/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16128082]

How come there was less ice in the arctic ocean 6000 years ago when the atmosphere was less than 0.03% CO2 than there is now with an atmosphere of over 0.04% CO2?
Why wasn't it colder when there was less CO2 in the atmosphere?
If CO2 is really as powerful a greenhouse gas as science says it is then it seems like it should have been a lot colder with something like 40% less CO2 in the atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.16128148]

>>16128082
ice in the ocean =/= ice on the arctic

[Anonymous No.16128312]

>>16128082
There were trees growing on the shores of the Arctic Ocean back then too. Its currently too cold for trees to grow on the shores of the Arctic Ocean.

[Anonymous No.16128859]

>>16128082
>If CO2 is really as powerful a greenhouse gas as science says
"powerful" is hardly a precise term, and several other factors have been changing throughout the Holocene: like orbital insolation and volcanic activity.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235885717_A_Reconstruction_of_Regional_and_Global_Temperature_for_the_Past_11300_Years

[Anonymous No.16129581]

>>16128859
Those temperature reconstructions are all trash, they equate estimates of past temperature taken from tree rings, ice cores and other natural data with modern temperature measurements for thermometers that were intentionally placed in locations that would get high readings, such as on unshaded asphalt parking, next to heating vents, next to hot springs, etc.

[Anonymous No.16129783]

>>16129581
Amusing how you didn't question the climate forcing reconstructions (insolation, volcanism) - the only actual point I had made.

[Anonymous No.16130692]

>>16128148
wrong

[Anonymous No.16131181]

>>16129581
Whats going to happen in 20 years when they want to make temperatures of recent past look colder, but their temperature records are all from unshaded asphalt parking lots in Arizona. Are they going to get new readings from thermometers inside the calderas of active volcanoes?

[Anonymous No.16132335]

>>16131181
They'll do the same thing they've been doing for the past 30+ years, they'll just """"adjust""" the temperature records of the recent past to be lower in order to present the false appearance of the warming trend in the present

[Anonymous No.16133083]

>>16132335
NASA's temperature record agrees with other surface temperature records, and with satellite datasets as well.

[Anonymous No.16133501]

>>16133083
no it doesn't

[Anonymous No.16133577]

>>16133501

[Anonymous No.16134226]

>>16132335
They can keep on lowering the temps from 20 years ago forever to keep their scam rolling. Its not like anyone has a time machine to go back and check with

[Anonymous No.16135454]

>>16133577

[Anonymous No.16135678]

If global temperature goes up only 5C it will be as warm as the average historical temperature.

[Anonymous No.16135830]

>>16135454
I'm glad you don't see any issues with the adjustment methodology. I find it compelling as well.

[Anonymous No.16136667]

>>16133083
>NASA

[Anonymous No.16136674]

>>16136667
>muh /pol/ globohomo bogeyman

[Anonymous No.16138079]

>>16136674
>everything is /pol/ because I'm a politics obsessed schizo

[Anonymous No.16138854]

>>16135678
it has to go 2º just to match the average temperature for the current interglacial period

[Anonymous No.16139726]

>>16136667
>NASA
We'll be back on the moon any day now! Two weeks!
t. NASA

[Anonymous No.16141214]

>>16128082
There was less ice in the Arctic back then because it was colder in the past and now its getting warmer. Global warming causes more ice in the Arctic because ice forms during how weather or something
Trust me, would I lie to you about such an important topic?