Europe had its ‘Dark Ages’ when scientists were punished for doubting religious teachings. These days are the ‘Dark Ages’ for the US, when scientists will have their work defunded or destroyed if they doubt the teaching of The Trumpet…
Some of the deniers just don’t like what they would have to do to even begin to slow it down. Liberal, to them, ideas of curbing it make them sick. They don’t want to change their lifestyle (of waste) and hate the idea of being told they “must” do it. Glenn Beck said it himself, "if I want to drive by truck to the postal box instead of walk, that is my right! "
To them just burn more carbon based fuel. And when the Earth is in a bad state they expect their deity to come and clean it all up as is promised in their holy word.
Republicans haven’t respected science ever since they discovered religion and hate play better to their base. If their base wanted to hear about facts, we wouldn’t be talking about President Trump’s EPA head Pruitt. The only flaw in the plan is you can not legislate nature, regardless of how much or little you believe in global temps and CO2 emissions, this is happening. Ignoring it will make it worse.
“Earth’s climate has varied widely over its history, from ice ages characterised by large ice sheets covering many land areas, to warm periods with no ice at the poles. Several factors have affected past climate change, including solar variability, volcanic activity and changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Data from Antarctic ice cores reveals an interesting story for the past 400,000 years. During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.
This statement does not tell the whole story. The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming. This positive feedback is necessary to trigger the shifts between glacials and interglacials as the effect of orbital changes is too weak to cause such variation. Additional positive feedbacks which play an important role in this process include other greenhouse gases, and changes in ice sheet cover and vegetation patterns."
Mike,You are probably thinking of what deniers love to cite, that the early warming was a recovery from the little ice age. And indeed, this is likely for the 19th century, and even the early 20th century. The CO2 levels before the beginning of the industrial revolution had been on the order of 280 ppm for more than 3 thousand years. (Which does confirm that CO2 is not responsible for all changes in temperature.)
The temperature record from approximately 1880 to the present shows traces of the existence of temperature oscillations. These are due to multidecadal oscillations in the Pacific and Atlantic. No one has the actual physics to predict these, so that cannot be modeled by the climate folks (without guessing and hoping the guesses are close).
But here’s the thing about those oscillations. The data shows that we are now in the third cooling cycle of those oscillations since 1880. And yet the trend in temperatures is for increasing, not decreasing, temperatures. In roughly 15 years, we will be in one of the warming cycles, which will lead to temperature increases even faster than what was seen in the last warming cycle. (about 0.6 degrees C from 1976ish to 2005ish)
Well, the update graphs show the the temperature has increased by 0.2 degrees during this “cooling” period.
From 1959 to the present, CO2 has gone from 315 ppm to 406 ppm. That curve represents an exponential growth. So does the growth in consumption of fossil fuels.
The warming is already swamping a significant geophysical signal (the multidecadal oscillations) and is likely to make them insignificant enough that not being able to model them will mean nothing.
The effects of the increases in CO2 and methane (also increasing a high rate) are going to dominate the physics.
The fact is, Trump has put a fox in every henhouse belonging to the “average” taxpayer in the UNited States and stealing the chickens and the eggs to feed to the one percent, no matter how much damage they inflict on us.
Argythree about 7 years ago
Europe had its ‘Dark Ages’ when scientists were punished for doubting religious teachings. These days are the ‘Dark Ages’ for the US, when scientists will have their work defunded or destroyed if they doubt the teaching of The Trumpet…
Liverlips McCracken Premium Member about 7 years ago
And they inhabit an alternative universe. It just happens to intersect ours at this moment in time.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] about 7 years ago
Some of the deniers just don’t like what they would have to do to even begin to slow it down. Liberal, to them, ideas of curbing it make them sick. They don’t want to change their lifestyle (of waste) and hate the idea of being told they “must” do it. Glenn Beck said it himself, "if I want to drive by truck to the postal box instead of walk, that is my right! "
To them just burn more carbon based fuel. And when the Earth is in a bad state they expect their deity to come and clean it all up as is promised in their holy word.
Mr. Blawt about 7 years ago
Republicans haven’t respected science ever since they discovered religion and hate play better to their base. If their base wanted to hear about facts, we wouldn’t be talking about President Trump’s EPA head Pruitt. The only flaw in the plan is you can not legislate nature, regardless of how much or little you believe in global temps and CO2 emissions, this is happening. Ignoring it will make it worse.
lgilbert50 about 7 years ago
Thank you trump and associates for insuring my grandchildren will have poisonous air, extreme heat and storms when they grow up..
Luanaphile about 7 years ago
Same for math: alternative calculus is easy peasy!
DrDon1 about 7 years ago
Ignorant voters elect ignorant candidates!
martens about 7 years ago
mike, the answer to your question is available on the www.skepticalscience,com site with graphs and details.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
“Earth’s climate has varied widely over its history, from ice ages characterised by large ice sheets covering many land areas, to warm periods with no ice at the poles. Several factors have affected past climate change, including solar variability, volcanic activity and changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Data from Antarctic ice cores reveals an interesting story for the past 400,000 years. During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.
This statement does not tell the whole story. The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming. This positive feedback is necessary to trigger the shifts between glacials and interglacials as the effect of orbital changes is too weak to cause such variation. Additional positive feedbacks which play an important role in this process include other greenhouse gases, and changes in ice sheet cover and vegetation patterns."
Baslim the Beggar Premium Member about 7 years ago
Mike,You are probably thinking of what deniers love to cite, that the early warming was a recovery from the little ice age. And indeed, this is likely for the 19th century, and even the early 20th century. The CO2 levels before the beginning of the industrial revolution had been on the order of 280 ppm for more than 3 thousand years. (Which does confirm that CO2 is not responsible for all changes in temperature.)
The temperature record from approximately 1880 to the present shows traces of the existence of temperature oscillations. These are due to multidecadal oscillations in the Pacific and Atlantic. No one has the actual physics to predict these, so that cannot be modeled by the climate folks (without guessing and hoping the guesses are close).
But here’s the thing about those oscillations. The data shows that we are now in the third cooling cycle of those oscillations since 1880. And yet the trend in temperatures is for increasing, not decreasing, temperatures. In roughly 15 years, we will be in one of the warming cycles, which will lead to temperature increases even faster than what was seen in the last warming cycle. (about 0.6 degrees C from 1976ish to 2005ish)
Well, the update graphs show the the temperature has increased by 0.2 degrees during this “cooling” period.
continued
Baslim the Beggar Premium Member about 7 years ago
Continued:
From 1959 to the present, CO2 has gone from 315 ppm to 406 ppm. That curve represents an exponential growth. So does the growth in consumption of fossil fuels.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/glo_2011.html
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
The warming is already swamping a significant geophysical signal (the multidecadal oscillations) and is likely to make them insignificant enough that not being able to model them will mean nothing.
The effects of the increases in CO2 and methane (also increasing a high rate) are going to dominate the physics.
Baslim the Beggar Premium Member about 7 years ago
Temperature graph:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record#mediaviewer/File:Global_Temperature_Anomaly.svg
Dtroutma about 7 years ago
The fact is, Trump has put a fox in every henhouse belonging to the “average” taxpayer in the UNited States and stealing the chickens and the eggs to feed to the one percent, no matter how much damage they inflict on us.