Larsen C Crack Is in Its Final Stages; Will Produce One of World's Largest Icebergs Ever Recorded

WRONG! Oldest fossils are 3.7 byo.
So, how many years are there in the sample "on record" and what percentage is that of the years of life on earth?

So 2.5 BY

We are in an ice age now.

TO BE FAIR, IT DOESN’T TAKE MUCH: Roger Kimball: “Pittsburgh Not Paris” Triggers the Eco-Nuts.

Like many international agreements, the unspoken subtext of the Paris Climate Accord is “hamper America. Grab as much of its wealth as you can. Say it’s in the name of ‘fairness.’”

That’s not going to wash with Donald Trump. In this respect, he has returned to a much more traditional view of the role of president. He is not the president of the world. He is the President of the United States. We seek to get along with others, but his first task is to assure the prosperity and well being of the citizens of the United States. America First.

As Andrew McCarthy and others have pointed out, in withdrawing from the Paris Accord, Trump has also returned to a more traditional—which is to say, a constitutional—view of treaties. The Paris Accord was a treaty. But it was never presented to the Senate for ratification. In this respect, it was just another of Obama’s initiatives to circumvent the Constitution and govern by administrative fiat. The reason that the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote of the Senate to ratify treaties is because treaties can deeply affect the the lives of American citizens.

The use of treaties as a means to end-run the democratic process has been a concern ever since Missouri v. Holland. Some pushback is warranted.

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/266736/

 

I can't even read it. I literally had to do something else because all that white and black strewn across my screen gave me a headache. It doesn't have an actual time scale or a source and barely has a temperature scale and doesn't look precise at all.

 

No, we are in an intergalacial:

 

Yes.

We are in the Pleistocene glaciation, a series of glacial events separated by inter-glacial events during the Quaternary period that began 2.58 Ma. No one expects this ice-age to end with this inter-glacial, that is why it is called an inter-glacial.

 

(Drops mic)

 

Yes, I do realize that. And scientists are perfectly capable of analyzing the possible reasons that the climate changed. Like orbital velocities, or orbital variations or volcanoes, or meteorites, or solar intensity. None of those reasons are the reason for the current change. The biggest driver is carbon dioxide. If we can measure the type of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and compare it times. The current type of carbon dioxide comes from combustion. That is human driven carbon dioxide.

And the last time that the carbon dioxide concentration rose by 80 points, the amount that it rose from 1900 to 2000, took approximately 5000 years.

 

1) That does not look like Scientific Data. It looks like a block quote from a blog post.

2) What's your point? That homo sapiens have existed in conditions that are warmer than the current one? Great. Now explain to me the historical evidence you have for suggesting that humans and the other animals and plants have gone through a climatic shift as rapid as the current one.

 

Solid logic there, Lou.

 

This is not true.

Humans only contribute about 3% of the total CO2. The rest is natural.

 

Go to the damn link I provided to see the scientific data.

 

Yes, it is.

The portion that humans add is not accounted for in the natural CO2 sequestration cycle. We can measure the isotopes of the CO2 in the atmosphere and compare it to the CO2 found in ice core data. The CO2 we produce through combustion creates a CO2 with a different isotope.

 

Translation - We want your money.
The U.S. won't give billions to a non-binding, unratified, unenforceable climate agreement that permits the worst polluter to do nothing for 20 years.

 

None of your post is true nor does it relate to my post in any rational manner.

But I'm curious to see if you know, when is the earliest that the United States can officially withdraw from the Paris Accord?

 

So, it's the 2nd highest temp over the course of 0.00000203125% of the history of the Earth. Also, that 130 year number is complete BS. It's been like 40+ tops of accurate information.

 

If it's BS, then you should edit the Wikipedia page. Although, I was wrong. It is actually closer to 165 years.

Why do you think that the entire course of Planet Earth's history is relevant?

 

Can't wait !!!

 

1. the 165 years is BS because of variables in the recording instruments, methods, and locations.
2. Planet Earth's temperature history beyond 40+ years is important because temperature is the dependent variable. The direct effect on temperature by a specific independent variable is unknown. To have any clue concerning the direct effect cause, accurate measurement before and after the change to the independent variable must be known. This is an oversimplification, but the whole AGW argument is falsely delivered due to either ignorant oversimplification or intellectual dishonesty. Either way, falsely representing the time scale of temperature measurement leaves a distorted sense of variation and magnitude.

 

Being an a galacial period just isn't the same as an ice age. Bring us down 6 degrees and that is an ice age.

 

Let me know when it's gonna hit the market!!




Lots of customers I can sell it to....

 

A running average of temperatures taken at marked locations around the globe.

Any more questions?

 

There are none because the efforts have not been undertaken to the scale required for effective control and measurement.

Now, you. How are the goals met without US participation.

 

The Japanese will tow the iceberg hunk off, and then melt it, and sell it...without the US?

 

Gee. I wish I had said that because it would mean we had legalized pot here in Florida.

 

Pot affects you in some profound way? Stop smoking....you do not have that much spare brain material, clearly.

Ok, so maybe it will be the Australians....