125,000 years ago...

grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
...global temperatures were a couple of degrees warmer, and ocean levels were 60 feet higher than today.


Discuss.:Popcorn
Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
«1345

Replies

  • WelwoodWelwood Posts: 745 Officer
    I agree....and I'm OK with that. Someone with an attitude will be along shortly to argue the point.
  • Soda PopinskiSoda Popinski GrovelandPosts: 10,371 AG
    I bet the boat ramps weren't as crowded either.
    People use statistics the way a drunk uses a street light, for support rather than illumination.
  • dave44dave44 Posts: 8,497 Admiral
    Welwood wrote: »
    I agree....and I'm OK with that. Someone with an attitude will be along shortly to argue the point.

    :rotflmao

    I am always amazed at the charts of the ocean floor. Up here we are close to fifty miles to the " canyon" . It's a nice declining beach till you get to the cliff.
  • WraithWraith Posts: 1,653 Captain
    Can't be. The Earth is only 6000 years old.
    SLOP, (Standard Liberal Operating Procedure).
  • NewberryJeffNewberryJeff Posts: 7,341 Admiral
    You're a DENIER!!!111

    Which oil company is paying you?!
  • MACDMACD Lee CountyPosts: 4,848 Captain
    We are just are intelligent parasites with silicon chips and fossil fuel blinded by rose colored emotion.
  • BallaCoiPersiciBallaCoiPersici NW Italy (Laveno Mombello)Posts: 4,653 Captain
    grady30wa wrote: »
    ...global temperatures were a couple of degrees warmer, and ocean levels were 60 feet higher than today.
    I could fishing from my windows :fishing
    Massimo (former Ballak) - Please, be patient for my English

    My YouTube Channel

    I'm typing keeping close my "pasta hole"!
    Choose common sense, boycott political correctness.
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    I'm not trying to get any of you to change your personal belief system in regards to climate, but I can offer an explanation of the OP.

    The paleo data references a time when climate and sea level were in equilibrium. Currently, climate and sea level are not in equilibrium. Sea level needs to catch up with the rapid rise in temperature. This is why rapid sea level rise is expected in the near future.

    Where is the water going to come from? One area of major concern is eastern Antarctica. Because of the slope of the land mass beneath the ice, the under washing of the Antarctic ice is expected to increase rapidly as we are passing a tipping point. There is a localized high point or ridge beneath the ice that has protected a large portion of the ice from under washing. Once we pass that ridge, the rate of melting is expected to rapidly increase. Estimates are that we will pass the ridge soon or we have already passed that ridge.

    What I am talking about here is based on recent seminars I have seen by scientists that study these things (in the field, in Antarctica) from both USF and UF.
  • dave44dave44 Posts: 8,497 Admiral
    I'm not trying to get any of you to change your personal belief system in regards to climate, but I can offer an explanation of the OP.

    The paleo data references a time when climate and sea level were in equilibrium. Currently, climate and sea level are not in equilibrium. Sea level needs to catch up with the rapid rise in temperature. This is why rapid sea level rise is expected in the near future.

    Where is the water going to come from? One area of major concern is eastern Antarctica. Because of the slope of the land mass beneath the ice, the under washing of the Antarctic ice is expected to increase rapidly as we are passing a tipping point. There is a localized high point or ridge beneath the ice that has protected a large portion of the ice from under washing. Once we pass that ridge, the rate of melting is expected to rapidly increase. Estimates are that we will pass the ridge soon or we have already passed that ridge.

    What I am talking about here is based on recent seminars I have seen by scientists that study these things (in the field, in Antarctica) from both USF and UF.
    So you are saying history is cyclical.
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    The paleo data references a time when climate and sea level were in equilibrium.

    Climate (ie--global temps) and sea level were in equilibrium during the interglacial period when temps were a couple of degrees warmer than today, and sea level was 60 feet higher. And man did not cause that.

    Despite man's presence and use of carbon fuels today, global temperatures and sea levels are still way less than they were when man did not exist. That's a fatal fact against the idea of man-made global warming.
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    To a degree. But solar forcing cycles indicate we should be under global cooling right now, not warming. This is why, back in the 70s or before, many people thought an ice age should be coming, they never thought man's impact on the climate could be so profound.

    Like I've said many times, I'm not going to argue, there is no scientific debate on the subject. When it seems appropriate, I will chime in and offer explanation.

    I've posted a general audience paper by William Ruddiman before that explains this in a clear way, but its up to the reader to want to understand.

    https://physics.ucf.edu/~britt/Climate/Reading5-Did%20humans%20alter%20global%20climate.pdf

    https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vRKtJacAAAAJ&hl=en
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    To a degree. But solar forcing cycles indicate we should be under global cooling right now, not warming. This is why, back in the 70s or before, many people thought an ice age should be coming, they never thought man's impact on the climate could be so profound.

    Like I've said many times, I'm not going to argue, there is no scientific debate on the subject. When it seems appropriate, I will chime in and offer explanation.

    I've posted a general audience paper by William Ruddiman before that explains this in a clear way, but its up to the reader to want to understand.

    https://physics.ucf.edu/~britt/Climate/Reading5-Did%20humans%20alter%20global%20climate.pdf

    https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vRKtJacAAAAJ&hl=en



    So now the argument is that CO2 began increasing 8,000 years ago (long before the use of fossil fuels) because man started farming?

    Do you realized the ridiculousness of that idea?

    And the worst part is if Ruddiman's theory is correct, then curbing fossil fuels won't do a **** thing unless we just stop eating.

    The concept of MMGW just gets nuttier and nuttier with each iteration.
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    There is no way to prove the temperature was a few degrees warmer 125,000 years ago.

    The thermometer was not even invented.
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • Bimini TwistedBimini Twisted Posts: 11,271 AG
    Wraith wrote: »
    Can't be. The Earth is only 6000 years old.

    :signs
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    There is no way to prove the temperature was a few degrees warmer 125,000 years ago.

    The thermometer was not even invented.

    I know you were being sarcastic, but let's focus on the 60 foot higher sea level then, ok?
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    Lets focus on your lack of sources for your claims.
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • Grouper GeniusGrouper Genius Posts: 1,322 Officer
    It's all hypothesis, guessing, and estimating.
    2400 CC Sea Chaser-Yamaha F250-Bad **** Tower (SOLD)
    Grady White 306 Bimini 300 Suzukis
    Hurricane 246 FunDeck
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    google "paleothermometer"

    some of the paleo sea level data comes from coral cores, in this case it would be fossil coral that is currently above sea level
  • ThrottleThrottle Posts: 2,830 Captain
    The paleo data references a time when climate and sea level were in equilibrium. Currently, climate and sea level are not in equilibrium. Sea level needs to catch up with the rapid rise in temperature. This is why rapid sea level rise is expected in the near future.

    Equilibrium? 125,000 years ago? I don't think that word means what you think it means.





    If there was a state of equilibrium why the climate fluctuations over the last 140,000 years, before, during and after the most recent glaciation?

    Here's some interesting reading for open minded and intellectually curious types, as opposed to committed members of the Church of Catastrophic Anthropogenic (and ONLY anthropogenic) Global Warming, errr... Climate Change.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_event
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard%E2%80%93Oeschger_event
  • ThrottleThrottle Posts: 2,830 Captain
    To a degree. But solar forcing cycles indicate we should be under global cooling right now, not warming. This is why, back in the 70s or before, many people thought an ice age should be coming, they never thought man's impact on the climate could be so profound.

    Like I've said many times, I'm not going to argue, there is no scientific debate on the subject. When it seems appropriate, I will chime in and offer explanation.

    I've posted a general audience paper by William Ruddiman before that explains this in a clear way, but its up to the reader to want to understand.

    https://physics.ucf.edu/~britt/Climate/Reading5-Did%20humans%20alter%20global%20climate.pdf

    https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vRKtJacAAAAJ&hl=en
    So what you're saying is that man's impact on climate is profound, and only appears to be trivial, because it really ought to be so much colder right now, but instead all we see are climate fluctuations so small that they actually are within the margin of error for measurements of "global average temperature"? Wow, I'm so scared.
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    Sure it does, but I can see how you got confused. I am saying sea level was in equilibrium with climate, now it is not. And here we are talking about very short time scales of just a few decades, not geologic time scales.

    It has nothing to do with the fact that climate changes, particularly over the geologic time scales of the graphs you presented.
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    google "paleothermometer"

    some of the paleo sea level data comes from coral cores, in this case it would be fossil coral that is currently above sea level

    I can take you to fossil coral that is over 6,000 feet in elevation. Are you telling me that the ocean was at one time 6,000 feet above it's current levels?
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    I know this is difficult to accept, it is after all the tragedy of the commons.

    It is far easier to see the benefit we get from the commons than to see the detriment we cause the commons.
  • Bimini TwistedBimini Twisted Posts: 11,271 AG
    I can take you to fossil coral that is over 6,000 feet in elevation. Are you telling me that the ocean was at one time 6,000 feet above it's current levels?


    Kind of difficult to have a conversation about time when some arguing the point won't say how old they believe the earth to be, no?
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    I can take you to fossil coral that is over 6,000 feet in elevation. Are you telling me that the ocean was at one time 6,000 feet above it's current levels?

    No, these kinds of studies are done in places that have not undergone significant uplift, typically on islands like the Florida Keys.
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    Sure it does, but I can see how you got confused. I am saying sea level was in equilibrium with climate, now it is not. And here we are talking about very short time scales of just a few decades, not geologic time scales.

    It has nothing to do with the fact that climate changes, particularly over the geologic time scales of the graphs you presented.

    Has anyone considered current water usage in the equation?

    Lets consider, if you will, that less than 100 years ago not one single dam existed on the Colorado river, not one. All of the snow/water that fell in the 242,000 square mile drainage flowed to the Gulf of California. Today, it is rare that even one gallon of that water makes it to the gulf. Instead it has been sprayed into the air where massive amounts evaporate before settling on the plants they are intended for.

    Now lets look at the rest of the water in the rest of America. How much no longer flows where it did for thousands of years? How much evaporates and no longer falls where it did for those thousands of years?

    Equilibrium will not return until mankind is extinguished from the earth.
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • grady30wagrady30wa Posts: 10,161 AG
    Lets focus on your lack of sources for your claims.

    What claims? That sea levels were 60 feet higher 125,000 years ago?
    Schadenfreude. November 8, 2016
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    No, these kinds of studies are done in places that have not undergone significant uplift, typically on islands like the Florida Keys.

    Windley Key is the highest point in the Florida Keys at 18'. Where did they get the other 42 feet from?
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • Team SabatageTeam Sabatage Posts: 12,873 AG
    grady30wa wrote: »
    What claims? That sea levels were 60 feet higher 125,000 years ago?

    For starters, that the temperature was a few degrees warmer than now, then, yes, that sea levels were 60 feet higher 125,000 years ago.
    Strap me in, tie me down and roll me a bone, I'm getting on an airplane and I'm flying home...
  • MadScientistMadScientist Posts: 3,402 Officer
    They have. In fact, the use of groundwater makes a slight contribution to seal level rise. That's right, we use so much groundwater, ground water that ultimately reaches the sea, that it is a measurable contribution to sea level rise.

    Thermal expansion of water plays a factor, as water gets hotter, it takes up more volume, and when you have a bunch of water, the difference is significant.

    So its not just melting ice, but it is all related to warmer climate and human activities like agriculture, etc.

    Some people are confused because they expect sea level to rise the same everywhere, they expect what's called the bath tub model. But because of a bunch of factors, sea level rises differently everywhere. Things like continental rebound since the last glaciation and even more complicated factors related to the dynamic nature of the mantle and crust or the bathymetry of the coastal ocean.
Sign In or Register to comment.