- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Apparently Earth's C02 levels crossed the 400 parts per million threshold
Posted on 10/1/16 at 12:12 am to hawgfaninc
Posted on 10/1/16 at 12:12 am to hawgfaninc
Here's an illustration of just how little CO2 this really is.
If you fill Tiger Stadium with exactly 100,000 people and only 40 of them are wearing Crimson Tide colors you have the exact same ratio of air to CO2.
Only 40 people out of 100,000.
If you fill Tiger Stadium with exactly 100,000 people and only 40 of them are wearing Crimson Tide colors you have the exact same ratio of air to CO2.
Only 40 people out of 100,000.
1
Posted on 10/1/16 at 12:21 am to hawgfaninc
quote:
paleoclimatic evidence
which is what?
quote:
A 2009 report in the journal found evidence of CO2 levels of 365 ppm to 415 ppm roughly 4.5 million years ago.
Humans are so fricking arrogant. It is okay to admit we do not know something. We don't even know a 3/4 of our planet, and yet we think we know how much CO2 was in the air 4.5 mya
Posted on 10/1/16 at 1:42 am to K9
Determining historical Co2 levels from ice cores is not really that crazy dude. They've been doing this work for many years, well before global warming was this big concern.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 3:02 am to hawgfaninc
More bullshite science put out by the bullshite press. If science was real, there would be proof of it by now.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 3:18 am to LucasP
If the last time it was this high was millions of years ago and there were no SUV's or green house emissions I'd say we're doing pretty good. We have all those things and we're just now reaching what it was way back then. Also I thought Gore said Florida would be under water by now. If Dicaprio and all those Democrats REALLY believed it was as serious as they say they wouldn't be living in mansions and flying in jets around the world raising Co2.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 3:32 am to hawgfaninc
Could you tell us the temperature on the planet 4.5 may when the CO@ level was in the 365-415 range? That would really help to determine man's impact on heating this planet. From what we've been told man was Not around at that time, but I think that is debatable. Maybe that CO2 level was caused by man's invention of FIRE.
Why has the CO2 level been so low during the past 4.5 mil yrs? What made it drop in the first place?
Why has the CO2 level been so low during the past 4.5 mil yrs? What made it drop in the first place?
Posted on 10/1/16 at 4:10 am to hawgfaninc
Is this also a major cause, I think it is, and if it is, how would you address it?
From Ourworlddata.org
"The UN calculates that there are more than 7 billion living humans on Earth, yet 200 years ago we numbered less than 1 billion. Recent estimates suggest that 6.5 percent of all people ever born are alive right now. This is the most conspicuous fact about world population growth: for thousands of years, population grew only slowly, but in recent centuries it has jumped dramatically. Between 1900 and 2000 the increase in world population was three times greater than the entire previous history of humanity– an increase from 1.5 to 6.1 billion in just 100 years."
From Ourworlddata.org
"The UN calculates that there are more than 7 billion living humans on Earth, yet 200 years ago we numbered less than 1 billion. Recent estimates suggest that 6.5 percent of all people ever born are alive right now. This is the most conspicuous fact about world population growth: for thousands of years, population grew only slowly, but in recent centuries it has jumped dramatically. Between 1900 and 2000 the increase in world population was three times greater than the entire previous history of humanity– an increase from 1.5 to 6.1 billion in just 100 years."
Posted on 10/1/16 at 4:43 am to TigernMS12
It has nothing to do with not seeing the facts. It's the fact that the liberals are sensationalizing the whole thing, like they awlays do.
Somewhat off topic here, but I had an acquaintance who posted a graphic showing the top causes of death in America last year. It had some pretty ridiculous stuff on there, like lawnmowers, falling out of bed, etc.
The "top" cause, however, was "Americans killed by other Americans with guns". Over 11k people were shot and killed last year.
What they failed to put on the chart, however, was that there were over 30k people killed in car accidents. Someone else pointed this out to the poster, to which no response waa given.
People don't listen to the fscts when the facts are presented in such a way that 1) only partial facts are used, and 2) they are used to push an agenda.
I know people that are all about green energy, pushing the "big bad industry" to reduce its footprint, and yet they still drive around gas-guzzling SUVs, continue to buy petroleum-based products, and have big bonfires in the winter.
I know others that cannot stand these companies and their environmental impacts, yet work for them day in and day out. The almighty dollar overpowers their righteousness.
So, do I deny the facts? No, I don't deny that climate change is an ever-occurring natural event. Do I buy into how much of an affect we have on it? No, because even the liberals don't seem to buy in 100%, and they only push what is convenient to them.
Somewhat off topic here, but I had an acquaintance who posted a graphic showing the top causes of death in America last year. It had some pretty ridiculous stuff on there, like lawnmowers, falling out of bed, etc.
The "top" cause, however, was "Americans killed by other Americans with guns". Over 11k people were shot and killed last year.
What they failed to put on the chart, however, was that there were over 30k people killed in car accidents. Someone else pointed this out to the poster, to which no response waa given.
People don't listen to the fscts when the facts are presented in such a way that 1) only partial facts are used, and 2) they are used to push an agenda.
I know people that are all about green energy, pushing the "big bad industry" to reduce its footprint, and yet they still drive around gas-guzzling SUVs, continue to buy petroleum-based products, and have big bonfires in the winter.
I know others that cannot stand these companies and their environmental impacts, yet work for them day in and day out. The almighty dollar overpowers their righteousness.
So, do I deny the facts? No, I don't deny that climate change is an ever-occurring natural event. Do I buy into how much of an affect we have on it? No, because even the liberals don't seem to buy in 100%, and they only push what is convenient to them.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 5:52 am to hawgfaninc
Well, that Elon Musk guy better get his arse in gear.
In the meantime, I vow to do my part - I'm gonna head over to Home Depot and Lowes for my fall landscaping plants.
In the meantime, I vow to do my part - I'm gonna head over to Home Depot and Lowes for my fall landscaping plants.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:14 am to OysterPoBoy
quote:
What's it supposed to be?
399.9999 PPM
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:27 am to hawgfaninc
So, will it be cheaper to fill my paintball gun?
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:29 am to hawgfaninc
plant a tree and chill the frick out.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:32 am to hawgfaninc
Thanks a lot for posting that Toby video. I went down a rabbit hole of office greatest moment videos. An hour and a half well spent and I forgot why I was upset in the first place. Something about the world coming to and end.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:37 am to TheArrogantCorndog
Except humans are deforest-ing the planet rapidly, especially the Amazon
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:43 am to LSUfan20005
quote:
Except humans are deforest-ing the planet rapidly, especially the Amazon
Well, the fricking UN wants to get involved in our election so why don't they stroll on down to Brazil and tell them what to do with their country?
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:47 am to hawgfaninc
97% of scientists believe that humans have a significant impact on global warming. There have been several credible studies on this consensus. The troll posts are getting out of control in this thread 
And quit with the "volcanoes argument". No one with any significant scientific knowledge supports that, unless they have a political agenda.
LINK
And quit with the "volcanoes argument". No one with any significant scientific knowledge supports that, unless they have a political agenda.
LINK
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:51 am to TigernMS12
quote:
. I don't know why global warming is such a political issue.
because politicians insist that to "fight" global warming (or is it climate change now?) they need more of YOUR money.
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:52 am to GeauxOCDP
quote:
And quit with the "AGW". No one with any significant scientific knowledge supports that, unless they have a political agenda.
fify
This post was edited on 10/1/16 at 7:53 am
Posted on 10/1/16 at 7:57 am to CptRusty
quote:
And quit with the "AGW". No one with any significant scientific knowledge supports that, unless they have a political agenda.
fify
That's your problem. You're more worried about some political bullshite speak than looking at factual information. I'm a republican baw, I voted for someone other than Al Gore
Posted on 10/1/16 at 8:00 am to GeauxOCDP
44% of house Republicans believe the consensus. How would that make sense if this was all about some Al Gore conspiracy?
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News