|
Post by luapnor on Aug 19, 2024 18:20:40 GMT -5
No, but maybe you could ask the guy who authored that graph who is responsible: www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45894-9Ice core records of carbon dioxide (CO2) throughout the last 2000 years provide context for the unprecedented anthropogenic rise in atmospheric CO2 and insights into global carbon cycle dynamics.Whoops. Whoops indeed. The article you linked is all about explaining a distinct decrease in atmospheric CO2 during the Little Ice Age that makes them question their climate modeling. They're trying to tie fluctuations in the last 2000 years with historic events and land use changes. The graph I cited covers 800,000 years, showing correlation between temperature fluctuations and CO2 levels, but not causation. The CO2 rises with temperature, not before... You should read beyond the first sentence. It was all refuted a decade ago but they cling to this idea because it brings them the power and control over the population that they seek.. Sadly the idiots that keep repeating it think they are part of the in-crowd but they are just the literal cannon fodder in this whole charade.
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on Aug 19, 2024 19:49:53 GMT -5
No, but maybe you could ask the guy who authored that graph who is responsible: www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45894-9Ice core records of carbon dioxide (CO2) throughout the last 2000 years provide context for the unprecedented anthropogenic rise in atmospheric CO2 and insights into global carbon cycle dynamics.Whoops. Whoops indeed. The article you linked is all about explaining a distinct decrease in atmospheric CO2 during the Little Ice Age that makes them question their climate modeling. They're trying to tie fluctuations in the last 2000 years with historic events and land use changes. The graph I cited covers 800,000 years, showing correlation between temperature fluctuations and CO2 levels, but not causation. The CO2 rises with temperature, not before... You should read beyond the first sentence. Oh, I read the entire study, and several others. You should read it again, because you do not get it. They are questioning the 1610 low data points themselves, not climate models, and not man-made CO2 rise in the past few centuries....the latter of which was my point in raising the study.
Nice try though and please do let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
|
|
|
Post by cyclist on Aug 19, 2024 20:54:05 GMT -5
Whoops indeed. The article you linked is all about explaining a distinct decrease in atmospheric CO2 during the Little Ice Age that makes them question their climate modeling. They're trying to tie fluctuations in the last 2000 years with historic events and land use changes. The graph I cited covers 800,000 years, showing correlation between temperature fluctuations and CO2 levels, but not causation. The CO2 rises with temperature, not before... You shouSaudis? beyond the first sentence. Oh, I read the entire study, and several others. You should read it again, because you do not get it. They are questioning the 1610 low data points themselves, not climate models, and not man-made CO2 rise in the past few centuries....the latter of which was my point in raising the study.
Nice try though and please do let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Its impossible to have an intelligent conversation with the magaa deniers. They read and comprehend about as well as trump...you will get a meme from them...not a discussion.
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on Aug 19, 2024 21:26:40 GMT -5
By the way, ardent triple masker Anthony Fauci just announced his THIRD case of covid, in spite of getting 6 covid shots. Yeah, all that shit is just working great. Of course carrying a rabbit's foot works exactly as well in actual practice. A man of advanced age has survived 3 bouts of COVID.
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on Aug 19, 2024 21:33:20 GMT -5
If only the million or so unvaccinated Americans who died of COVID had been as fortunate.
Yet still they disbelieve.
|
|
|
Post by gandy on Aug 20, 2024 10:50:11 GMT -5
Oh, I read the entire study, and several others. You should read it again, because you do not get it. They are questioning the 1610 low data points themselves, not climate models, and not man-made CO2 rise in the past few centuries....the latter of which was my point in raising the study.
Nice try though and please do let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Its impossible to have an intelligent conversation with the magaa deniers. They read and comprehend about as well as trump...you will get a meme from them...not a discussion. There is no intelligent conversation with anyone buying WTF ever is being sold to them. Back to the my source is better wars. Because, I like their label better, there label has a prestigious place in my heart. Even if they are lying to me.
|
|
|
Post by johngalt on Aug 20, 2024 11:48:19 GMT -5
Probably not. But he wasn’t citing record highs. Daybreak is typically when record lows occur. Which is why his citation was appropriate for making a counter to the claim of record highs. Records are being broken on both ends of the spectrum. Nobody is disputing that. The only dispute is what drives the change in the Earth’s climate. Some think man does and that man can fix it. I don’t believe we’ve mastered the universe enough to move the needle one way or the other. I believe we’re just along for the ride. Practice good stewardship and forget all the nonsense that the “Peters” of the world are trying to sell. The problem is, if we are honest, humans are lousy stewards. Just look around. Your right. Just look at the Chinese, India and the rest of the third and second world countries.
|
|
|
Post by johngalt on Aug 20, 2024 11:51:42 GMT -5
If only the million or so unvaccinated Americans who died of COVID had been as fortunate. Yet still they disbelieve. You still believing that hoax?😏 I’m sure you’ll rush out and get the new monkey pox vax when ordered to?
|
|
|
Post by cyclist on Aug 20, 2024 12:00:45 GMT -5
If only the million or so unvaccinated Americans who died of COVID had been as fortunate. Yet still they disbelieve. You still believing that hoax?😏 I’m sure you’ll rush out and get the new monkey pox vax when ordered to? You are not very smart...
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on Aug 20, 2024 13:17:24 GMT -5
If only the million or so unvaccinated Americans who died of COVID had been as fortunate. Yet still they disbelieve. You still believing that hoax?😏 I’m sure you’ll rush out and get the new monkey pox vax when ordered to? He is a dedicated worshiper of false information.
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on Aug 20, 2024 13:20:47 GMT -5
You still believing that hoax?😏 I’m sure you’ll rush out and get the new monkey pox vax when ordered to? You are not very smart... Hahaha.... talk about causing global warming.
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on Aug 20, 2024 13:26:22 GMT -5
You still believing that hoax?😏 I’m sure you’ll rush out and get the new monkey pox vax when ordered to? You are not very smart... lol...
|
|
|
Post by illinoisfisherman on Aug 20, 2024 17:15:44 GMT -5
Some of these leftist extremists really need mental health help right now.
|
|
|
Post by throttle on Aug 21, 2024 19:38:11 GMT -5
Whoops indeed. The article you linked is all about explaining a distinct decrease in atmospheric CO2 during the Little Ice Age that makes them question their climate modeling. They're trying to tie fluctuations in the last 2000 years with historic events and land use changes. The graph I cited covers 800,000 years, showing correlation between temperature fluctuations and CO2 levels, but not causation. The CO2 rises with temperature, not before... You should read beyond the first sentence. Oh, I read the entire study, and several others. You should read it again, because you do not get it. They are questioning the 1610 low data points themselves, not climate models, and not man-made CO2 rise in the past few centuries....the latter of which was my point in raising the study.
Nice try though and please do let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.
Sure ya did.
|
|
|
Post by throttle on Aug 21, 2024 19:46:10 GMT -5
Whoops indeed. The article you linked is all about explaining a distinct decrease in atmospheric CO2 during the Little Ice Age that makes them question their climate modeling. They're trying to tie fluctuations in the last 2000 years with historic events and land use changes. The graph I cited covers 800,000 years, showing correlation between temperature fluctuations and CO2 levels, but not causation. The CO2 rises with temperature, not before... You should read beyond the first sentence. It was all refuted a decade ago but they cling to this idea because it brings them the power and control over the population that they seek.. Sadly the idiots that keep repeating it think they are part of the in-crowd but they are just the literal cannon fodder in this whole charade. Global warming is a loser of an issue. The world socialists hoped that it would be an issue they could use to enact global control and essentially global taxation, but the only binding international agreement they've been able to pass so far is the Kyoto Treaty, which cost complying countries 1% of their GDP in exchange for lowering the global temperature exactly zero point zero degrees. Good job. And it exempted all the worst polluting countries on the basis that their developing economies were too vulnerable so forget about the "existential threat". I guess it isn't all that "existential" after all.
|
|