A concensus of scientists acknowledge CO2 levels at astronomical highs, the most in 1,000,000 years?

Question

Limbaugh has criticized two things in trying to debunk global warming. Concensus, and, climate modeling.

Sometimes in science it is nearly impossible to "prove", with 100% certainty, an accepted idea, or theory. For example, many scientists by the 15th century felt the earth was round, but, with 100% certainty, went unproven until space flight allowed images of a round earth to be taken. It was a consensus of scientists that believed the earth was round prior to certainty being provided.

In such a case, it is usually that science hasn't developed the tools to measure a postulation with absolute certainty.

With global warming, there is no doubt among scientists that CO2 levels are at astronomical highs, and, the only question is, how much harm will be done to the earth if left unchecked.

The only way to handle the problem is with a climate model, an attempt to project into the future different outcomes. For now, there is little else science can do, people.

Measuring CO2 levels is quite easy, and, over immense period of times.

Actually, CO2 levels are at levels exponentially higher, much, much, much higher, than the earth has ever experienced in 1,000,000 million years, this is the central concern, folks.

Steven C...really though, overexposure in the media is a bad reason to not support moving ahead on the issue. Kyoto Accords will be revisited soon, and, we need to, politically, handle the problem head on.

Answer 1

Thank you for posting this, but the Dittoheads won't actually read it and will head straight to slamming you.

I find that most people who argue all these minutiae to prove global warming doesn't exist have not seen Al Gore's movie because they don't like HIM and are not mature enough to separate a guy they don't like from the scientific evidence. Plus, as someone mentioned on another thread, they don't want to give up their huge gas-guzzling vehicles.

Perfect example of people who have made up their minds without seeing the movie and scientific evidence: most of the answerers here.

Answer 2

I am over 50yrs I remember in the 1960's predictions by scientist back then, Tell me if any of them were even remotely accurate.
We were approaching another ice age.
The oceans will become so polluted that there will be mass extinction of sea life.
With overpopulation the earth population will reach 50 billion by 2050 ( in many nations the opposite is happening)
The amazon jungle was loosing the equivalent of a football field every hour(it would have disappeared by now)
We would have one world language by 2000
I could go on and on Experts would give their prediction on what the world would be like every 10 years they had to discontinue doing that because they were so far off base predicting 10 years ahead, for all you global warming zealots the only thing I can say is PLEEEEEEASE.

Answer 3

1) You have a lot to learn about science & the history of science. I have neothyer the time nor space to educate you here.
2) Do you have a source for the CO2 data? Without a credible source, I will not believe you.
3) There is no way to know CO2 levels 1,000,000 years ago. Do you thing Australopithicenes knew how to measure it?

Answer 4

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT EVERY ONE IS GUESSING. THE EARTH GOES THROUGH PERIODIC CLIMATE CHANGE THAT IS A NATURAL PART OF THE EVOLVING EARTH. SCIENTIST HAVE YET TO FIGURE OUT WHY AND HOW THIS HAPPENS. TIL THEN WE HAVE TO STOP FARTING THE METHANE GAS IS GOING TO EXPLODE THE EARTH.

HOW THE HELL WOULD SCIENTIST BE ACCURATE ABOUT HOW HIGH THE CO2 LEVEL WERE IN THE EARTH A MILLION YEARS AGO.
THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE IS A ROBUST
78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen, 0.9% argon, 0.03% carbon dioxide, and trace amounts of other gases.
LINK THE SOURCE OF YOUR INFORMATION.

"If models cannot be supported by actual observations of the atmosphere... then we cannot and should not rely on their predictions of a future warming." -Dr. S. Fred Singer, atmospheric scientist

"We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy." -Tim Wirth, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Global Affairs

"...We have been seeing some profound changes in the relationship between humankind and the Earth's environment. And that's the first obstacle, in my opinion, to really coming to grips with this issue of global warming. The first big change is population... [With greater] availability of birth control information and culturally appropriate and acceptable techniques... [and] empowerment of women, socially, politically and in the context of the family, to participate in the decisions about childbearing... population begins to stabilize." -Vice President Albert Gore

Answer 5

There are other questions to consider regarding the validity of CO2 as being a pre-cursor to global warming increases.

First, what is the radioation absorption of CO2? What is the depth of penetration for that absorption? What are the absorption ratios for gamma, alpha, beta, UV, and X? What do those various raditons have to do with planetary temperature?

Second, what are the CO2 levels of Mars, since its polar cap is also melting?

Third, why is the overall mass of Antartica growing while the mass of the Artic is shrinking?

4th, of other gases we place in the atmosphere, what is their ability to reflect rads? In other words, how valid is a scientific conclulsion when it rests upon monitoring just one variable when that variable is not the sole cause of the dynamic? if you are fluent with peer review, you know that it is not valid.

5th, regarding the roundness of the earth.....actually ancient greeks were the first to show the roundness of the planet. A better reference point to make might be to compate the complex systems created to counter kepler and his orbits.

Answer 6

Romare, you think people can't separate their dislike for Al Gore from the science in his movie. My question would be what science in his movie?

Where is the science for his claim that the oceans will rise 20 feet in the next century? The IPCC predicts 18", thats a lot less than 20 feet. Is this the scientific concensus I keep hearing about?

Answer 7

OH YEA, SNAP INTO A SLIM JIM!

Sorry, did scientists keep records 1,000,000 years ago on CO2. Dang, what book is that in? Hmmm, maybe it was the Bible but libs don't read that.

Anyways, models on predicting the future on this subject are not accurate either. The wonderful UN has said that.
**********
Plant another tree and then you can help reduce the super high CO2.

Answer 8

solutions for CISN 103.9 Edmonton & u . s . one hundred and five Calgary CISN: 7am music = good Time 7:15 be conscious = Mexico BBFF = lost interior the Nineteen Fifties this nighttime 9am music = It happens artwork be conscious = job 10:15 be conscious = Ocean 12pm Artist = Brad Paisley - worked for me 2pm music = What approximately Now 2:15 be conscious = Beer 4:15 be conscious = Boat 5pm music = Mercury Blues maximum needed = do not think of i won't be able to Love You - worked for me 8:15 be conscious = this nighttime Wine u . s . trivialities = a place To stay invariably u . s . one hundred and five: 7am music = it somewhat is a large Day To Be Alive artwork be conscious = Pole 1st music @ Lunch = Letter To Me outstanding 3 @ 3 = I advised You So 5pm music = Chattahoochee trivialities for the two: video games = 7 organic Essences = Devon hi Mr. best Minister = B Mindfield = Santee, CA Sleuth = living house each and each of something = a happy Hump Day each and every physique

Answer 9

why are so many people against the global warming initiative now that we are finally seeing some results from over a century of effort? Without climatic change the weather anomalies cited in revelations can't happen. Burn more fossil fuel while we still can.

Answer 10

I suppose what they teach in high schools is not that great now a days. Ahh I remember learning in biology that plants like carbon dioxide and convert it to oxygen. Liar you say, hateful neo-con! No its not a lie, if you find a reputable book you to can read about plants converting carbon dioxide to oxygen.

I agree that we are warming, but I do not agree we are the cause. It's a cycle.