Medieval warming was global

methane, which is flammable, yes. CO2, no.

Monkeyjerk: "Vote me down, Gunga..."


Glad to.

First off, do not patronize when discussing.

Secondly, the biggest event of sea level rise has occured over the last 12K years and the curve has NOT increased appreciably. The proxy sea levels (I was there when Kraft and FAirbridge would try to argue their respective lines of evidence on sea level rise at GSA and ALL their predicted sites of sea level rise are still above water, 15 years after they were to be inundated) . Those early curves , when ignored all make any sea level number look extreme. Post Pleistocene sea level rises qwere initially about 3 to 5 ft PER YEAR

what happened to Goldman10? I missed the memo

Front end of cow, like us, CO2.
Back end of cow, like us especially after Jack Cheese and Kielbasa Sandwich, methane.

It's easy to test the difference.

Joe(Have a friend hold a lighter to your ass)Nation

There are numerous youtube videos of assholes (in both senses) and lighters proving the point. The most interesting ones are those in which the lighter gets just a little too close before ignition happens. Talk about days that are real scorchers.

There's a simple rule, if you don't want to burn your arsehole, keep your trousers on. The fart lights just as well, and there's no blowback. Try it now.

And now is a lot warmer than 10,000 BC. Where exactly are we with relation to the ice ages ? Because if we are not at the hottest temp between ice ages then we will get hotter no matter what we do.

You are assuming Global Warming is real. If we believe you, what will be the cost of stopping CO2 ? Incidentally, to all those greenies who call CO2 a poison, your lungs will not work without it.

Why do all Global Warming Thuggees have delusions as to how important their knowledge is, how right they are and how we all must do what they tell us ? Isnt there a whale you can save somewhere ?

funny thought...

replace global warming thuggies with bible thumping creationists, and watch what happens.

cool, huh?

(seen Jonah lately?)

So what happened when the world had the Snow Ball ice age ? Lots of CO2, and no melting. For most of its existence the planet has NOT had polar ice caps . They are a feature of ice ages and their residual effect. The North Polar Ice has melted completely several times since the POlar bear's evolution, whereupon it breeds with the Brown bear and survives. When the ice returns, it moves back onto the ice and it s dormant genes kick in. Where was CO2 when the ice was melting then ?

You see this Gunga ? How dare you have an opinion ! Global Warming Thuggees will not tolerate any attack on their feelings of delusional power and special knowledge . You have been threatened !

Make a linear scale of green house influence . Put water vapour at the very end of maximum influence . Now put CO2 at the minimum end . Put every other gas like methane in between . Now why do they leave out water vapour and the other gases ? An inconvenient truth, perhaps .

I dont want to see anyone's opinion replaced . That is the main argument I have against Global Warming Thuggees . They shred data, they lie and demand they be believed . They ARE bible thumpers, they just have a different bible to a normal religion .

and just as I am very careful not to lump all christians into one stinky basket, maybe you could realize that all of us that are concerned about the future of our planet are not door to door bicycle riding loons...

Granted . But I think you realise the burden of proof is on those wanting change . From a friend who has a ScD and who cut his teeth on weather and climate, it is a guess . It is a guess that he thinks is correct and his opinion gave me more pause to think maybe AGW is correct but the decision I reached was if we are to turn trillions of dollars and our entire future over to those who cant get the trains to run on time then we need more certainty .

Ionus says:


What makes you think they do leave them out? If you think they do, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about in these threads, because they ALL are clearly considered and their effect evaluated, in the scientific literature and the IPCC reports which distill the scientific research. There is no evidence that water vapor concentration is changing except as a result of increasing temperature--it is a feedback, not a forcing, in what is going on today. Water vapor concentration is not changing on its own, but as a result of another change, which the evidence shows is anthropogenic climate change. Methane's not particularly good for your case either, because A) though it's much more potent a GHG than CO2, it exists in the atmosphere in concentration that are only a small fraction of CO2, so it's effect is much less. B) it's half life in the atmosphere is only on the order of a week or so, rather than CO2's life of around a century. CO2 lasts, methane has to continually be replenished. C) Methane in the atmosphere is highly dependent on human activity, e.g. rice ppaddy agriculture. During the recent droughts and the economic crises of the last few years, human agricultural activity dropped significantly and methane dropped too.
It's all been considered. Sorry you remain ignorant and out of the loop.

I also suggest you look at the multiple independent investigations into climate science research done to determine whether there was any validity to the so-called "Climategate" charges. The research was vindicated. The denialist claims were bogus, as are your charges.

I always go back to the great debates of ocean rise that seems to have been stuunted significantly since the end of the Pleistocene (if you assume that the Pleistocene HAS ended considering Green;and)AND I like to discuss the Vostok curves that go back to mid Pleostocene times and show the approximate values of several of the global issues on this subject (insolation, CH4 (with a big boost from CH4 clathrates at several key times). The Vostok curves , Ive been told, correspond to several intersecting cylces including Dangaard/MAlenkovitch/Chandler wobbles and harmonic precessions).

Ill see if I cnt find a downloadable.

The issue on climatgate has not really been resolved to many's satisfaction. There was some vfraud involved that cannot be disputed

farmer, I followed the "Climategate" investigations fairly closely, and I don't remember any of them ever saying there was any fraud, though the denialists charged fraud loudly and wildly. Having some knowledge of what the emails were actually talking about from knowing something about their original contexts, I know they were also wildly misconstrued. If you know of some fraud found, not just alleged, please mention it. As far as I can tell, a small fraction of the work could have been tighter, and some of the scientists' reactions got a little angrier than they possibly should have (though in my opinion that anger was well deserved, because the denialists trashed them and misrepresented what they found without good cause), but that's about it.

farmer, I also had no intention of partronizing you. When I talked about "you of all people", it meant to me, that in pretty much every other discussion I've seen you in you have ALWAYS dealt with all the aspects of whatever was under discussion to come to a conclusion, but on this one it's seemed to me that you haven't considered fully that there are new changes taking place in the system that are human-induced, that weren't in effect 12K years ago, or 500K years ago, and that seemed really out of character to me. I was really surprised. Maybe the choice of words was bad. If so, I apologize.