robosmith Posted March 16 Report Posted March 16 (edited) The Last Time the Globe Warmed Video The climate crisis that happened before is upon us. Man is NOT the only source of green house gases, but we have similar effects as nature has in the PAST. Edited March 16 by robosmith Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 C02 has never preceeded warming. It has always been methane. The methane is released from methane hydrate that are released when the Earth's orbit changes and causes the tectonic plates to shift and release magma causing methane hydrate to be released and turned into methane. Methane is the leading greenhouse gas. Further, this happens when the earth's orbit is closer to the sun for longer periods of time. So you have a stronger concentration of energy and a better form of retention. That leads to a much warmer planet. He put a lot of that in the video. But then he lied. He lied by using data relativism. The planet has cooling mechanisms that kick in and cause, what should be a steady period of warming, to become a Rollercoaster climb. He's comparing 100ya to today because 100ya was a low point in the climb. Go back 200 years and the change is about 0.2 deg C. 3 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
eyeball Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 41 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Further, this happens when the earth's orbit is closer to the sun for longer periods of time. So you have a stronger concentration of energy and a better form of retention. Like every other planet in the solar system we're spiralling out farther from the sun. Just like we always have been and just like we always will be. Yes perihelion is a little farther out every year too. 1 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 56 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: C02 has never preceeded warming. It has always been methane. The methane is released from methane hydrate that are released when the Earth's orbit changes and causes the tectonic plates to shift and release magma causing methane hydrate to be released and turned into methane. Methane is the leading greenhouse gas. Further, this happens when the earth's orbit is closer to the sun for longer periods of time. So you have a stronger concentration of energy and a better form of retention. That leads to a much warmer planet. He put a lot of that in the video. But then he lied. He lied by using data relativism. The planet has cooling mechanisms that kick in and cause, what should be a steady period of warming, to become a Rollercoaster climb. He's comparing 100ya to today because 100ya was a low point in the climb. Go back 200 years and the change is about 0.2 deg C. Since you've cited NO EVIDENCE for ^this OPINION, you are NOT CREDIBLE. The video cites at least 2 possible sources of the extreme warming 56M ya. One is the well known CO2 released by coal seams when ignited by volcanism, which apparently you missed and are IGNORANT of. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 13 minutes ago, eyeball said: Like every other planet in the solar system we're spiralling out farther from the sun. Just like we always have been and just like we always will be. Yes perihelion is a little farther out every year too. I don't know who told you that, but that isn't entirely true. Our orbit depends on the spin of the universe. As we orbit around the sun, other solar systems orbit around the galaxy and our orbit changes based on the position of the solar systems and even galaxies nearest us. There are eras when we have a more elongated/eliptical orbit and periods where we have a more circular orbit. It's the circular periods that lead to warming. 1 Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 14 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: I don't know who told you that, but that isn't entirely true. Our orbit depends on the spin of the universe. As we orbit around the sun, other solar systems orbit around the galaxy and our orbit changes based on the position of the solar systems and even galaxies nearest us. There are eras when we have a more elongated/eliptical orbit and periods where we have a more circular orbit. It's the circular periods that lead to warming. NO ONE HERE knows where you get ^this bullshit, but it certainly isn't a major peer reviewed climate science journal or you would have posted your source. There is NO EVIDENCE that the universe has "spin" which would ONLY be around a central point. Quote
gatomontes99 Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 23 minutes ago, robosmith said: Since you've cited NO EVIDENCE for ^this OPINION, you are NOT CREDIBLE. The video cites at least 2 possible sources of the extreme warming 56M ya. One is the well known CO2 released by coal seams when ignited by volcanism, which apparently you missed and are IGNORANT of. Oh, I have sources. I don't just make things up, like your guy did. He was very clever about it though. He used a lot of valid information and then, right at the end, he lied. He built all that trust so you would believe his bullshit. So, here is reality: https://climateilluminated.com/CO2_facts/carbon_lag/Vostok_800yr_lag_CO2.html Carbon Dioxide lags temperature changes and follows a very linear correlation. This suggests that the atmosphere can only hold so much CO2 at certain given temperatures. Think of it like powdered drink additive. The atmosphere is like water that has too much powdered drink additive tossed in. The excess just falls away. C02 is not causing our warming. The sun and our orbit are. Oh, here is a fun picture: Do you see how CO2 was high and the temperature started falling? Weird huh? Well, that's too much science for you. Plus, you won't listen to science if it doesn't comport to the preconceived notions you want to believe. Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
gatomontes99 Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 1 minute ago, robosmith said: NO ONE HERE knows where you get ^this bullshit, but it certainly isn't a major peer reviewed climate science journal or you would have posted your source. There is NO EVIDENCE that the universe has "spin" which would ONLY be around a central point. How do you not know this stuff? Have you never been exposed to any science? My 13 year old has already studied this in school. Quote Eccentricity – Earth’s annual pilgrimage around the Sun isn’t perfectly circular, but it’s pretty close. Over time, the pull of gravity from our solar system’s two largest gas giant planets, Jupiter and Saturn, causes the shape of Earth’s orbit to vary from nearly circular to slightly elliptical. Eccentricity measures how much the shape of Earth’s orbit departs from a perfect circle. These variations affect the distance between Earth and the Sun. Eccentricity is the reason why our seasons are slightly different lengths, with summers in the Northern Hemisphere currently about 4.5 days longer than winters, and springs about three days longer than autumns. As eccentricity decreases, the length of our seasons gradually evens out. The difference in the distance between Earth’s closest approach to the Sun (known as perihelion), which occurs on or about January 3 each year, and its farthest departure from the Sun (known as aphelion) on or about July 4, is currently about 5.1 million kilometers (about 3.2 million miles), a variation of 3.4 percent. That means each January, about 6.8 percent more incoming solar radiation reaches Earth than it does each July. When Earth’s orbit is at its most elliptic, about 23 percent more incoming solar radiation reaches Earth at our planet’s closest approach to the Sun each year than does at its farthest departure from the Sun. Currently, Earth’s eccentricity is very slowly decreasing and is approaching its least elliptic (most circular), in a cycle that spans about 100,000 years. NASA.gov Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 8 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Oh, I have sources. I don't just make things up, like your guy did. He was very clever about it though. He used a lot of valid information and then, right at the end, he lied. He built all that trust so you would believe his bullshit. So, here is reality: https://climateilluminated.com/CO2_facts/carbon_lag/Vostok_800yr_lag_CO2.html Carbon Dioxide lags temperature changes and follows a very linear correlation. This suggests that the atmosphere can only hold so much CO2 at certain given temperatures. Think of it like powdered drink additive. The atmosphere is like water that has too much powdered drink additive tossed in. The excess just falls away. C02 is not causing our warming. The sun and our orbit are. Oh, here is a fun picture: Do you see how CO2 was high and the temperature started falling? Weird huh? Well, that's too much science for you. Plus, you won't listen to science if it doesn't comport to the preconceived notions you want to believe. I KNEW you had NO PEER REVIEWED climate science journal EVIDENCE. I read your site until I got to Lord Monckton who is NO KIND of climate scientist. Real climate scientists know about your "weird graph" and can explain it consistent with the effects of CO2 GREEN HOUSE GAS effects. Climate Myth Fallacies (UNDER CONSTRUCTION) Skeptical Science https://skepticalscience.com › fallacies Ice core record tells us warming causes the ocean to emit more CO2. Combined with greenhouse effect, this is a reinforcing feedback. CO2 lagging temperature ... ci:grasp 2.0: popular fallacies Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research https://www.pik-potsdam.de › cigrasp-2 › popular-fallacies Carbon dioxide is only a minor compound of the atmosphere and cannot account for global warming. Other gases like water vapor are much more prominent and ... Denial101x Debunkings: Fact Myth Fallacy Skeptical Science https://skepticalscience.com › factmythfallacy Emitting more CO2 means more heat is being trapped high up in the atmosphere where the air is thinner. "The greenhouse effect is saturated so adding more CO2 ... Missing: leads | Show results with: leads CO2 caused warming during past climate changes, notably ... Science Feedback https://science.feedback.org › review › its-not-true-that-... Claim: CO2 does not cause climate change, it RESPONDS to it [...] temperature always changes first, and CO2 follows Claimed by: Robert W. Felix, William Happer Quote
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 12 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: How do you not know this stuff? Have you never been exposed to any science? My 13 year old has already studied this in school. Are you really so stupid that you don't know the difference between planets orbiting the sun and the UNIVERSE having "spin" like your previous post CLAIMED? Planets have spin. Planets revolve around the sun, and STARS revolve around the center of galaxies which have pseudo spin because of theorized dark matter which causes a constant angular velocity independent of distance from the center. None of that is related to YOUR HYPOTHETICAL SPIN of the UNIVERSE. Thanks for demonstrating you have no idea what you're talking about. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 29 minutes ago, robosmith said: NO ONE HERE knows where you get ^this bullshit, but it certainly isn't a major peer reviewed climate science journal or you would have posted your source. There is NO EVIDENCE that the universe has "spin" which would ONLY be around a central point. Of course not. If this was accepted science we would have heard about it. 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Of course not. If this was accepted science we would have heard about it. I found this article at that site which clearly demonstrates it's anti-science agenda: Human Breathing and CO2 (Carbon Dioxide): As Anthropogenic Causes of Climate Change and Global Warming Basically pretends that human breathing out CO2 is EQUIVALENT to fossil fuel CO2 emitted by automobiles. ANY climate scientist knows that biological CO2 is continually RECYCLED and thus DOES NOT increase atmospheric concentrations. The source of fossil fuel burning CO2 is MILLIONS YEAR OLD fossil fuel from the ground, which hasn't been in the atmosphere for millions of years and does increase CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. OBVIOUSLY NOT THE SAME, and clearly illustrates the anti-science agenda of that site. Quote
Legato Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Of course not. If this was accepted science we would have heard about it. The correct answer would be "we don't know". After all the earth was flat until it wasn't. Today's accepted science will superseded by future science. Quote
CdnFox Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: I don't know who told you that, but that isn't entirely true. Our orbit depends on the spin of the universe. As we orbit around the sun, other solar systems orbit around the galaxy and our orbit changes based on the position of the solar systems and even galaxies nearest us. There are eras when we have a more elongated/eliptical orbit and periods where we have a more circular orbit. It's the circular periods that lead to warming. Dude he's just being an 1diot trying to get a rise out of you. I'm the first to admit he's dumber than a stump but he's not that dumb 1 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 14 minutes ago, Legato said: The correct answer would be "we don't know". After all the earth was flat until it wasn't. The Earth being thought to be flat is more myth than reality. In reality it was NEVER flat. Duh And even the myth was far from universal as it was only maintained by ignorants in certain area. 14 minutes ago, Legato said: Today's accepted science will superseded by future science. In reality, the vast majority of science is never "superseded," instead it is refined by greater precision of of measurements. Isaac Newton's understanding of gravity is still reasonably accurate at the precision he was able to measure. Quote
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 5 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Dude he's just being an 1diot trying to get a rise out of you. I'm the first to admit he's dumber than a stump but he's not that dumb Are you dumb enough to believe the universe has "spin," that no science has detected and written about? Maybe you should consult with Dr. Who about it since what you know about is FICTION. LMAO Doctor Who Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Doctor_Who Doctor Who is a British science fiction television series broadcast by the BBC since 1963. The series, created by Sydney Newman, C. E. Webber and Donald ... Quote
CdnFox Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 3 minutes ago, robosmith said: The Earth being thought to be flat is more myth than reality. In reality it was NEVER flat. Duh And there was never a climate crisis . Duh. See the comparison now? Duh. You're not terribly bright are you Duh De Duhhh Duh. 1 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: And there was never a climate crisis . Duh. See the comparison now? Duh. I see you're still mistaking FICTION for SCIENCE cause you don't know how green house gases work. LMAO 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: You're not terribly bright are you Duh De Duhhh Duh. Not terribly bright, but much MORE SO THAN YOU. Tell us again how much money you make and let's see if you remember or were just LYING. Quote
CdnFox Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 8 minutes ago, robosmith said: I see you're still mistaking FICTION for SCIENCE cause you don't know how green house gases work. LMAO The only fiction I see around here is yours and I'm not seeing any science at all. In fact I've asked for the science to be posted dozens and dozens of times and many others have here as well and yet you and your friends have been unable to produce any actual science But hey, maybe I just missed it. Why don't you produce the scientific research papers that show that the current climate change is a crisis requiring urgent attention. There must be absolutely hundreds from the way you guys talk so posting three or four should be no trouble. And I don't mean government web pages, I don't mean analysis of the science by government employees, I mean post a couple of actual research papers that corroborate each other and show that it is an absolute crisis. I'll wait. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
robosmith Posted March 17 Author Report Posted March 17 57 minutes ago, CdnFox said: The only fiction I see around here is yours and I'm not seeing any science at all. In fact I've asked for the science to be posted dozens and dozens of times and many others have here as well and yet you and your friends have been unable to produce any actual science But hey, maybe I just missed it. Why don't you produce the scientific research papers that show that the current climate change is a crisis requiring urgent attention. There must be absolutely hundreds from the way you guys talk so posting three or four should be no trouble. And I don't mean government web pages, I don't mean analysis of the science by government employees, I mean post a couple of actual research papers that corroborate each other and show that it is an absolute crisis. I'll wait. You'll wait forever cause there's no point in posting anything you can't understand. IF you knew anything, you'd know that peer reviewed scientific journals are NOT available to post online for free; you have to have a subscription or visit your local university library to read paper like I have. And I've told you that before, but you forgot. Strike 3, you're out. LMAO Quote
CdnFox Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 3 hours ago, robosmith said: Are you dumb enough to believe the universe has "spin," that no science has detected and written about? He never mentioned spin. Once again not only do you not know what you're talking about you didn't even know that you were not talking about what you were talking about. That's like weapons grade stupid Quote Maybe you should consult with Dr. Who about it since what you know about is FICTION. Only you would get your science advice from a TV show character 🙄🙄🙄 Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
gatomontes99 Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 8 hours ago, robosmith said: I KNEW you had NO PEER REVIEWED climate science journal EVIDENCE. I read your site until I got to Lord Monckton who is NO KIND of climate scientist. Real climate scientists know about your "weird graph" and can explain it consistent with the effects of CO2 GREEN HOUSE GAS effects. Climate Myth Fallacies (UNDER CONSTRUCTION) Skeptical Science https://skepticalscience.com › fallacies Ice core record tells us warming causes the ocean to emit more CO2. Combined with greenhouse effect, this is a reinforcing feedback. CO2 lagging temperature ... ci:grasp 2.0: popular fallacies Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research https://www.pik-potsdam.de › cigrasp-2 › popular-fallacies Carbon dioxide is only a minor compound of the atmosphere and cannot account for global warming. Other gases like water vapor are much more prominent and ... Denial101x Debunkings: Fact Myth Fallacy Skeptical Science https://skepticalscience.com › factmythfallacy Emitting more CO2 means more heat is being trapped high up in the atmosphere where the air is thinner. "The greenhouse effect is saturated so adding more CO2 ... Missing: leads | Show results with: leads CO2 caused warming during past climate changes, notably ... Science Feedback https://science.feedback.org › review › its-not-true-that-... Claim: CO2 does not cause climate change, it RESPONDS to it [...] temperature always changes first, and CO2 follows Claimed by: Robert W. Felix, William Happer I went beyond the appeal to authority fallacy of peer reviewed and provided the raw data. You can see the data with your own eyes. Why do you need someone to tell you what it means? Quote The most dangerous development of the last five years or so, in my view, is the rise of attempts to ostracize and punish academic heretics, events that are disturbing echoes of Soviet-, Mao-, McCarthy- and 1984-style denunciations. Academics are now at risk for being de-platformed, having their papers retracted, and even being fired for expressing ideas that trigger academic outrage mobs. The rise of denunciations and punishment for ideas raises reasonable concerns about what these people will do when they do gain control of institutions, and regarding their effects right now. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser/202005/political-biases-in-academia Quote The Rules for Liberal tactics: If they can't refute the content, attack the source. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition. If they are wrong, blame the opponent. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa. If all else fails, just be angry.
Nationalist Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 8 hours ago, robosmith said: Are you dumb enough to believe the universe has "spin," that no science has detected and written about? Maybe you should consult with Dr. Who about it since what you know about is FICTION. LMAO Doctor Who Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Doctor_Who Doctor Who is a British science fiction television series broadcast by the BBC since 1963. The series, created by Sydney Newman, C. E. Webber and Donald ... The universe has no "spin"? What a silly thing to say. Our own galaxy has "spin". Ever read A Breif History Of Time? Really robo...you take stoopid to a whole new level. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.
CdnFox Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 10 hours ago, robosmith said: You'll wait forever cause there's no point in posting anything you can't understand. I'll wait forever because you don't have any. You've been lying this whole time And once again for the billions time when asked to provide scientific evidence that there is a climate crisis you and your friends are unable to produce a single document Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Michael Hardner Posted March 17 Report Posted March 17 6 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: You can see the data with your own eyes. Because it takes a lot of training and skill to understand it? This is part of the problem, in our current epistemic crisis, is that people think that opinions are knowledge. Evolution will eliminate people who drink bleach because a big man tells them to. Just FYI. 1 1 Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.