Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[CJJon]

For those of you that would like a program to help follow along, here you go:

https://www.logicalfallacies.org/

Sponsored

 

[CJJon]

Can't control yourself I see.

Amazing that you don't see how creepy you are searching through my posts to dig up something to disparage over. WTF? You really are insane dude. Go seek help. Seriously, one human being to another, you need treatment.

 

[CJJon]

Again with the creeper moves and the jump to conclusion! Dude you are whack!

GET HELP! Ask a family member to help you, they will understand.

 

[CJJon]

There is no god and I seek no mercy.

 

[CJJon]

How many times have I been in and out of timeout? In all the confusion I've lost track.

Unless he defines 'ignore' differently - a real possibility!

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Interesting. He struck you as the type who made it to old?

 

[CJJon]

DEFINITION OF CREEPY!!!!

 

[CJJon]

Crazy Horse waiting for me to post something...

 

[Sivi70980]

I'm bothered by how entertained I am by the stalking here. I'll bring this up at my next therapy meeting...

 

[RPDBlueMoon]

Hello; Thank you for helping make two of my points. First is the ice core data is not necessarily representative of the globe. The older ice is only found in some limited places.
Let me fast forward to data collected currently. On the ground the stations are spread over large areas. The data from orbital sensors gathers data from all over the planet. A polar orbit perhaps. I do not have records to cite but do recall discussion about how some of the weather stations were not giving reliable data when compared to other stations.
The preserved ice may not represent global conditions. It had to be ice in the first place to trap old air. The air may be more regional than global.

Next is how what is considered natural determined when the cycles you mention are so very much longer term than the current capacity to take accurate measurements. How can it be known there were not past times of oceanic warming of similar nature to what is being observed currently. we use clues and infer from those clues what the temperatures may have been.
If you find plant pollen in the ice for example you may infer the temperature must have been within a range suitable for that plant to live. A fairly wide range of temperatures compared to a thermometer.

The "data" from ice cores and other such sources is inference data and not from direct measurement. Not necessarily bad data, but also not necessarily precise data. Again I mention significant numbers.

Yes the oceans are becoming warmer by measure currently. That is not disputed. lay it all on human activity if you wish, but expect some push back that there may be natural effects in play.

I don't understand what you are trying to say as you didn't reply to my other post. So tell me what other way is it possible to quantify the data? I feel like you are doing mental gymnastics here, current recorded data isn't long enough, so use ice cores for a longer data set?

First of all where are you getting that ice cores are unreliable? There is nothing that says that they are unreliable. Ice cores from Greenland are considered to be a bit unreliable due to the constant melting and freezing but there is nothing that says the cores from Antarctica are unreliable. I'm not trying to sound mean but you are talking out of your ass right now. The ice cores have also been referenced with the current weather to confirm their accuracy. This is you just saying things just because without any basis. Ice cores now show regional data? Lol. The Roman warming period which is the most recent warming event doesn't show up in any of the ice cores, if it was regional then it would be observable. With the way you are wording temperature it's like you don't understand what global average temperature means.

You do realize that there are people who study this very question and it has already been answered multiple times?Im not just talking out of my ass here. This is why I said that you are entering paleontology. Its an entire discipline dedicated to ancient history to study these things. You act is if this is some unknown area of knowledge. There are others ways to get data on temperature and readings if you have problems with the methodology than you should brush up on your chemistry.

The carbon ppm today is the highest its been in 2.1 million years. 55 million years ago, there has been a mass extinction in the ocean due to ocean acidification, called Paleocene Eocene thermal maximum due to the massive increase in C02 up to 650 - 2,000 PPM and CH4 (methane). It still an active area of research, because its very similar to what is happening today. The reason why the event happened was because of extreme volcano activity on earth. This is when Iceland began to from and why it has volcanic activity. The increase in carbon today is not from volcanos, its from human activity which is why we are seeing the similar changes and the ocean becoming more acidic as it has done before. You can call it climate change or whatever, but it is an undisputed fact that an increase in CO2 makes the ocean acidic, and that isn't happening naturally. The current "warming cycle" is abnormal from the past.

I suggest you read up on Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum if you know what during the last warming event.

 

[Bikeman315]

I have no skin in this game put I just saw this and thought of this thread.
You know who you are.

 

[CJJon]

I have no skin in this game put I just saw this and thought of this thread.
You know who you are.

I never knew Leo was such a sage. He seems to have many quotes indeed. Here is another that reminds me of this thread.

 

[Sivi70980]

Maybe take off about 20% there super chief.

 

[Sivi70980]

Quoted a show Letter Kenny. Maybe tone down the forum post stalking thing. Or I misread the possible negative light on Bikeman with the geriatrics thing. I might seriously be losing it now. Or I'm spot on. Either way, I'm gonna sit the next few plays out, I'm confusing myself.

 

[Sivi70980]

Sponsored