!

[Bunion 2020]

Long and behind a paywall and just about as depressing as you need to ruin a Hump day. Coulda, woulda and shoulda.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...T.nav=top-news