Would everyone please take a look at this chart?

Question

Folks,
Mean global temperature is very near a low point
If the chart that I just found at http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm is anywhere near accurate, this global warming thing has only started,
AND IT IS NOT BEING CAUSED BY HUMANS!!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

This is for all the people only focus on CO2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is not the most abundant gas in the greenhouse effect it may make up 5%, 90% of it is WATER VAPOR!!!!!!!! second of all CO2 levels rise after the temperature rises!!!!!! Water Vapor is what you should be concerned with and we have very little control over that considering the ocean makes 90% of the water vapor in the atmosphere!! Human CO2 release amounts account for 0.3% of the gases in the atmosphere!!!!! So tell me how the hell that .3% makes the difference!!! So I agree with the questionnaire HUMANS ARE NOT THE CAUSE!!!!!!!! You won't prove me otherwise until you give me legitamite proof.. LIKE A REAL SCIENTIST!!!!!!

Answer 2

The chart is incomplete and poorly drawn, but if you look closely, and know what you are looking at, look specifically at the temperature change during the Permian Era. That was the last time there was a mass extinction due to Global Warming. We are now at the beginning of that pattern again but for a different reason.

Please keep an open mind and look at all the evidence IN CONTEXT. It is the only way you will have any understanding of the issue rather than just providing ranting opinion pieces.

(Yeah, that applies to the other side of the argument, too.)

Answer 3

Yes, the chart is accurate. The 'fire and ice' periods are also well correlated with the position of our solar system in relationship to the spiral arms of our galaxy. Nir Shaviv, an Israeli physics professor, has a very well done web site with applicable journal articles linked.

When the Earth is within a spiral arm of the galaxy, we are bathed with many more galactic cosmic rays (GCR), very high energy charged particles, from supernovae. These are thought to cause the formation of cloud condensation nuclei, little water droplets, that seed cloud formation. Lots of GCR, lots of clouds, more sunlight is reflected away. Less GCR, fewer clouds, more light reaches the Earth's surface.

There really does not seem to be *any* other mechanism to explain the ice age correlation with galactic position.

Answer 4

Thanks for posting this. I see all of the global warming nut jobs are saying we can't judge the temperature cycle from millions of years of data. Of course you can. Any scientist worth anything would love that much data to base an opinion on. Saying a better idea of the trend can be found from the last 2000 years of data is insane. Global warming was not cause by humans millions of years ago, as it is not caused by them now. It is just earth's natural cycle and there is nothing we can do about it. The earth heated and cooled all on its own.

Answer 5

Sorry Joe U, but for once I actually agree with dana’s first statement. I’m afraid that the suggestion that it was warmer than today in the past does not *prove* that mankind isn’t causing the current warming.

It *does* demonstrate that it is perfectly *possible* that mankind could have nothing to do with it, because, plainly, it has been much warmer in the past than today without any help from mankind at all. But, it doesn’t *prove* anything either way.

However, what’s even more interesting about dana’s answer is that lovely first link of his. Have a look at it now and look specifically at the Permian period (245 – 290 million years ago) Notice that CO2 was around 5,000 ppmv for pretty much the whole period? Now compare that period with your temperature graph. For the first half of the Permian period it was as cool, if not cooler, than today.

Then move forward in time on your temperature graph. Notice that all of the Triassic and most of the Jurassic were much warmer than today? Now swap over to dana’s CO2 graph and… oh look! During both periods, CO2 was lower than today?

The truth is, when you compare the two graphs, no sane, objective person would notice any link at all between CO2 levels and temperature.

Clearly there is something else affecting climate change that is *much* more significant than CO2. Is that ‘something’ causing today’s warming? I don’t know, but the truth is, nor does anybody else.

As ever with global warming - don't believe the hype.

:::EDIT:::

In response to dana’s edit…

So you provide one graph that shows CO2 has no relevance to temperature and then another that shows that they are closely linked.

Make your mind up dana. Which version is the truth?

And re. your comment “don’t listen to the chuda.” Well, you’re the one making it up as you go along dana.

Answer 6

Temp increases precede C02 increases not the other way around.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/07/carbon-dioxide-and-temperatures-ice.html
http://global-warming.accuweather.com/2007/06/skeptical_dr_fred_singer_on_he.html

http://technocrat.net/d/2007/5/6/19282

There are all kinds of places to get the data that shows C02 following temp increase.

Answer 7

TOO BAD that you did not show the same graph with the carbon concentration over time...

Because then you see that an average earth temperature was 10°C and the CO2 concentration back then over 1000PPM

If I still have the link, I will send it.

Answer 8

Two important things.

That chart covers millions of years. You simply can't see what's been happening in the last 50. Here's a picture of the last 2000 which makes it clearer.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png

Yes, it has been warmer in the distant past. And the result was dramatically different coastlines and plant life. If that happens again, our modern society, with massive coastal development and intensive agriculture, will be devastated. We're not nomads who can pick up and move.

EDIT - coocachoo13 says "90% of it is WATER VAPOR!!!!!!!! second of all CO2 levels rise after the temperature rises!!!!!! Human CO2 release amounts account for 0.3% of the gases in the atmosphere!!!!! You won't prove me otherwise until you give me legitamite proof.. LIKE A REAL SCIENTIST!!!!!!

OK, here you go. 3 arguments above, 3 answers from real scientists, with references to the scientific literature. It will take time to read and understand them, maybe clicking and reading some links, too.

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11652
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11659
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11638

Answer 9

if scientists can figure out good rough estimates of the temparature and co2 levels 500 million years ago and give solid reasoning for why this was so, don't you think they could figure out the reason for temperature and co2 levels now in real time as they are observing it take place?

Answer 10

Interesting chart. I can't wait for it to go through peer review. Because the "if this anywhere near accurate" is the question.

I'd like to see the methods o how they went from rock type, estimated continent location and predicted swamps to temperature. That is some real leaps in logic.

I will hold my comments until I can see methods in detail.

Because, you see.....this is how science works....