Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/31/2025 7:27:34 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Oh no! [ Insert “Mr. Bill” picture ] ... industrial activity causes global warming. Did somebody get the memo out to China?
Some scientists cough cough..have put co2 in a tiny little box....separate from the workings of the Universe itself....and only subject to the “inventions” by man. The entire concept is absurd...
/
AKA
Secular humanist messiah complex psychosis .
They all think the are saviors
( Pride, the first and foundational sin )
That's what happens when one rejects the true Messiah
Jesus Christ.
One becomes their own god
( The 1st lie, “ you shall be as gods ")
False premise. CO2 is reactionary, an effect, not a driver. Discredits the rest.
Atmospheric CO2 is a RESULT of climate, not a CAUSE of climate change. Warmer climate, more plants; more plants, more CO2.
Dr. Spencer is one of the few climate scientists who isn’t owned by the deep state.
[[Yes, Increasing CO2 Causes a Warming Tendency in the Climate System… So What? ]]
Bzzt- Wrong- Warming periods cause rises in CO2- hundreds of years LATER- Ice core samples prove that warming happens first, then CO2 levels rise- the exact opposite of what the hoaxers claim!
Exactly-
Scientists trace atmospheric rise in CO2 during deglaciation to deep Pacific Ocean
CORVALLIS, Ore. – Long before humans started injecting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels like oil, gas, and coal, the level of atmospheric CO2rose significantly as the Earth came out of its last ice age. Many scientists have long suspected that the source of that carbon was from the deep sea.
But researchers haven’t been able to document just how the carbon made it out of the ocean and into the atmosphere. It has remained one of the most important mysteries of science.
A new study, published today in the journal Nature Geoscience, provides some of the most compelling evidence for how it happened – a “flushing” of the deep Pacific Ocean caused by the acceleration of water circulation patterns that begin around Antarctica.
The concern, researchers say, is that it could happen again, potentially magnifying and accelerating human-caused climate change.
“The Pacific Ocean is big and you can store a lot of stuff down there – it’s kind of like Grandma’s root cellar – stuff accumulates there and sometimes doesn’t get cleaned out,” said Alan Mix, an Oregon State University oceanographer and co-author on the study. “We’ve known that CO2 in the atmosphere went up and down in the past, we know that it was part of big climate changes, and we thought it came out of the deep ocean.
“But it has not been clear how the carbon actually got out of the ocean to cause the CO2 rise.”
Lead author Jianghui Du, a doctoral student in oceanography at Oregon State, said there is a circulation pattern in the Pacific that begins with water around Antarctica sinking and moving northward at great depth a few miles below the surface. It continues all the way to Alaska, where it rises, turns back southward, and flows back to Antarctica where it mixes back up to the sea surface.
It takes a long time for the water’s round trip journey in the abyss – almost 1,000 years, Du said. Along with the rest of the OSU team, Du found that flow slowed down during glacial maximums but sped up during deglaciation, as the Earth warmed. This faster flow flushed the carbon from the deep Pacific Ocean – “cleaning out Grandma’s root cellar” – and brought the CO2 to the surface near Antarctica. There it was released into the atmosphere.
“It happened roughly in two steps during the last deglaciation – an initial phase from 18,000 to 15,000 years ago, when CO2 rose by about 50 parts per million, and a second pulse later added another 30 parts per million,” Du said.
That total is just a bit less than the amount CO2 has risen since the industrial revolution. So the ocean can be a powerful source of carbon.
In other words- the earth warmed, and a 1000 years later the CO2 rose- showing again that climate drives CO2- CO2 does NOT drive the climate
Yes, resting too heavily on that, not qualifying it, does discredit all of the rest. Any sane debater knows that. Only someone who considers themselves to be spouting holy writ does not.
There is ample data that CO2 causes warming. But, within the earth’s system the impact levels off at 400ppm. Plus, if you push the level up to 1200ppm the food crops go bananas. Double, triple harvests. This has been tested in greenhouses.
New blockbuster paper finds man-made CO2 is not the driver of global warming
“The highlights of the paper are:
► The overall global temperature change sequence of events appears to be from 1) the ocean surface to 2) the land surface to 3) the lower troposphere.
► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.
► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5-10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.
► Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.
► Changes in ocean temperatures appear to explain a substantial part of the observed changes in atmospheric CO2 since January 1980.
► CO2 released from use of fossil fuels have little influence on the observed changes in the amount of atmospheric CO2, and changes in atmospheric CO2 are not tracking changes in human emissions.”
[[2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.]]
Seems man’s total contribution over the many decades has been just 0.00022%, not the 0.00137% I’ve been stating- seems I was way off- Soooo, can someone please explain how just 0.00022% of our atmosphere can capture enough heat and back radiate it in large enough quantities to cause global climate change?
[[4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.]]
[[10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.]]
[[11) Politicians and activiists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago]]
‘overwhelming scientitifc consensus’? Think again!
[[19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.]]
[[23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries]]
[[26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles]]
[[30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles]]
100 reasons why climate change is natural
I don’t know if it was totally planned from the start, or just fell into place, but the results of government declared climate crises has been more government control, less individual freedoms and more costly energy for everyone.
This is the main reason I oppose it. The government (elite individuals at the top of the food chain) wants the power...
What won’t it do (lie, cheat, steal) to keep on acquiring power over the people?
Given that our climate system is nonlinear and dynamic, and given the sheer volume of water vapor in the atmosphere, orders of magnitude more than carbon dioxide, plus the wide variability of water vapor in the atmosphere from 0.4% to 5%, you would think that water vapor would be the key factor in climate change.
Aerosols are a factor in cloud formation, too, in addition to cyclic Sun activity.
It is time to shift focus from carbon dioxide to water vapor and other factors in climate change. We have accomplished next to nothing except spending a lot of research dollars on the obsession with carbon dioxide.
The whole world seems bent on self-destruction chasing a false premise that we are all going to die if we do not control a trace gas that is needed for plant life.
Yep- in my profile page- i have articles discussing that ver thing- Man’s CO2 is nowhere near what it would take to blanket the earth in a thick enough layer to trap heat and heat the planet- we produce so little that it’s ridiculous to claim it is causing climate change- Sadly, the alarmist’s lies have become mainstream while the truth is buried away
“ Atmospheric CO2 is a RESULT of climate, not a CAUSE of climate change. Warmer climate, more plants; more plants, more CO2.” No… more plants absorb more CO2 and the give off the O2 that we breathe.
“ A new study, published today in the journal Nature Geoscience, provides some of the most compelling evidence for how it happened – a “flushing” of the deep Pacific Ocean caused by the acceleration of water circulation patterns that begin around Antarctica.” As cold water sinks from the melting glacier, the warmer water below, which absorbs gases better, is displaced and rises to the surface where it cools and thus can release the gases it has absorbed.
wouldn’t more plants mean more oxygen and less CO2? plants feed off of CO2 so more CO2 means more plants, but more plants would mean less CO2.
can’t we settle this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.