If man is the big boogie-man of climate change, and his CO2 destructive to the Earth, in fact so destructive it will bring about the dreaded "tipping point" of no return and the end of all life as we know it...

Is it not a fact that there were eras where CO2 was much much much higher in concentration than it is today?

The Cambrian Era had CO2 at a max of about 7000ppm instead of today's of around 385ppm.  In fact looking at several graphs covering Earths history it looks as if todays levels of CO2 is lower to a great deal lower than it has ever been.

Now if we are to believe the ALARMISTS they say that for every 100ppm there's an increase in temp of .6 degrees Celcius.

So based on that the temperature in Cambrian times must have been about 40 degrees Celcius hotter than today.

Yet scientists think it was only around 22 degrees Celcius.  Oh dear.

I guess since we are still here that 7000ppm isn't the tipping point nor is  60 degrees Celcius.

Feel free to correct any and all figures.

oh and BTW none of that 7000ppm was man made CO2 either.

ROTFLMAO...

gee thanks for that.

I just won another bet.

What has a trilobite got to do with climate and atmosphere?
I suggest you try to stick to the point, not go off trying to dissemble and deny and ignore what is being discussed.

And I was hoping for once you'd stop the nonsense and talk rationally.  I could have of course picked any era, epoch, age in the past couldn't I and the biota would be different in each...  yet the CO2 levels would still be much higher than todays.

I NOTE you refute NONE of the figures..  or FACTS.

no wrong noise...  FLUSH!!!!!
that's the crap you just wrote BTW.

Stop being so evasive and address the issue for a change..

Sorry - can't come out to play right now Grendel. I'll maybe see you on Monday when I can have some more fun. 

You're such a funny guy.

Grendel wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2009 at 8:02pm:


OK. Let me answer that in a bit more detail. First strawman:

Quote:


Well, I'd like to see a reference for that little gem, because the relationship is logarithmic. You just can't speak in terms of 'every 100 ppm' because it isn't linear.

We often talk about temperature changes that result from a doubling in CO2 concentrations.  The reason we do it this way is because the relationship between CO2 concentrations and temperature increases is not linear but logarithmic.  Put simply, the temperature change from a CO2 concentration increase from 200 to 300ppm is different (in fact, larger) than the temperature change we might expect from a concentration increase of 600 to 700 ppm.   But the temperature change from 200 to 400 ppm is about the same as the temperature change from 400 to 800 ppm, because each represents a doubling.   This is totally uncontroversial.

The temperature during the Cambrian may well have been higher - possibly as much as 22 degrees. The other factor is that the sun was not as 'intense' 500 million years ago.

I questioned the CO2 figure because it's controversial. There are several studies that use various proxies to determine CO2 and temperature during this period. The results vary by 300 percent between the studies. To cling on to one CO2 concentration and say that that's exactly what it was 500 million years ago is a bit naughty and a bit misleading.  

I suggest you start Googling, because I doubt if a peer reviewed paper could get through with a clanger like that.

Grendel wrote on Jul 7^th, 2009 at 3:53pm:


No. Actually they are not. Simulations by modelling can and have been tested.  They were tested during the current and previous La Nina cycles, and they were tested during the Mt Pinatabo eruption.

I'll try to find the paper Dessler et al I think. It came out in April 2009 in Science.

In order to test something that happened 500 Million years ago, you'd need a good Doctor with a time machine. Doctor Who?  

Happy wrote on Jul 7^th, 2009 at 4:03pm:


Well, it's a long story. Initially life originated in an atmosphere rich in CO2. It wasn't until cyanobacteria (blue green algae) evolved that we started to see oxygen in the atmosphere.

Other sources of CO2 have been volcanic outgassing and CO2 from comets. So it's not quite as simple as it sounds.

Keep living in denial...