- 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: Is this is logical argument against man-made C02? Cambrian Period CO2 levels vs Current
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:47 pm to ChineseBandit58
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:47 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Many other things 'drive the climate' - much too complicated to address here.
The primary component being solar radiation in terms of solar flux measured in energy per area.
0
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:48 pm to i am dan
Everything with lungs makes CO2 every time they exhale. I believe the volume of CO2 produced by respiration from tens of billions of living things exceeds by a vast amount any other source of CO2 (except for volcanic activity in the short duration volcanos are violently active). So what’s the logical solution to that if you’re an environmental radical?
And note both are natural sources.
And note both are natural sources.
This post was edited on 1/16/25 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:49 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:
So what’s the logical solution to that if you’re an environmental radical?
Communism.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:49 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
CO2 is not the only thing that 'drives the climate'
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:52 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Communism
The answer he was looking for is, "suicide".
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:54 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
The more salient question is, if CO2 drives climate, what caused the cooling and drop in CO2?
That’s not a salient question, because no one is claiming that CO2 is the only, or even the main, driver of climate.Tires that suffer blowouts cause crashes. So how do you explain the crashes that occur in the absence of blowouts?
To answer the OP, No, it’s not an argument against. There are neither solid arguments proving CO2 is causing a material increase in earth’s temperatures, or that it is not. Every qualified scientist, who is not in the pay of one side or the other, agrees with this.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 2:54 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:Extremists you say?
Too often this debate is framed by the extremists on both sides.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:04 pm to Harry Boutte
Better than the medieval ice ages, 4-5 degrees cooler
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:05 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Extremists you say?
Yes.
The extremist promoters are screaming that the world is coming to an end, and the extremist deniers are saying everything's fine.
Meanwhile, the atmosphere is warming - for whatever reason. While we don't need to revert back to pre-industrialization times, we should consider what rising sea level may mean to coastal flood insurance rates.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:09 pm to GumboPot
quote:
The natural sequestration of CO2 mostly through plant growth.
Yup
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:10 pm to Nosevens
quote:
Better than the medieval ice ages, 4-5 degrees cooler
Of course a warm planet would be better than an ice planet. The point is that humankind should be prepared. A warmer planet than what we have today could indeed be better for mankind as a whole, but that's not to say there would be zero adverse effects.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:12 pm to Penrod
By keeping the energy input into a control volume constant (constant sun light) you can calculate the temperature change with precision based on the change in constituents of a mixture.
For example water boils at 212 F.
Ethanol boils at 173.1 F.
If I mix half water and half ethanol the boiling point of the mixture is 178.16 F, every single time.
Same can be done with atmospheric gases when a change in constituent concentrations change. I don't want to bury the lede here but CO2 has a very small impact on raising temps...very small amount. The overwhelming controller of atmospheric temps second to the sun is water vapor by an overwhelming amount in terms of atmospheric concentrations.
For example water boils at 212 F.
Ethanol boils at 173.1 F.
If I mix half water and half ethanol the boiling point of the mixture is 178.16 F, every single time.
Same can be done with atmospheric gases when a change in constituent concentrations change. I don't want to bury the lede here but CO2 has a very small impact on raising temps...very small amount. The overwhelming controller of atmospheric temps second to the sun is water vapor by an overwhelming amount in terms of atmospheric concentrations.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:16 pm to Penrod
quote:Dude, "no one" is an expansive term. Ask 100 of our propaganda "educated" citizens if CO2 is the main driver of climate, and a significant % will say yes ... guaranteed. On a good day that significant % might not be a majority.
because no one is claiming that CO2 is the only, or even the main, driver of climate
quote:and unless you, I, or a smattering of others are in the survey audience, that answer won't see light of day.
There are neither solid arguments proving CO2 is causing a material increase in earth’s temperatures, or that it is not.
I am consistently appalled at what educated folks feel they understand about the "Climate Crisis" aka the "Era of Global Boiling."
When I explain to them we are currently in the Quaternary Period. It is the coolest period Earth has experienced since before the age of the dinosaurs, their jaws drop. Their phones come out. Then their jaws drop again, followed by an incredulous "you just ruined Santa Claus for a kid" look.
Happens all the time. Sad stuff.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:18 pm to GumboPot
quote:
every single time.
Nope.
Only at 1013.2 mb.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:19 pm to Harry Boutte
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:21 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:
Everything with lungs makes CO2 every time they exhale. I believe the volume of CO2 produced by respiration from tens of billions of living things exceeds by a vast amount any other source of CO2 (except for volcanic activity in the short duration volcanos are violently active). So what’s the logical solution to that if you’re an environmental radical?
And note both are natural sources.
Rain weathering of rock accounts for even more than volcanism. By a long shot.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:21 pm to Harry Boutte
True.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:22 pm to i am dan
quote:
Cambrian Period CO2 Levels: 3,000 - 9,000 ppm
Current CO2 Levels: 420 ppm
So when we had no man-made sources of GHG on Earth, the level was at at least 6x the level it is now?
The climate change cult knows this ^^^ they would say, the environment, atmospheric and ecological conditions were appropriate for life on earth at that time not for the current period we're living in.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:26 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:The rate of sea level rise is around 0.13 inches/yr. How many decades ahead should insurance companies run those numbers?
we should consider what rising sea level may mean to coastal flood insurance rates.
Posted on 1/16/25 at 3:29 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:Diatoms ... but there's not enough wealth redistribution in that logical solution.
So what’s the logical solution to that if you’re an environmental radical?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News