What's new
By:

West Antarctic Ice Sheet Is Doomed

LogGrad98 said:
They appear to be claiming causes that are not anthropogenic.
Click to expand...

Yes, a few thousand years ago, we had warming cycles that were not the result of human industry. What does that tell us about whether human industry is causing warming today?
 
One Brow said:
Yes, a few thousand years ago, we had warming cycles that were not the result of human industry. What does that tell us about whether human industry is causing warming today?
Click to expand...

That it may not be the only thing causing it.
 
Stoked said:
That it may not be the only thing causing it.
Click to expand...

Of course it's not the only thing causing it. Now, what does that mean in terms of confronting the human contributions to global warming? Please keep in mind that the pace of the warming is unprecedented in the earths history, at least since life first appeared.

As a poor analogy, I heard murder is not the only cause of human death. Offer an argument about the former that doesn't have an unacceptable parallel in the latter.
 
One Brow said:
Of course it's not the only thing causing it. Now, what does that mean in terms of confronting the human contributions to global warming? Please keep in mind that the pace of the warming is unprecedented in the earths history, at least since life first appeared.

As a poor analogy, I heard murder is not the only cause of human death. Offer an argument about the former that doesn't have an unacceptable parallel in the latter.
Click to expand...

Slow down Brow, slow down.

You asked what it says, rhetorically I am sure, and I answered.

Never said what side of the fence I am on. For all you know you are arguing withsome one ont he same side of the fence to no point.
 
Last edited:
Question: If America went all-in and killed every single industry that contributed to our country's CO2 output, would that be enough to reverse global warming? Would America completely bowing out reverse everything and cause the temperature to drop? If not what would it really take to make an impact on the global CO2 concentrations?
 
LogGrad98 said:
Question: If America went all-in and killed every single industry that contributed to our country's CO2 output, would that be enough to reverse global warming? Would America completely bowing out reverse everything and cause the temperature to drop? If not what would it really take to make an impact on the global CO2 concentrations?
Click to expand...

No, it would not be enough to "reverse global warming", or even the possible/likely anthropogenic portion of it, which I believe it not the major cause of it.

It would be better use of our time, energy, resources, and intelligence to do things on large scale that will help us to cope with it if not prosper with it. But hey, our leading "intellectuals", or as Franklin would put it, our "elite intelligentsia", are paid through the political influence if not the outright private money of our cartelists, and all they really care about is locking up the resources and shutting down the influences of all possible competitors. As Robert Redford with his little Sundance Ski Resort shows by his example, after having his little heaven, by opposing every other proposed development of Utah snow resources. . . .

Somehow, I hope folks like OB will eventually realize their caring is being diverted from actually beneficial action. . . . .
 
babe said:
No, it would not be enough to "reverse global warming", or even the possible/likely anthropogenic portion of it, which I believe it not the major cause of it.

It would be better use of our time, energy, resources, and intelligence to do things on large scale that will help us to cope with it if not prosper with it. But hey, our leading "intellectuals", or as Franklin would put it, our "elite intelligentsia", are paid through the political influence if not the outright private money of our cartelists, and all they really care about is locking up the resources and shutting down the influences of all possible competitors. As Robert Redford with his little Sundance Ski Resort shows by his example, after having his little heaven, by opposing every other proposed development of Utah snow resources. . . .

Somehow, I hope folks like OB will eventually realize their caring is being diverted from actually beneficial action. . . . .
Click to expand...

I like this post
 
A further length of the discussion would involve the larger picture. . . .

how our present "meltdown" is an anomaly in the larger trend towards longer and deeper ice epochs caused by an inbalanced decline in atmospheric carbon dioxide, which will mean that after we've burned up all our locatable/extractable oil, we'll face ice ages having to dig deeper holes/caves and move south permanently.. .. concentrating humanity on lower lattitudes. We also may face more persistent droughts due to the increasing salinity of oceans as the land is leached of salt deposits and fresh water is locked up in polar ice. . .

But hey, one day our sun will do its Red Giant expansion and melt the earth again. The problem then will be how do we get to another planet, or another, younger, star.
 
babe said:
The problem then will be how do we get to another planet, or another, younger, star.
Click to expand...

I bet its via flight of some sort
 
LogGrad98 said:
Question: If America went all-in and killed every single industry that contributed to our country's CO2 output,
Click to expand...

Why does converting to carbon-neutrality kill not just a company, but an entire industry?

LogGrad98 said:
would that be enough to reverse global warming? Would America completely bowing out reverse everything and cause the temperature to drop? If not what would it really take to make an impact on the global CO2 concentrations?
Click to expand...

If we went all-in, I think we could produce energy from solar and wind (available on the surface of the earth) more cheaply than you can from digging stuff out of the ground, and then sell that to other countries.

Yes, over time, the CO2 would cycle back into the soil.
 
One Brow said:
Of course it's not the only thing causing it. Now, what does that mean in terms of confronting the human contributions to global warming? Please keep in mind that the pace of the warming is unprecedented in the earths history, at least since life first appeared.

As a poor analogy, I heard murder is not the only cause of human death. Offer an argument about the former that doesn't have an unacceptable parallel in the latter.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for the irrefutable objective scientific proof it is undeniably a bad thing and means the end of the human race if we do not act RIGHT NOW!!!1!!
 
One Brow said:
Why does converting to carbon-neutrality kill not just a company, but an entire industry?



If we went all-in, I think we could produce energy from solar and wind (available on the surface of the earth) more cheaply than you can from digging stuff out of the ground, and then sell that to other countries.

Yes, over time, the CO2 would cycle back into the soil.
Click to expand...

Totally missed the point of the hypothetical. Let me rephrase. If we had a world where magic existed and we could just eliminate with a wand all sources of CO2 polution in the United States alone and leave everything else going the way it's going, exactly what impact would that have on global warming and the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere? Would that be a guarantee that global warming would stop or reverse?


And you've got to be kidding about the bolded right? Carbon-neutrality is a huge farce, you do realize that right? Also, there isn't a single "clean" industry right now. Petroleum comes into it somewhere even if it is just use of plastics. So to rephrase again, if we stopped producing all CO2 pollution in the US by magic or government/army mandate or whatever let's say by Monday you would have to shut down entire industries to do so, right now at this point in time.
 
babe said:
No, it would not be enough to "reverse global warming", or even the possible/likely anthropogenic portion of it, which I believe it not the major cause of it.

It would be better use of our time, energy, resources, and intelligence to do things on large scale that will help us to cope with it if not prosper with it. But hey, our leading "intellectuals", or as Franklin would put it, our "elite intelligentsia", are paid through the political influence if not the outright private money of our cartelists, and all they really care about is locking up the resources and shutting down the influences of all possible competitors. As Robert Redford with his little Sundance Ski Resort shows by his example, after having his little heaven, by opposing every other proposed development of Utah snow resources. . . .

Somehow, I hope folks like OB will eventually realize their caring is being diverted from actually beneficial action. . . . .
Click to expand...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to babe again.
 
LogGrad98 said:
From the article:

These data support the idea that the Southern Ocean was an important factor in regulating the CO2 concentration during the last transition. However, the fast increases between intervals II and III and at the end of interval IV show that additional mechanisms in the Northern Hemisphere influenced CO2, presumably through changes in NADW formation.

also

The fast increases of CO2 and methane concentrations between intervals II and III, at ∼13.8 ky B.P. according to the Dome C time scale, correspond to the fast warming in the Northern Hemisphere observed at 14.5 ky B.P. on the GRIP time scale. This warming was probably caused by enhanced formation of North Atlantic Deep Water (NADW) (30), suggesting that the sudden CO2 increase could have been caused by changes in thermohaline circulation. The methane increase, on the other hand, is thought to have been caused by an intensified hydrological cycle during the B/A warm phase, which led to an expansion of wetlands in the tropics and northern latitudes.

They appear to be claiming causes that are not anthropogenic.
Click to expand...

Wo there. We know that we are thus far mostly to blame for the current rise in atmospheric Co2 because we know how much we are emitting and how much deforestation we are causing. Of course we are not to blame for past increases. Other factors can cause an increase in co2 but right now during this time period we are clearly the culprit. The important bit of this is
The fast increases of CO2 and methane concentrations between intervals II and III, at ∼13.8 ky B.P. according to the Dome C time scale, correspond to the fast warming in the Northern Hemisphere
Click to expand...
Remember that the "fast increases of co2 and methane" from the holocene are much much slower and to a lesser degree than the increase we have seen over the last 100 years. Further it clearly links Co2 to increased temperature.

What am I missing? This seems to me to quite heavily support usgenic global warming.
 
Last edited:
I agree with stoked that it is more or less another example of what may be contributing to the problem besides man.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I'm still waiting for the irrefutable objective scientific proof it is undeniably a bad thing and means the end of the human race if we do not act RIGHT NOW!!!1!!
Click to expand...

I understand. I'm sure you're also waiting for irrefutable objective scientific proof that the earth is not a flat disc. Meanwhile, those of us who understand how knowledge works will go on talking about things we are 97+% sure of and react to them, unlike you flat-earthers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top