Global Cooling or Global Warming?

[CasualBystander]

Are you saying CO2 molecules are radioactive and disintegrates to something else in just a few decades ?

Nope. Reread the ESRL site - their chart is the delta in percent relative to the background C14 concentration (the "excess" C14). The background concentration is maintained by rain from the upper atmosphere. The earth is radioactive as hell as I keep having to point out - a banana is 120 becquerels.

The halflife of C14 is 5,730 years and the decay effect on decade time levels is insignificant unless measured with very sensitive equipment.

That is the rate that an excess of CO2 is absorbed into the environment. The default level of CO2 is around 290 PPM and anything above that should be treated as an "excess".

Only about 30-40% of current atmospheric C14 is from bomb testing.

 

[3FEL9]

That is the rate that an excess of CO2 is absorbed into the environment.

So,, then its not such a big problem after all.

And a warmer climate with more plants sounds good to me. And according to your calculations The Maldives should be safe.

 

[CasualBystander]

So,, then its not such a big problem after all. When the temperture goes too high the american people will just elect a democratic president again. Trump obviously wants more heat.

And a warmer climate with more plants sounds good to me. And according to your calculations The Maldives should be safe.

Actually my 290 as the default level is wrong. The warmer ocean would have driven the CO2 level to over 300 PPM anyway. During the 40s when it was cooling the CO2 level actually went backward.

Part of the problem is we have defined the LIA (the coldest period of the interglacial) as "normal". It wasn't.

Here is a fun chart of cumulative CO2 emissions vs CO2 level (the downward kink the 1940s) I made a while back.

The last half of the chart (below the red line) is post 1996 CO2 emission. The more we emit the less effective it is at raising the CO2 level.


its not such a big problem

You have identified the difficulty of discussing more CO2 with progressives.

They have misidentified a solution as a problem (thinking isn't their strong suit).

More CO2 is massively beneficial.

 

[3FEL9]

thinking isn't their strong suit

That sounds like 97 % of the population on earth. You might have to broaden your definition somewhat

 

[spacecase0]

Are you saying CO2 molecules are radioactive and disintegrates to something else in just a few decades ?

a percentage of the carbon in the CO2 is radiative, so you can tell how old the carbon is by the ratio of the 2 carbon isotopes
edit: Radiocarbon dating - Wikipedia

 

[CasualBystander]

a percentage of the carbon in the CO2 is radiative, so you can tell how old the carbon is by the ratio of the 2 carbon isotopes
edit: Radiocarbon dating - Wikipedia

Well...

The point was that the C14 injected into the atmosphere by nuclear testing provides a "tracer" that can be used to determine the lifetime of an excess of carbon in the atmosphere.

 

[nivek]

More CO2 is massively beneficial.

Perhaps for plants who breath it, and if the earth got greener it sure would be very beneficial, the problem is we are cutting the green, for example, the Amazon is shrinking fast and the world does nothing, we need the green for our own survival, the precious oxygen they exhale, we cannot breath co2...

...

 

[spacecase0]

Perhaps for plants who breath it, and if the earth got greener it sure would be very beneficial, the problem is we are cutting the green, for example, the Amazon is shrinking fast and the world does nothing, we need the green for our own survival, the precious oxygen they exhale, we cannot breath co2...

...

160PPM is the lower limit for most plant life on earth (C3 plants), and the middle of farm fields often fall below that in the middle of the day.
we are likely on a dying planet due to lack of CO2.
I am happier at where CO2 is now than what it was 50 years ago, but it needs to be higher for the life on earth not to die.

 

[Standingstones]

The problem is that countries like a China and India give lip service to pollution control. Just take a look at those photos from Beijing China. I don’t wish to go through life wearing a mask over my face to avoid breathing in polluted air.

 

[spacecase0]

pollution and CO2 in the air are separate topics.
every country starting out industrializing ends up polluting,
but at some point they clean up the mess, even china is doing that now (but it will take them a while)
letting CO2 emissions somehow get linked to pollution legally is just not helping anything

 

[nivek]

Tanks roll in to frozen hell: Germany and Austria call state of emergency as troops save residents from NECK-DEEP snow after 21 deaths in worst winter for more than 30 years

• State of emergency has been declared in a fourth southern Bavarian district with army called in to help
• Avalanche crashed through restaurant of the Hotel Säntis in Switzerland while guests were eating inside
• A 1,000ft wall of snow reportedly hit the hotel, in Schwägalp, in the canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden
• The bitter weather sweeping Europe has killed at least 21 and forecasters have warned of more snow to come
• ‘Quantities of snow above 800m altitude happen once every 30 to 100 years,’ said an Austrian meteorologist

 

[spacecase0]

The Chill of Solar Minimum

 

[nivek]

The Chill of Solar Minimum

I do think we are entering towards a mini ice age, partially due to a solar minimum...A global heatwave can also cause a mini ice age, melting the poles and dumping large amounts of ice into the oceans, cooling the currents and oceans along with a solar minimum it can put much of the world into a deep freeze...

...

 

[Castle-Yankee54]

I do think we are entering towards a mini ice age, partially due to a solar minimum...A global heatwave can also cause a mini ice age, melting the poles and dumping large amounts of ice into the oceans, cooling the currents and oceans along with a solar minimum it can put much of the world into a deep freeze...

...

The melting ice sheets are more likely to start a new ice age. When enough fresh water enters the North Atlantic it will shut down the Gulf Stream and the northern hemisphere will descend into the next ice age. Based on past data its likely the next ice age will happen in the near geologic future.

 

[nivek]

The melting ice sheets are more likely to start a new ice age. When enough fresh water enters the North Atlantic it will shut down the Gulf Stream and the northern hemisphere will descend into the next ice age. Based on past data its likely the next ice age will happen in the near geologic future.

Indeed this is a natural cycle it appears...

 

[CasualBystander]

The pattern of a reentry into a ice age is increasing climate oscillation (hundred+ year warm and cool periods) until one of the cold excursions becomes permanent.

 

[Standingstones]

I would lean towards the sun's activity for the majority of the earth's weather changes. However, you can't deny that humans polluting the atmosphere is also a reason for the weather we have presently.

Looking at photos of China's skies, you can't discount that all human beings are being affected by the crap being sent up into the atmosphere.

 

[CasualBystander]

I would lean towards the sun's activity for the majority of the earth's weather changes. However, you can't deny that humans polluting the atmosphere is also a reason for the weather we have presently.

Looking at photos of China's skies, you can't discount that all human beings are being affected by the crap being sent up into the atmosphere.

Won't argue that pollution is bad, but CO2 isn't pollution.

Further - 80% of the rainforest has been chopped down in the last 200 years.

If that doesn't affect climate - nothing will.

 

[CasualBystander]

Perhaps for plants who breath it, and if the earth got greener it sure would be very beneficial, the problem is we are cutting the green, for example, the Amazon is shrinking fast and the world does nothing, we need the green for our own survival, the precious oxygen they exhale, we cannot breath co2...

...

Huh???

Satellite Data Show The Earth Is Getting Greener

Increased CO2 levels are greening the Earth

Global Garden Gets Greener

Now this is bad news for climate cultists so of course you get this kind of article:

It’s official: the planet is getting greener

But the reality is that 10% of land is Antarctica and much of the rest (in the equatorial area) is getting savagely deforested.

So the fact we have more green (and the North American green is not explained by their theory) is a tribute to CO2.

 

[spacecase0]

I have tried to get people to separate the pollution issue and CO2 for a long time now
and it would seem as if the propaganda works very well,
many farm fields and forests are below 160PPM of CO2 soon after sunrise,
below 160PPM is the point when almost all the plants on earth will die, and with that, all the animals.
most life on earth was headed to die from lack of CO2, it seems as if we are on a dying planet from lack of CO2.
the levels are still way to low, but better now in the last few years.
ideal CO2 numbers for humans and plants is about 750PPM, with 500 to 1000 being in the ok range.

the largest issue we have with pollution is nitrate runoff from farms and lawns into rivers that go to the ocean.
this fuels the "dead spots" in the ocean. these locations are where H2S creating bacteria thrive (on the nitrates),
remember that this sort of (potential) event is what killed off the animals (and most of the plants) that were here before the dinosaurs.
and I can't get anyone to pay attention to this easily avoidable pollution (that has nothing to do with CO2).
even full nuke war would be a small threat to earth in compairison.
I guess it just goes to show that most people (specifically the people controlling things) either don't really care about facts because they are ignorant of the science, or they are have some other agenda and really don't care about any of this topic at all.

Then again we can see things like the "hardening of the power grid from solar events and EMP" (or whatever it is called) law got changed as they tried to pass it (it still failed to pass as of my last check). They rewrote it to just remove the EMP protection, that rewrite was a very small part of the total funding. So, they do want to protect the power grid, but they still want to be able to take it out when they want to.

So my advice is to think of all this as a warning,
the earth is pretty safe as is, it is just that the ones that control the world want lots of people on earth to be gone, and they would prefer if the "extra people" all actively tried to get rid of themselves. I suggest not falling into the trap or confusing CO2 and pollution.
remember that it was an advertisement campaign by the Club of Rome that linked CO2 and pollution in the first place, they even use to brag on the website they have about how most people fell for the logic flaw they offered.