Let's debunk what CO2 does. Let's also explain what it does not do.

Yes. We are very near the bottom of the natural range for: CO2, temperature, and sea level, but, during an ice age, even an interglacial that is to be expected.

 

Facts are of no use to them, Zorro. They cry out for "consensus" and that from their fellow Leftists.
"Consensus" is not science, however.

"If we all worked on the assumption that what is accepted as true is really true, there would be little hope of advance." - Orville Wright (who did NOT have a pilot's license!)

 

The issue is about how climate change affects human beings and our flora and fauna. The earth will survive humans. It still has billions of years left and I doubt very much if humans will be around for a billion or two years so lets cut the bullshit about CO2 in the past. This is about today and the next 100 years. If we continue along this path, weather patterns will change and kill or displace millions of people. That is the issue, nothing else matters.

 

You have not countered even a single claim made by all those people in the video.
It is not my claims, it is their claims.

 

It would be the issue were the alarmists being honest. But things are in excellent shape and getting only better.

We know due to the greening of earth. Earth can handle a lot more than we can toss at it.

 

I once subscribed to Scientific American and retain some of the issues.

It could have been in one of their magazine articles that it was disclosed life at the Arctic once upon a time. I was amazed to learn of some giant mosquitos then there. Even now there are huge numbers of mosquitos. Thankfully not nearly as huge as those when the Arctic bloomed and life was warm.

http://www.popsci.com/in-warming-arctic-mosquitos-are-getting-bigger

 

Remind me, what is MY claim about Windmills?

 

Post 772

This is my first comment about windmills

Since I got challenged, I then posted the youtube site that discusses this in a lot of detail.

So, when I reply, just use the source i provided.

 

I too was amazed when I learned that for most of Earth's history that the Arctic was warm water. Normally the oceans diffuse the heat fairly evenly, but with the current continental configuration, there is a solid wall from the Bering Strait to the Strait of Magellan and the wash of equatorial warmth is not flowing from the equatorial waters of the Pacific up through Northern Europe, Iceland, Greenland and the Arctic. So, it's mainly frozen in that area, with a Caribbean that is a hurricane spawning, hot lake.

 

Wow!!! You have a fossil record!! Where??

Oh the Eocene!! Tell me. Were the continents in the same positions as they are today?

I love how these. "Found a bit about it in wiki so I am now an expert" people quote scientists when it suits them but deny the findings when it does not suit

You do realise don't you that often the person writing the paleoclimatology report on the Eocene is the SAME person who is a contributing author to the IPCC

 

Yup because over Millenia the continents have moved!

 

You are the one who claimed warm earth conditions were arid, when the hard evidence of the fossil record is that its actually quite lush and life flourishes.

The Eocene oceans were warm and teeming with fish and other sea life.

Continental Configuration of the Mid Eocene

 

Exactly. And the continents remain in a configuration where the earth is prone to glaciation. Thank your lucky stars that you were blessed to have your lifespan be within an inter-glacial, because a period of glacial advance will be a mass extinction event. But a climate optimum within an inter glacial? That's good living. May we be so fortunate. But a return to warm earth conditions? Not a chance with this continental configuration and that's why this is called an INTER-glacial. Because the next expected event is another glacial advance, not a return to warm earth conditions. If that was really the expectation the current period would be described as post-glacial, not inter-glacial.

 

Suggest, strongly, that next time you check the source for images. This actually came from a blog reply on WUWT. Which shows you that not even Anthony Watts would put something so obviously unreferenced and questionable on his website

There are a lot of differences between the Eocene and the Holocene not the least of which is that solar output was lower

 

You DID check when the Eocene epoch was didn't you?
http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/co2-temperature-during-middle-eocene-climatic-optimum


https://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?n=2664

 

deleted

 

I'm not in to the whole declaration of some as apostates and deniers, followed by shunning and excommunication. It was a bad era for the church, it won't be a good era for progressivism.

I know what I'm looking for, I have no easy way to scan it from a book at post it online, so when I find it online and you have asked for it, I post it. If it happens to be from someone who you have excommunicated and shunned for your own reasons, then rather than bitching to me, simply right click the image and choose "find similar", these are not esoteric bits of information, rather common, and available from likely thousands of different sources.

In science, the strength of an idea is in how closely it describes the natural world, only a barn owl gives a hoot about who put it forward.

 

Funny, everyone has decided the same about you. And everyone is right. You don't debate. You toss propaganda and run.

You posted a link to a video, but said nothing about what it contained. I asked you to debate the specific points in the video that you found compelling. You're actively refusing to do so, and crying about how mean I am for daring to ask you to actually debate.

Again, I'm inviting you to state what points in the video you found compelling, so that we can debate them.

If you're actively refusing to debate, then just keep acting like you've been acting. If you're okay with looking cowardly, keep doing what you've been doing. We rational people have no problem with that. We're used to superstitious cultists throwing tantrums and running when we challenge their religious beliefs.

 

When you have to toss insult images to cover your panicked retreat, I know I've spanked you good. Time for me to carve another notch.

Nitpicking terminology won't make your "We need to broil the earth now to prevent an ice age in 25,000 years!" line of reasoning any less crazy. It's absurd logic, yet almost every denier embraces it. Deniers clearly aren't strong on logic. But then, if they were, they wouldn't have gotten sucked into their political/religious cult. They'd have instantly seen through all the denier cult propaganda, as all the normal people do.

The deniers also all cling fanatically to their "The Earth is just recovering from the Little Ice Age!" myth, even though that makes no sense either. Global average temperature dropped 0.5C during the LIA. Global average temperature had fully recovered that 0.5C by 1900. No sane and honest person could say a "Little Ice Age recovery" went beyond that. Yet even though the temperature has climbed a full 1.0C past that "recovery" threshold, deniers are still claiming the earth is in a "Little Ice Age recovery". Why? Religious fervor, I suppose. Stupid things like facts and data can't penetrate the faith-shields a true believer.

 

As usual, the response from the deniers is off topic and pointless. I see that you listen to the same propaganda the rest of the right wing laps up. Today the response is about the "greening" of the world. That is straight from the latest spin doctors. Once you wear that out, it will be some other nonsense.

 

And the next time you want to develop a new product, call on a Climatologist. See how well that will work for you.



I realize that Robert probably has me on "ignore". But I'll not ignore is ongoing BS.

 

Chem Engineer and Robert with an unidentified female.

 

When intellectually lazy, just post a link to a video to show how knowledgeable you are.

 

Aw, don't be shy. We'd all love to see them.

 

Trump can't get funding for a silly fence. You think Congress will pass funding for a seawall around Florida. That really show the level of your intellect.