Captain Nemo wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 2:05pm:



That's only in the Antarctic Ice Cores petal.

For Greenland Ice Core (GRIP) -

"CO2  record  between  40  and  8 kyr  B.P.  from  the
Greenland  Ice  Core  Project  ice core "

" We present CO2 measurements performed on an ice core from central Greenland, drilled during the Greenland Ice Core Project (GRIP). This CO2 profile from GRIP confirms the most prominent CO2 increase from the LGM,  with a mean concentration of 200 ppmv, to the early Holocene with concentrations between 290 and 310 ppmv. Some structures of the new CO2 record are similar to those previously obtained from the Dye 3 ice core (Greenland), which indicated a dilemma between Greenland and Antarctic CO2 records [Oeschger et al., 1988]. Both Greenland cores show high CO2 values for rather mild climatic periods during the last glaciation, whereas CO2 records from Antarctica do not show such high CO2 variations during the glaciation and, furthermore, the CO2 values in the early Holocene are about 20-30 ppmv higher in the GRIP  record than  in  Antarctic  records.  There  is  some  evidence  that  the  difference  could  be due to chemical reactions between impurities in the ice leading to an increase of the CO2 concentration under certain conditions. If in situ processes can change the CO2 concentration in the air  bubbles, the question arises about how reliably do CO2 records from ice cores reflect the atmospheric composition at the time of ice formation."

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/97JC00182

I believe between 8K and 40K years is shorter than 800K years.

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 2:51pm:


Well they're not really these days as Kelp have, like Forests, etc - been decimated. Tasmanian Bull kelp is almost gone in just a few decades.
Aquatic plants and species produce more oxygen - than land plants.
80% less oxygen production by planet.
80% increase in CO2 production by humans.

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 2:10pm:


You'll need:
- a number for CO2 concentration (Ajax says 7000ppm)
- a number for climate sensitivity
- a calculator

Have fun! Let us know what you come up with!

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 2:10pm:


"I don't believe scientific evidence but provide me with answers based on scientific evidence."

Robot wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:34pm:


It's your claim for a hothouse earth you do the maths.

Robot wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:34pm:



Poor petal. That's what they say. But logic says both states can't be right. But then logic is not your strong point.

Jasin wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:09pm:


Increased toxicity? Perhaps you can explain a longer life expectancy on the back of this increased toxicity.

Do you have any long term (100 Year) ozone figures for us? Just for comparison.

Re CO2 scrubbers - so you disbelieve the greening of the planet shown by satellites?

Not only above 400 PPM atmospheric CO₂ concentration following the industrial revolution, but the spike happening about 1,000 times faster than ice-core data indicates about previous increases of a natural type. 

Is this natural or Human induced?



Anyone?




...





Anyone?







....


It is Human induced.

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:43pm:


"It's too hard. You do it." 

lee wrote on May 17^th, 2020 at 3:43pm:


You're claiming that human activity can't cause the climate to cool while CO2 levels are increasing?