Global Warning/Climate Change

[Bootstrap]

I don't really understand the science and I am not sure I believe them.

I have no problem with that ;->

[Robert]

If you said something like, "I don't really understand the science, and I'm not sure I believe them", I would have no problem with that.

I am sorry you do not like the way I communicate. I have no issue with the way you communicate. I accept you as you are and do not demand you change to suit me.

I will present some data again, and see if you want to discuss it. I have done this and I felt you ignored it or found some way to minimize it.



This shows very high co2 levels and there were still ice ages. Why is that?

The co2 levels were much higher during the Jurassic, mean temperatures were higher and life was more abundant. Why is that?

PS - "they" is them!

[RZehr]

I am a young earth creation believer, so you lost me with this chart.

[Robert]

I am a young earth creation believer, so you lost me with this chart.

Most all the science for climate change is based off of old earth ideology. Young earth people would most likely not even care about climate change because of the theology that God has a very tight control on things.

[KingdomBuilder]

This shows very high co2 levels and there were still ice ages. Why is that?

This isn't that surprising. There are plenty of instances where periods of cooling were preceded by intense periods of volcanic activity. Mass-eruptions disrupt the planet and can very easily cause "ice ages".
What's that got to do with carbon dioxide levels? Volcanic eruption release massive quantities of CO2.

[Robert]

This isn't that surprising. There are plenty of instances where periods of cooling were preceded by intense periods of volcanic activity. Mass-eruptions disrupt the planet and can very easily cause "ice ages".
What's that got to do with carbon dioxide levels? Volcanic eruption release massive quantities of CO2.

Correct. Volcanic activity is not human caused. The argument is if global warming is human caused or natural occurances. Your statements suggest natural causes. Yet, the correlation between co2 levels and temperature are not parallel through most of history. This makes me question the concept that a small raise in co2 levels will bring on massive warming.

[KingdomBuilder]

Correct. Volcanic activity is not human caused. The argument is if global warming is human caused or natural occurances. Your statements suggest natural causes. Yet, the correlation between co2 levels and temperature are not parallel through most of history. This makes me question the concept that a small raise in co2 levels will bring on massive warming.

You're not taking into account the fact that CO2 in the atmosphere exists in the form of several distinct isotopes- each can be traced to different sources. The CO2 from volcanoes and the CO2 from fossil fuels are totally different.

Yet, the correlation between co2 levels and temperature are not parallel through most of history

An "ice age" following massive eruptions would have absolutely nothing to do with CO2... it's the result of the release of aerosols that reflect shield the earth from the sun's life-giving warmth.
Sure the CO2 would be there, but the this "blanket" would make warming impossible.
Trickle down issues can cause correlations that aren't "parallel"... these are expected; they're not bizarre outliers that disprove anything, really.

[Bootstrap]

I am a young earth creation believer, so you lost me with this chart.

Most all the science for climate change is based off of old earth ideology. Young earth people would most likely not even care about climate change because of the theology that God has a very tight control on things.

Young earth people don't care about pollution? They don't think we can do bad things to the environment?

I remember a time that pollution was a whole lot worse than it is now, a river catching on fire, cities like Lackawanna and Gary where the air was very polluted, the Love Canal incident ... and don't get me started on East Germany ... surely everyone believes that pollution can have consequences. That's not dependent on when and how the earth originated.

[appleman2006]

I don't really understand the science and I am not sure I believe them.

I have no problem with that ;->

Thanks. I would probably be more inclined to listen to what many have to say on this subject if they were ready to make a similar statement.

[Bootstrap]

I will present some data again, and see if you want to discuss it. I have done this and I felt you ignored it or found some way to minimize it.



This shows very high co2 levels and there were still ice ages. Why is that? The co2 levels were much higher during the Jurassic, mean temperatures were higher and life was more abundant. Why is that?

The part I am most certain about is more recent history - and even the people who created your graph used grey to indicate times of greater uncertainty. The further back you go, the less directly we can measure these things.

Let's compare that to this graph:

Greenhouse gasses and Temperature moved in lock-step through the Pleistocene Ice Ages, controlled by Earth's orbit around the Sun (Centre for Ice and Climate, University of Copenhagen). Arrows show where levels were a few years ago, on the same scale.

Until recently, many scientists thought c02 increased after temperature rose, but now they believe c02 rises come first, followed by temperature rise:

CO2 doesn’t lag behind temperature

Until 2012, Antarctic ice core data suggested CO2 may have lagged behind the warming trend by hundreds of years. This was used by skeptics to question the link between CO2 and climate. More recent studies, with much more precise correlation between ice cores and global temperature records, have shown that temperature and CO2 changed synchronously in Antarctica during the end of the last ice age, and globally CO2 rose slightly before global temperatures.

Now as you say, there was life on earth through all these times, at least according to most scientists. Here's how this site describes it:

It’s true that at times in Earth's past the climate has been as warm or even warmer than temperatures projected for the end of this century and beyond. Aside from some warm interglacials, the average climate was last as warm as we expect in 2100 during the Pliocene epoch – before the emergence of the genus Homo which includes you and me. In that time, summer Arctic temperatures were 3°C (5°F) warmer than today, with CO2 levels similar to today’s and sea levels were 15-25m (50-82ft) higher than today. Rain-drenched forests fringed the Arctic Ocean at the time.

Going further back to the Eocene, the world then was very warm and humid – on average 10°C (18°F) warmer than today. Lush swamp forests fringed the Arctic, inhabited by turtles, alligators, primates, tapirs, and the hippo-like Coryphodon (just as the myth claims). Lowland Antarctica was warm and covered in near-tropical vegetation, and London was a mangrove swamp as rainforests spread across much of the planet. Going back even further to the age of the dinosaurs, life flourished in a time of high CO2 and generally warm average temperatures with high sea levels. Even Antarctica was forested and supported a healthy population of dinosaurs.

I am not aware of scientists saying that life would be wiped out, but rapid changes in climate result in major waves of extinction of some animals. Polar bears probably would not survive, for instance. And they result in major disruption in life. Suppose conditions returned to those described above. Disneyworld would suddenly have beachfront in Orlando, Miami would be under water, much of New York City would be gone.

Human beings would survive, we are very adaptable. We can live on the South Pole or in the tropics, given the right clothes. But there would be major economic changes, and there would be winners and losers.