ooops, maybe the ice isn't melting at all..

[garyb]

Hey Gary,

You could not live on earth 530 million years ago... you would choke and die in a few seconds... too much co2, very high temperature.. it was underwater cells and shells in that time, in volcanic areas (hot water and primal elements).
You had to wait for the first plants to appear (410 million years), algae especially (underwater, after gaz clouds gone out of the atmosphere (absorbed by seas and due to earth becoming colder, ie, much less volcanic activity, allowing light to pass thru and allowing photosynthesis, and plants to grow to recycle CO2 and "clean" the air.
So the conditions were met for the first amphibian to leave the sea (370 million) and the reptiles cames after that (200 million years).
Amphibians and reptile = cold blood, need high temperature and a lot of sun to store energy for the day. iguanas, they sunbath all day long..
first primates -200/-150 million years
oldest humanoid known , 7 to 10 million years

homo sapiens (us) ... 100 000 years

yes, but that has nothing to do with the point about the correlation of temperature and CO2. they can't be associated causally. never the less, there are those who would exterminate everyone based on non causal evididence. i'm just pointing out the fraud of the "carbon footprint".

[garyb]

some of those things are true, but the implication is one i never made. reductio ad absurdum is a common logic fallacy.

crbon footprint IS a lie. soil degradation is the byproduct of factory farming, it is real and easily solvable. biocide can be disaster or just part of life, and contamination is what it is. the Sahara desert is one thing that can happen when the rulers are irrresponsible with resources. the peasants are always kept in a state of ignorance, so they can hardly be blamed....

the CO2 increase is statistically insignificant, and there is NO evidence that it is driving climate. this isn't even the hottest period in the last 100years. yes, an asteroid can be hugely toxic, but that's no reason to be pigs.


for someone who fancies himself rational, that's a pretty emotional response...

[spacef]

Hey Gary,

You could not live on earth 530 million years ago... you would choke and die in a few seconds... too much co2, very high temperature.. it was underwater cells and shells in that time, in volcanic areas (hot water and primal elements).
You had to wait for the first plants to appear (410 million years), algae especially (underwater, after gaz clouds gone out of the atmosphere (absorbed by seas and due to earth becoming colder, ie, much less volcanic activity, allowing light to pass thru and allowing photosynthesis, and plants to grow to recycle CO2 and "clean" the air.
So the conditions were met for the first amphibian to leave the sea (370 million) and the reptiles cames after that (200 million years).
Amphibians and reptile = cold blood, need high temperature and a lot of sun to store energy for the day. iguanas, they sunbath all day long..
first primates -200/-150 million years
oldest humanoid known , 7 to 10 million years

homo sapiens (us) ... 100 000 years

yes, but that has nothing to do with the point about the correlation of temperature and CO2. they can't be associated causally. never the less, there are those who would exterminate everyone based on non causal evididence. i'm just pointing out the fraud of the "carbon footprint".

You are absolutely right when you said that the temperature was not so much hotter (well, it was around 50 - 60 degrees Celsius : i have been in sahara in summer (55°) and with the proper suit, it is actually very ok (you sweat, so the wind make your body fresh...)... Humans can survive by 50 to 70° degrees celsius, no problem, you can live underground, it is fresh. But difference of a few degrees endanger species that are not adaptable, and those species are part of recycling the air we breath. May be we should have this debate in 100 or 200 years...

My point was to say that you can't compare with periods where the conditions were totally different like another planet (the 530 million years).

If you recereate the conditions of how it was 530 million years ago, and add our own era "pollution" may be it would have been a very different scenario (in that time, co2 escaped the planet easily).

Humans will not feel any difference for the next 20/100 years may be, it is an very adaptable specie, except on some parts of the world may be, but not in industrialized countries. Anyway, I am not a specialist and i don't know shit about those things ecxept what one side or another say about it...
The thing about Co2, if i understood, is to minimize the impact of ozone, and try to slow down the whole in the ozone layer, and other stuff that keep CO2 from escaping earth atmosphere as it should.
I am more worried about other stuff like chemicals and stuff like that.
Or may be there is no whole in the ozone layer and may be there are killing bees after all
I have no idea
nobody here will know in his lifetime..

[garyb]

no, but there will be unjust laws regardless...

there's no promise that anything will continue as it is, no matter what we do, and as i said, these clowns can't even predict the weather a few days into the future. why would we accept their predictions(although almost all of the high level scientists have now disowned the popular notion of man made global warming) about future weather 5-10 or 100years into the future? they simply don't know.

anyway, the point of this thread was that earlier this year there were report after report that the polar ice was nearly gone, and now we find that the polar ice is doing just fine, thank you! big mistake, nothing to see here, move along....

[spacef]

also, forgive me to have forgotten about that ,
but the sea surface was miles above what is our head now, the planet was bigger and a ball of water.
the temperatures cannot be compared, carbon or not carbon...
the graphs are absolute at a certain point in time, and cannot be compared to nowadays.
it is just like another planet...
that is why i said you can't compare 530 million years ago.
Now for the rest, i have no idea, we live in the century of manipulation and propaganda....

[garyb]

again, WE don't decide what energy sources are available. WE even in our worst exaple are nothing like the users and wasters that those who control such thigs are. again, i challenge you to check the energy usage of your prime minister, the heads of industry and banking and royalty. these guys use more energy in a month than the rest of humanity does in several years. if anyone needs to change their lifestyle, it's THEM. have you googled Al Gore's electric bill? it went UP after he installed solar panels!

[garyb]

also, forgive me to have forgotten about that ,
but the sea surface was miles above what is our head now, the planet was bigger and a ball of water.
the temperatures cannot be compared, carbon or not carbon...
the graphs are absolute at a certain point in time, and cannot be compared to nowadays.
it is just like another planet...
that is why i said you can't compare 530 million years ago.
Now for the rest, i have no idea.

actually, the seas are the biggest carbon sinks. the ocean is where most of the CO2 is, dissolved in the water, which is part of the reason for CO2 rise when the temps rise. as temps rise, CO2 dissolved in the seas is released into the atmosphere.

what CAN be compared is the temperature vs. CO2 levels. if CO2 is such a powerful "greenhouse" heat engine, it would only make sense that the Earth's temperature should be at it's highest when the levels of CO2 are at their highest. instead, temps have peaked to the same levels regardless of CO2 levels. they were about the same at 7000ppm and at 500ppm.

[spacef]

héhé, you worked on the subject apparently...
this still doesn't take into account the regulating power of ocean on temperature (makes it colder) nor the mass of that ocean.
Anyway, i leave the room to the specialist (garyb

[garyb]

naw, i'm pretty ignorant. i'm just going by what is readily and obviously apparent and available.

btw-while the ocean might seem to be a cooling force, water vapor is 80-95% of all the greenhouse gasses...

[nightscope]

The amount of fuel consumed by the military boggles the mind. I saw this programme in which a US Navy destroyer was getting fuelled up by a tanker. Just one fill up would take the average car to the moon and back three times.

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/29925

ns

[spacef]

naw, i'm pretty ignorant. i'm just going by what is readily and obviously apparent and available.

btw-while the ocean might seem to be a cooling force, water vapor is 80-95% of all the greenhouse gasses...

and cows farts too (they are more clean than human fart, but cows fart a lot more)...

(just joking )

[garyb]

The amount of fuel consumed by the military boggles the mind. I saw this programme in which a US Navy destroyer was getting fuelled up by a tanker. Just one fill up would take the average car to the moon and back three times.

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/29925

ns

right!

who is it who needs to cut down on consumption?

the earth is so unbelievably bountifull! there's more than enough if not for some inbred, power hungry, psychopathic deviants running things...

[Zer]

maybe your brains are not loosing cells at all...but hey..who cares?

[garyb]

naw, i'm pretty ignorant. i'm just going by what is readily and obviously apparent and available.

btw-while the ocean might seem to be a cooling force, water vapor is 80-95% of all the greenhouse gasses...

and cows farts too (they are more clean than human fart, but cows fart a lot more)...

(just joking )

idk, my farts are pretty clean...

[MD69]

I too think that to take care of our planet is our responsability .... but this subject is brought up as a smoke screen by the ones in charge to hide a more relevant and immediate subject: the economy ruled by our policy makers is far more agressive against homo sapiens than pollution ... and we already feel it: millions peoples will dies this year because of the economic crisis as millions died in 1873!

There will be relevant renewable energy policy when there will be renewable economy policy, not before.

cheers

[dawman]

Speaking of lunch............................

chicks_light_farts.jpg

A great way to keep methane levels down is to light them.
We are way more sophisticated than our Bovine friends.

[spacef]

idk, my farts are pretty clean...

us french don't access the online episodes since they "air" (lol?) them on cable here since last summer ..... and the french version is really bad when you know the original version.
what idk stands for ?

@XITE 4 LOVE (new nick) : we are the evolved ones, fire-power....

I too think that to take care of our planet is our responsability .... but this subject is brought up as a smoke screen by the ones in charge to hide a more relevant and immediate subject: the economy ruled by our policy makers is far more agressive against homo sapiens than pollution ... and we already feel it: millions peoples will dies this year because of the economic crisis as millions died in 1873!
There will be relevant renewable energy policy when there will be renewable economy policy, not before.
cheers

an unconvenient truth...