Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 63
Thanks Tree56Thanks

Thread: Flat Earth Theory

  1. #51
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,604
    Thanks
    17269

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Unlike Left wingers SOME of us have Jobs. we don't mooch of the dole.
    That's adorable. When you're pseudo-science fails you, just fall back on an attack of "Left Wingers"...

  2. #52
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,913
    Thanks
    7707

    From
    TN
    @Czernobog your chart does not include the Roman Warming period, the Midevial warming period, and the Warming period during the Egyptian Empire, nor does it include the last Ice age... which are minor warming periods that have occurred during the Current warming period which Began ~110,000 years ago.
    Last edited by TNVolunteer73; 13th October 2017 at 08:35 PM.

  3. #53
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,604
    Thanks
    17269

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Damn you are foiled by LIES OF omission Darn you graph ONLY INCLUDES ONE WARMING PERIOD. poor @Czernobog your graph is only one Cycle.

    Poor Czernobog you left out every warming period but the currnt

    there have been 5 warming preiods in the last 400,000 years. (only 1 in the last 100,000)

    This is how you are fooled by ignorance (not an insult, you just don't have the knowledge of the full climate history) Not knowing all the facts isn't and insult

    the warming periods occur IN REGULAR cycles (this would be a frequency) The CURRENT warming period is ON TIME and is at the Correct Amplitude.

    So why did you OMIT 399,000 years of climate history.

    Because IT DOES NOT FIT your narrative.


    I like Graphs, Mine is Bigger and is made of Stronger wood.
    Of course you do, because graphs look pretty without giving any actual information. Our climate has experienced much more dramatic change than the Little Ice Age. Over the past 400,000 years, the planet has experienced ice age conditions, punctuated every 100,000 years or so by brief warm intervals. These warm periods, called interglacials, typically last around 10,000 years. Our current interglacial began around 11,000 years ago. Could we be on the brink of the end of our interglacial?

    How do ice ages begin? Changes in the earth's orbit cause less sunlight (insolation) to fall on the northern hemisphere during summer. Northern ice sheets melt less during summer and gradually grow over thousands of years. This increases the Earth's albedo which amplifies the cooling, spreading the ice sheets farther. This process lasts around 10,000 to 20,000 years, bringing the planet into an ice age.

    What effect do our CO2 emissions have on any future ice ages? This question is examined in one study that examines the glaciation "trigger" - the required drop in summer northern insolation to begin the process of growing ice sheets (Archer 2005). The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the lower insolation needs to drop to trigger glaciation. Since you like graphs you should love this one. It examines the climate response to various CO2 emission scenarios. The green line is the natural response without CO2 emissions. Blue represents an anthropogenic release of 300 gigatonnes of carbon - we have already passed this mark. Release of 1000 gigatonnes of carbon (orange line) would prevent an ice age for 130,000 years. If anthropogenic carbon release were 5000 gigatonnes or more, glaciation will be avoided for at least half a million years. As things stand now, the combination of relatively weak orbital forcing and the long atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide is likely to generate a longer interglacial period than has been seen in the last 2.6 million years.



    To those with lingering doubts that an ice age might be imminent, turn your eyes towards the northern ice sheets. If they're growing, then yes, the 10,000 year process of glaciation may have begun. However, currently the Arctic permafrost is degrading, Arctic sea ice is melting and the Greenland ice sheet is losing mass at an accelerating rate. These are hardly good conditions for an imminent ice age.

    But, hey, you keep telling yourself that CO2 emissions, and humans haven't had any effect on the climate.

  4. #54
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,913
    Thanks
    7707

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    Of course you do, because graphs look pretty without giving any actual information. Our climate has experienced much more dramatic change than the Little Ice Age. Over the past 400,000 years, the planet has experienced ice age conditions, punctuated every 100,000 years or so by brief warm intervals. These warm periods, called interglacials, typically last around 10,000 years. Our current interglacial began around 11,000 years ago. Could we be on the brink of the end of our interglacial?

    How do ice ages begin? Changes in the earth's orbit cause less sunlight (insolation) to fall on the northern hemisphere during summer. Northern ice sheets melt less during summer and gradually grow over thousands of years. This increases the Earth's albedo which amplifies the cooling, spreading the ice sheets farther. This process lasts around 10,000 to 20,000 years, bringing the planet into an ice age.

    What effect do our CO2 emissions have on any future ice ages? This question is examined in one study that examines the glaciation "trigger" - the required drop in summer northern insolation to begin the process of growing ice sheets (Archer 2005). The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the lower insolation needs to drop to trigger glaciation. Since you like graphs you should love this one. It examines the climate response to various CO2 emission scenarios. The green line is the natural response without CO2 emissions. Blue represents an anthropogenic release of 300 gigatonnes of carbon - we have already passed this mark. Release of 1000 gigatonnes of carbon (orange line) would prevent an ice age for 130,000 years. If anthropogenic carbon release were 5000 gigatonnes or more, glaciation will be avoided for at least half a million years. As things stand now, the combination of relatively weak orbital forcing and the long atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide is likely to generate a longer interglacial period than has been seen in the last 2.6 million years.



    To those with lingering doubts that an ice age might be imminent, turn your eyes towards the northern ice sheets. If they're growing, then yes, the 10,000 year process of glaciation may have begun. However, currently the Arctic permafrost is degrading, Arctic sea ice is melting and the Greenland ice sheet is losing mass at an accelerating rate. These are hardly good conditions for an imminent ice age.

    But, hey, you keep telling yourself that CO2 emissions, and humans haven't had any effect on the climate.

    Look at your graph look close

    Each Peak (warming period) -2 (offset) (same amplitude) and occur ~100,000 year (creating a sine wave) and the Current Warming period is COOLER than all but 1, the warming period that occurred 500,000 years ago.

    Thanks YOUR GRAPH proved my point. this warming period is part of a NATURAL CYCLE and is cooler that 4 of the other 5...

    So explain why is this WARMING PERIOD cooler than the 4 previous 5 and only warmer than 1 of the previous 5.

  5. #55
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,604
    Thanks
    17269

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Look at your graph look close

    Each Peak (warming period) -2 (offset) (same amplitude) and occur ~100,000 year (creating a sine wave) and the Current Warming period is COOLER than all but 1, the warming period that occurred 500,000 years ago.

    Thanks YOUR GRAPH proved my point. this warming period is part of a NATURAL CYCLE and is cooler that 4 of the other 5...

    So explain why is this WARMING PERIOD cooler than the 4 previous 5 and only warmer than 1 of the previous 5.
    It's not a question of whether it is more extreme than previous periods; it's a question of extending the interglacial. Guess what? If you leave an ice cube in a room that is 100 degrees C, it melts. You leave an ice cube in a room that is only 50 degrees C, you know what happens? It still melts, it just takes longer. The problem isn't is it hotter than it has been in the past. The problem is that it is staying warmer than it should for longer than it should, and that is our fault. In case you don't understand what the lines on that graph indicate, lemme help you:

    Effect of fossil fuel CO2 on the future evolution of global mean temperature. Green represents natural evolution, blue represents the results of anthropogenic release of 300 Gton C, orange is 1000 Gton C, and red is 5000 Gton C. And, in case you missed it from my earlier post, we're well past the 1,000 GTon, and well on our way to the 5,000. So, your silly little observation that it peaked out at a higher temperature last time, is kinda meaningless.

  6. #56
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    29,913
    Thanks
    7707

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Czernobog View Post
    It's not a question of whether it is more extreme than previous periods; it's a question of extending the interglacial. Guess what? If you leave an ice cube in a room that is 100 degrees C, it melts. You leave an ice cube in a room that is only 50 degrees C, you know what happens? It still melts, it just takes longer. The problem isn't is it hotter than it has been in the past. The problem is that it is staying warmer than it should for longer than it should, and that is our fault. In case you don't understand what the lines on that graph indicate, lemme help you:

    Effect of fossil fuel CO2 on the future evolution of global mean temperature. Green represents natural evolution, blue represents the results of anthropogenic release of 300 Gton C, orange is 1000 Gton C, and red is 5000 Gton C. And, in case you missed it from my earlier post, we're well past the 1,000 GTon, and well on our way to the 5,000. So, your silly little observation that it peaked out at a higher temperature last time, is kinda meaningless.
    The Current warming cycle isn't MORE EXTREME than previous Cycles. IT IS LESS EXTREME than 4 of the 5 previous warming periods in your source (500,000 years 6 warming cycles) and ALL of 4 previous warming cycles notied in my source

    Your source spanned 6 warming cycles (including the current) mine spanned 5 (including the current) this is the COOLEST warming period in 400,000 years, 2nd Coolest in 500,000 years.


    There is no EXTREME warmth according to the data you posted, which CONFIRMED the data I posted.
    Last edited by TNVolunteer73; 13th October 2017 at 09:14 PM.

  7. #57
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,604
    Thanks
    17269

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    The Current warming cycle isn't MORE EXTREME than previous Cycles. IT IS LESS EXTREME than 4 of the 5 previous warming periods in your source (500,000 years 6 warming cycles) and ALL of 4 previous warming cycles notied in my source

    Your source spanned 6 warming cycles (including the current) mine spanned 5 (including the current) this is the COOLEST warming period in 400,000 years, 2nd Coolest in 500,000 years.


    There is no EXTREME warmth according to the data you posted, which CONFIRMED the data I posted.
    That is lasting longer than any other, and shows no sign of ending soon.

    That's the part that you keep ignoring, and don't seem to comprehend is a problem. It doesn't have to be "extreme" warmth. It just has to be warmer than it should for longer than it should, and it is. And it's our fault that it is lasting so long.
    Last edited by Czernobog; 13th October 2017 at 09:40 PM.

  8. #58
    Mad Genius For Hire Puzzling Evidence's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    16,332
    Thanks
    6721

    From
    Derpville USA
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Look at your graph look close

    Each Peak (warming period) -2 (offset) (same amplitude) and occur ~100,000 year (creating a sine wave) and the Current Warming period is COOLER than all but 1, the warming period that occurred 500,000 years ago.

    Thanks YOUR GRAPH proved my point. this warming period is part of a NATURAL CYCLE and is cooler that 4 of the other 5...

    So explain why is this WARMING PERIOD cooler than the 4 previous 5 and only warmer than 1 of the previous 5.
    ^Flat earth.
    Thanks from Czernobog

  9. #59
    Mad Genius For Hire Puzzling Evidence's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    16,332
    Thanks
    6721

    From
    Derpville USA
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    @Czernobog your chart does not include the Roman Warming period, the Midevial warming period, and the Warming period during the Egyptian Empire, nor does it include the last Ice age... which are minor warming periods that have occurred during the Current warming period which Began ~110,000 years ago.
    'Medieval Warm Period' Wasn't Global or Even All That Warm, Study Says
    Historical data from Greenland’s glaciers helps debunk another favored theory of climate denialists.
    BY PHIL MCKENNA, INSIDECLIMATE NEWS


    The tenth to thirteenth centuries, when temperatures in Europe were unusually warm, was also a time of relative cold in the western North Atlantic, according to a study published Friday in the journal Science Advances.

    The findings further undermine the notion of a global Medieval Warm Period that climate change denialists often hold up to support the false idea that today's global warming is a result of natural, non-manmade causes. It also further debunks the belief that early Norse settlements in Greenland flourished and later folded because of changes in the region's climate......

    https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04122015/medieval
    Last edited by Puzzling Evidence; 14th October 2017 at 07:36 AM.

  10. #60
    Veteran Member Czernobog's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    34,604
    Thanks
    17269

    From
    Phoenix, AZ
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    @Czernobog your chart does not include...the Midevial warming period..
    Interesting you should mention the "Medieval" warming period.

    Here is the temperature spread during the Medieval period.


    Reconstructed surface temperature anomaly for Medieval Warm Period (950 to 1250 A.D.), relative to the 1961 1990 reference period. Gray areas indicates regions where adequate temperature data are unavailable.

    Today:


    Surface temperature anomaly for period 1999 to 2008, relative to the 1961 1990 reference period. Gray areas indicates regions where adequate temperature data are unavailable (NOAA).

    Notice the difference? Now, since you like charts, compare the mean temperature from the Medieval interglacial, with today:


    Global surface temperature reconstruction from Mann et al. (2008)
    Thanks from Puzzling Evidence

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The flat tax
    By PACE in forum Economics
    Replies: 154
    Last Post: 19th November 2015, 04:30 AM
  2. The flat tax
    By PACE in forum Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12th November 2015, 05:54 AM
  3. "We don't have time for a meeting of the flat earth society..."
    By Raoul_Duke in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 26th June 2013, 06:59 PM
  4. Perry's Flat tax
    By USA-1 in forum Political Ideologies
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 28th October 2011, 04:30 PM
  5. Prince Harry Conspiracy Theory (Just a theory)
    By Robodoon in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 25th February 2007, 09:37 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed