Largest North America Climate Change In 65 Million Years, Study Shows

Science Daily ^ | February 8, 2007 | University of Florida

[rbookward]

The largest climate change in central North America since the age of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, a temperature drop of nearly 15 degrees Fahrenheit, is documented within the fossilized teeth of horses and other plant-eating mammals, a new study reveals.

[spunkets]

Freezin' muh tootsies off here. Wish I could burn snow. It's free.

[Clump]

My bad!

[3niner]

That graph shows no correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature at all.

I never said it did.

[3niner]

That graph shows no correlation between CO2 levels and global temperature at all.

There doesn't seem to be any, over that time scale, but there is a pretty strong correlation of the last 400,000+ years. Unfortunately, for the human-caused global warming nuts, the CO2 fluctuations lag the temperature fluctuations by about 1,000 years.

http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2006/10/co2_acquittal.html#more

[BuffaloJack]

The sky is falling again.

[showme_the_Glory]

"because you're schmart?"

[gondramB]

>>Oh, like I'm going to believe this pile of manure...<<

I'm not sure why it would be manure - we know there were ice ages in the past and its entirely possible that the one they are talking about (30 million years ago) was the largest change.

[TigersEye]

I have seen that. It would appear that CO2 levels follow temp. changes not the other way around. But not on that larger time scale so what is the real correlation even there? Is it just one of those crossover points illustrated by the graph you posted? Is it just a sign that the geo-climatic systems of the earth are moving towards a greater equilibrium? And have been all along? The most certain conclusion is that NO ONE KNOWS.

Thanks for the link. I'm accumulating good links in a folder for future heretical useage.

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

LOL, that is class!

[dforest]

I think I will weigh in on this a little more. This site's Home Page says it is a conservative site. It doesn't say it is a scientific journal. It is a political site. Most conservatives know all this climate change hoopla, global warming garbage, is hoopla, mainly to find a reason to take our money. This is what people react to. We are not on here to think we will live 100 years down the road only to find we were screwed back in 2007. I am no scientist, neither are a lot of people here. We are common sense conservatives. What transpired 30,000 years ago is irrelevant. How many 30,000 year old dead people care about our political sense today. If you do not get the responses you wish for , go to a scientific site. I think everyone here knows the purpose for the article. The flippant responses are because they are tired of being gamed.

[BuffaloJack]

The dirty little secret about global warming is this: IT DOESN'T EXIST! We are just experiencing a natural long term global climate cycle (ice ages alternating with tropical periods).
The "Inconvenient Truth" to the hype is that socialists have siezed on the "Global Warming" BIG LIE to push a socialist agenda. The Kyoto treaty would create a condition for the global redistribution of wealth, the socialists ultimate goal.
"Global Warming" is just a rallying point for the masses, the real socialists could care less about the climate. Part of their agenda: All naysayers need to be punished for bringing the truth to light.
Global Warming has become the religion of socialism, the Kyoto Treaty is its holy scripture and Al Gore is its Messiah. You either believe or you are a heretic.

[gondramB]

The earth is warming at a rate that will cause a lot of problems if it continues. We are already at a 10,000 year peak. That is a fact.


I remain unconvinced that humans are causing the vast majority of this increase. There are some anomolies - like if why did temperatures decline in the 1800's when CO2 levels were rising? And why did global warming stop between 1945 and 1976?

So it does bear investigating. We need to beware both extremes - those who see global warming as an excuse to cripple the economy and those who deny global warming exists.

[dforest]

I think you worry too much. If this were so I would not be sitting here in sub zero temps tonight. I feel that any climate changes are out of human hands. I don't think getting in a frenzy or over reacting with blaming average people for a non crisis is the answer. The earth has went through many changes as all things do. All of this scare policy is more politics and very little science. I don't think people alive 200 years ago wasted their time and effort and money on fear about 200 years down the road. Cruel? I think not. Common sense is more like it.

[gondramB]

>>I think you worry too much. If this were so I would not be sitting here in sub zero temps tonight. I feel that any climate changes are out of human hands<<

If the global warming and continues is not human caused that's the worst possible scenario.

But it's worth remembering that we've hit this global temperature twice before in the last 10,000 years and each time it cooled back down. Its only if it breaks through this barrier that we have serious consequences. That's why we should monitor and study this.

I have a friend who just came back from the environmental summit in the U.K and another who just came back from the World economic forum in Switzerland - they both told the same story - a strong movement to reduce emmissions by 80% without waiting for further proof. we have to oppose this.

But conservatives who claim there is no issue at all aren't helping because that so clearly disagrees with the facts. We need to acknowledge global warming and demand proof of human causation instead of denying reality.

[theDentist]

Remember Y2K??? Talk about a marketing scheme... a worldwide computer disaster to mix in with the end-of-the-worlders paranoia which grew the computer industry 3 fold almost overnight!