"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.

In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."

All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square.." - too funny.

Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.

https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented

On a sunny day (Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote in
<74cebad1-0bc2-442d-90be-6dee3207f5b9n@googlegroups.com>:

>"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are =
>known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but m=
>any include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extrem=
>ely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a lon=
>ger, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
>
>In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern clima=
>te, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. =
>During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
>
>All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning =
>to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years a=
>go during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glacier=
>s in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square=
>." - too funny.
>
>Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doe=
>sn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off accepta=
>nce of their imminent doom as long as practical.
>
>https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented

Could it be that the rise of electric cars caused the accelerated methane growth after 2006?

See how dangerous drawing conclusions from statistics can be...

;-)

On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
>
>In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
>
>All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
>
>Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
>
>https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented

If we dump enough CO2 we might delay the next ice age. But I doubt
that would work. Some sort of geo-engineering might.

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > "Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> >
> > In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> >
> > All indications are the Earth is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> >
> > Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> >
> > https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> Don't be so relentlessly stupid.

Try taking your advice yourself.

>
> The incipient temperature rise isn't unprecedented. We had a preview 55.5 millions years ago. Back then it took some 20,000 years for some 2,000 to 7,000 gigatons of extra carbon to get dumped in the atmosphere. We've dumped about 650 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, so not yet as much, if quite a bit faster.

Who said it was unprecedented? The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before.

>
> Back then it got some 5 to 8 degrees Celcius warmer and stayed warm over about 200,000 years. Our fairly remote ancestors didn't find it uninhabitable - they may have moved further away from the equator, but they clearly survived or we wouldn't be here.

Those ancestors weren't human. If there was a higher form of human, they all died off and were survived by the dregs of their species to become the modern human race.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 11:35:59 AM UTC-4, Jan Panteltje wrote:
> On a sunny day (Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote in
> <74cebad1-0bc2-442d...@googlegroups.com>:
>
> >"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are =
> >known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but m=
> >any include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extrem=
> >ely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a lon> >ger, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> >
> >In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern clima=
> >te, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. > >During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> >
> >All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning =
> >to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years a=
> >go during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glacier=
> >s in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square=
> >." - too funny.
> >
> >Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doe=
> >sn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off accepta> >nce of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> >
> >https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> Could it be that the rise of electric cars caused the accelerated methane growth after 2006?
>
> See how dangerous drawing conclusions from statistics can be...

It's looking more and more like nature is the prime mover in this equation. Mankind's contribution is an additive noise, comparatively small, but enough to send the Earth's global dynamics into a new trajectory. Apparently there is quite a lot of gain from mankind's additive noise to the motion in the trajectory.
>
> ;-)

On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 2:09:05 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> >
> >In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> >
> >All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> >
> >Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> >
> >https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> If we dump enough CO2 we might delay the next ice age. But I doubt
> that would work. Some sort of geo-engineering might.

Doesn't look like an ice age on the horizon any time soon. Climatologists are trying to figure out what's happening right now, it will be quite some time before they can make any forecasts.

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > "Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> > > >
> > > > In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> > > >
> > > > All indications are the Earth is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> > > >
> > > > Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> > > >
> > > > https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> >>
> > > Don't be so relentlessly stupid.
> >
> > Try taking your advice yourself.
> Telling you that you have got stuff wrong is as pointless as telling Flyguy the same thing, but pointing out errors isn't stupid.

I don't have anything wrong. It's your reading comprehension that's lacking..

> > > The incipient temperature rise isn't unprecedented. We had a preview 55.5 millions years ago. Back then it took some 20,000 years for some 2,000 to 7,000 gigatons of extra carbon to get dumped in the atmosphere. We've dumped about 650 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, so not yet as much, if quite a bit faster.
> >
> > Who said it was unprecedented?
> You did, in your subject line.

According to the Earth Science professor, per study of methane bubbles in ice cores:

"Full terminations take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt."

As regards the latest ice age, presumably the Earth already went through its abrupt temperature rise phase some 10,000 years ago, a transition that lasts about a century, and up until modern times was in a very slow and lengthy temperature rise lasting 100,000 years ( who knows?) until the polar caps melt. What's unprecedented is this second abrupt temperature rise occurring now during what should be a very gradual rise. The abrupt temperature rise is only projected to occur based on the rapid rise in atmospheric methane happening now, it hasn't actually occurred yet, obviously.

The unprecedented part of the article is this:

"Since 2006, the amount of heat-trapping methane in Earth's atmosphere has been rising fast and, unlike the rise in carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane's recent increase seems to be driven by biological emissions, not the burning of fossil fuels."

There's no "seems" to it. Physicists can actually pinpoint the geographic location of the methane emission by analyzing its molecular structure, which means they can determine with certainty it's due to natural biological process and not gas line leaks.

> > The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before..
> It was all about the transition from ice ages to interglacials which have been happening for the past 2.6 million years. The current episode is a transition to atmosdpheric C)2 levels which we haven't seen for about 20 million year, so this is a different "rodeo".

The rodeo is the oscillatory transitioning. No one is fixated on CO2 levels except as regards how they affect the oscillation, and that is mainly through the Earth solar energy imbalance. Apparently the CO2 induced warming is triggering a positive feedback of methane emission in the natural course of events.

> > >
> > > Back then it got some 5 to 8 degrees Celcius warmer and stayed warm over about 200,000 years. Our fairly remote ancestors didn't find it uninhabitable - they may have moved further away from the equator, but they clearly survived or we wouldn't be here.
> >
> > Those ancestors weren't human. If there was a higher form of human, they all died off and were survived by the dregs of their species to become the modern human race.
> In evolutionary terms the survivors are always the variants best adapted to their environment. Nothing that was around aback then for which fossils have survived had a big enough brain case to have been labelled hominid. let alone human
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:11:28 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:26:12 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 2:09:05 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> > > <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> > > >
> > > >In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> > > >
> > > >All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> > > >
> > > >Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> > > >
> > > >https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> > > If we dump enough CO2 we might delay the next ice age. But I doubt
> > > that would work. Some sort of geo-engineering might.
> >
> > Doesn't look like an ice age on the horizon any time soon. Climatologists are trying to figure out what's happening right now, it will be quite some time before they can make any forecasts.
> Not true,
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
>
> "The amount of anthropogenic greenhouse gases emitted into Earth's oceans and atmosphere is predicted to delay the next glacial period by between 100,000 and 500,000 years, which otherwise would begin in around 50,000 years.." The backing references are listed below.
>
> Thomson, Andrea (2007). "Global Warming Good News: No More Ice Ages". LiveScience.
> "Human-made climate change suppresses the next ice age". Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. 2016. Archived from the original on 2020-08-18. Retrieved 2019-01-07.
> Archer, David; Ganopolski, Andrey (May 2005). "A movable trigger: Fossil fuel CO2 and the onset of the next glaciation". Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 6 (5). Bibcode:2005GGG.....6.5003A. doi:10.1029/2004GC000891. S2CID 18549459
>
> Some people seem to be bolder than you are, and probably better-informed

That's a bunch of Stone Age era research from almost 20 years ago based on a bunch of conjecture. They had nowhere near the amount data and understanding available to modern researchers. Not going to waste time looking at it, because I know those reports are full of "may"s and "could"s.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > "Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All indications are the Earth is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> > > >>
> > > > > Don't be so relentlessly stupid.
> > > >
> > > > Try taking your advice yourself.
> >
> > > Telling you that you have got stuff wrong is as pointless as telling Flyguy the same thing, but pointing out errors isn't stupid.
> >
> > I don't have anything wrong. It's your reading comprehension that's lacking.
> That's Flyguy's opinion too.
> > > > > The incipient temperature rise isn't unprecedented. We had a preview 55.5 millions years ago. Back then it took some 20,000 years for some 2,000 to 7,000 gigatons of extra carbon to get dumped in the atmosphere. We've dumped about 650 gigatons of carbon into the atmosphere, so not yet as much, if quite a bit faster.
> > > >
> > > > Who said it was unprecedented?
> >
> > > You did, in your subject line.
> >
> > According to the Earth Science professor, per study of methane bubbles in ice cores:
> >
> > "Full terminations take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt."
> >
> > As regards the latest ice age, presumably the Earth already went through its abrupt temperature rise phase some 10,000 years ago, a transition that lasts about a century, and up until modern times was in a very slow and lengthy temperature rise lasting 100,000 years ( who knows?) until the polar caps melt. What's unprecedented is this second abrupt temperature rise occurring now during what should be a very gradual rise. The abrupt temperature rise is only projected to occur based on the rapid rise in atmospheric methane happening now, it hasn't actually occurred yet, obviously.
> >
> > The unprecedented part of the article is this:
> >
> > "Since 2006, the amount of heat-trapping methane in Earth's atmosphere has been rising fast and, unlike the rise in carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane's recent increase seems to be driven by biological emissions, not the burning of fossil fuels."
> >
> > There's no "seems" to it. Physicists can actually pinpoint the geographic location of the methane emission by analyzing its molecular structure, which means they can determine with certainty it's due to natural biological process and not gas line leaks.
> They don't analyse the "biological structure" of methane, which is really simple molecule, but it's C-14 isotope content, which tells you how long it has been i the ground, not where it came from - all methane seems to be of biological origin. If it comes from the thawing of frozen tundra it can have been laid down fairly recently - but doesn't have to have been. C-14 has a half life of 5700 years, but that doesn't get you geological time scales.

That is a misbelief and no longer true. There are other characteristics of the molecular structure which when analyzed can locate the source to a particular region, after that region has been assayed. They can also do the same with CO2. Everything becomes unique when it's looked at in fine enough detail.

> > > > The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before.
> > >
> > > It was all about the transition from ice ages to interglacials which have been happening for the past 2.6 million years. The current episode is a transition to atmospheric C)2 levels which we haven't seen for about 20 million year, so this is a different "rodeo".
> >
> > The rodeo is the oscillatory transitioning. No one is fixated on CO2 levels except as regards how they affect the oscillation, and that is mainly through the Earth solar energy imbalance. Apparently the CO2 induced warming is triggering a positive feedback of methane emission in the natural course of events.
> And it has done it at the end of every interglacial for the past 2.6 million years. The extra CO2 we have injected into the atmosphere is warming up frozen tundra \and other methane-ice clathrates that survived previous interglacials. We've no idea how much of it there is
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
>
> Most researchers don't consider it to be likely that this will to make anthropogenic global warming run away, but there's always a market for hysterical alarmism.

That's just another example of your boring static thinking.

It seems the current sudden increase in temperature they're experiencing now is completely novel because it departs from the climate parallel record of slow and gradual temperature increase from every other post-glacial they know about. The only other variable is time. The anthropogenic contribution is being applied very quickly, almost an impulse on climatic scale, and that is what's causing all this weird and unprecedented behavior, despite in absolute terms the AGHG being a relatively small fraction of the totality of what's going on. The dynamics of it gives it more weight.

> > > > > Back then it got some 5 to 8 degrees Celcius warmer and stayed warm over about 200,000 years. Our fairly remote ancestors didn't find it uninhabitable - they may have moved further away from the equator, but they clearly survived or we wouldn't be here.
> > > >
> > > > Those ancestors weren't human. If there was a higher form of human, they all died off and were survived by the dregs of their species to become the modern human race.
> >
> > > In evolutionary terms the survivors are always the variants best adapted to their environment. Nothing that was around aback then for which fossils have survived had a big enough brain case to have been labelled hominid.. let alone human

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:11:35 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:35:05 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:11:28 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:26:12 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 2:09:05 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> > > > > <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> > > > > >
> > > > > >All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
> > > > > If we dump enough CO2 we might delay the next ice age. But I doubt
> > > > > that would work. Some sort of geo-engineering might.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't look like an ice age on the horizon any time soon. Climatologists are trying to figure out what's happening right now, it will be quite some time before they can make any forecasts.
> > > Not true,
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age
> > >
> > > "The amount of anthropogenic greenhouse gases emitted into Earth's oceans and atmosphere is predicted to delay the next glacial period by between 100,000 and 500,000 years, which otherwise would begin in around 50,000 years." The backing references are listed below.
> > >
> > > Thomson, Andrea (2007). "Global Warming Good News: No More Ice Ages". LiveScience.
> > > "Human-made climate change suppresses the next ice age". Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany. 2016. Archived from the original on 2020-08-18. Retrieved 2019-01-07.
> > > Archer, David; Ganopolski, Andrey (May 2005). "A movable trigger: Fossil fuel CO2 and the onset of the next glaciation". Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems. 6 (5). Bibcode:2005GGG.....6.5003A. doi:10.1029/2004GC000891.. S2CID 18549459
> > >
> > > Some people seem to be bolder than you are, and probably better-informed.
> >
> > That's a bunch of Stone Age era research from almost 20 years ago based on a bunch of conjecture. They had nowhere near the amount data and understanding available to modern researchers. Not going to waste time looking at it, because I know those reports are full of "may"s and "could"s.
> It post-dates the ice core data which is what seems to have firmed up the ideas about what had happened in previous ice age to interglacial transitions.
>
> Once somebody got enough data to have a good idea what was going on, and publish that, the literature does tend to go quiet.
>
> "May"s and "could"s are a feature of that kind of paper. It's climate change denial propaganda that goes in for positive assertions - their aim is convince, rather than inform.

It was an accomplishment in its day but gobs of billions have been invested in space based Earth observatories since, In many cases the data has been a real eye opener. One example is NASA's OCO-Orbiting Carbon Observatory. A widely held belief prior was that the tropical rain forest jungles were the 'lungs of the Earth'. Turns out they're net emitters, and the real CO2 sinks are the boreal forests ( which are burning down worldwide right now).

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:39:31 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > > > Who said it was unprecedented?
> > > >
> > > > > You did, in your subject line.
> > > >
> > > > According to the Earth Science professor, per study of methane bubbles in ice cores:
> > > >
> > > > "Full terminations take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt."
> > > >
> > > > As regards the latest ice age, presumably the Earth already went through its abrupt temperature rise phase some 10,000 years ago, a transition that lasts about a century, and up until modern times was in a very slow and lengthy temperature rise lasting 100,000 years ( who knows?) until the polar caps melt. What's unprecedented is this second abrupt temperature rise occurring now during what should be a very gradual rise. The abrupt temperature rise is only projected to occur based on the rapid rise in atmospheric methane happening now, it hasn't actually occurred yet, obviously.
> > > >
> > > > The unprecedented part of the article is this:
> > > >
> > > > "Since 2006, the amount of heat-trapping methane in Earth's atmosphere has been rising fast and, unlike the rise in carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane's recent increase seems to be driven by biological emissions, not the burning of fossil fuels."
> > > >
> > > > There's no "seems" to it. Physicists can actually pinpoint the geographic location of the methane emission by analyzing its molecular structure, which means they can determine with certainty it's due to natural biological process and not gas line leaks.
> >
> > > They don't analyse the "biological structure" of methane, which is really simple molecule, but it's C-14 isotope content, which tells you how long it has been i the ground, not where it came from - all methane seems to be of biological origin. If it comes from the thawing of frozen tundra it can have been laid down fairly recently - but doesn't have to have been. C-14 has a half life of 5700 years, but that doesn't get you geological time scales.
> >
> > That is a misbelief and no longer true.
> The misbelief is all yours, and you don't know what you are talking about..
> > There are other characteristics of the molecular structure which when analyzed can locate the source to a particular region, after that region has been assayed. They can also do the same with CO2. Everything becomes unique when it's looked at in fine enough detail.
> Care to name just one of them? Methane is just four hydrogen atoms symetrically - tetrahedrally - arranged around a central carbon atom. You do have three isotopes of hydrogen (though tritium doesn't last long enough to come into it) and three isotope of carbon, but that's it.

Don't waste time handing out links.

>
> Simple molecules have got room for any other identifying features
> > > > > > The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before.
> > > > >
> > > > > It was all about the transition from ice ages to interglacials which have been happening for the past 2.6 million years. The current episode is a transition to atmospheric C)2 levels which we haven't seen for about 20 million year, so this is a different "rodeo".
> > > >
> > > > The rodeo is the oscillatory transitioning. No one is fixated on CO2 levels except as regards how they affect the oscillation, and that is mainly through the Earth solar energy imbalance. Apparently the CO2 induced warming is triggering a positive feedback of methane emission in the natural course of events.
> > > And it has done it at the end of every interglacial for the past 2.6 million years. The extra CO2 we have injected into the atmosphere is warming up frozen tundra \and other methane-ice clathrates that survived previous interglacials. We've no idea how much of it there is
> > >
> > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
> > >
> > > Most researchers don't consider it to be likely that this will to make anthropogenic global warming run away, but there's always a market for hysterical alarmism.
> >
> > That's just another example of your boring static thinking.
> Boring, static and correct. You have actually misunderstood what was being said, to a degree that puts you in the Flyguy category.

You're thinking is wrong. And you're always accusing people of being confused or not understanding something, when you're own statements are so simpleminded and erroneous.

> > It seems the current sudden increase in temperature they're experiencing now is completely novel because it departs from the climate parallel record of slow and gradual temperature increase from every other post-glacial they know about. The only other variable is time. The anthropogenic contribution is being applied very quickly, almost an impulse on climatic scale, and that is what's causing all this weird and unprecedented behavior, despite in absolute terms the AGHG being a relatively small fraction of the totality of what's going on. The dynamics of it gives it more weight.
> "AGHG"?

Anthropogenic...

>
> This isn't "post-glacial" warming. It's us replaying the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum by injecting more CO2 into the atmosphere. The extra methane that the article calls "unexpected" is coming out of the Arctic permafrost. The arctic is warming up some three times faster than the planet as a whole and people have been monitoring the extra methane coming out of the thawing permafrost for at least a decade now.

You didn't even read the article, numbskull. Every thing post-glacial is warming. The climate naturally undulates between glacier- furnace (tropical climate polls).

>
> Getting excited about it now is a bit silly.
> > > > > > > Back then it got some 5 to 8 degrees Celcius warmer and stayed warm over about 200,000 years. Our fairly remote ancestors didn't find it uninhabitable - they may have moved further away from the equator, but they clearly survived or we wouldn't be here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Those ancestors weren't human. If there was a higher form of human, they all died off and were survived by the dregs of their species to become the modern human race.
> > > >
> > > > > In evolutionary terms the survivors are always the variants best adapted to their environment. Nothing that was around aback then for which fossils have survived had a big enough brain case to have been labelled hominid. let alone human
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:46:17 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:11:35 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:35:05 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:11:28 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:26:12 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 2:09:05 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> > > > > > > <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Once somebody got enough data to have a good idea what was going on, and publish that, the literature does tend to go quiet.
> > >
> > > "May"s and "could"s are a feature of that kind of paper. It's climate change denial propaganda that goes in for positive assertions - their aim is convince, rather than inform.
> >
> > It was an accomplishment in its day but gobs of billions have been invested in space based Earth observatories since, In many cases the data has been a real eye opener. One example is NASA's OCO-Orbiting Carbon Observatory. A widely held belief prior was that the tropical rain forest jungles were the 'lungs of the Earth'. Turns out they're net emitters, and the real CO2 sinks are the boreal forests ( which are burning down worldwide right now).
> That rather ignores the phytoplankton soaking up CO2 in the southern ocean and sinking it to the seafloor in their carbonate skeletons. The oxygen released by their photosynthetic activities doesn't sink.
>
> https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/150656/breathing-life-into-the-ocean
>
> "Phytoplankton act as Earth’s lungs and have produced about half of all oxygen on Earth."

Statement by a plankton nut. What's producing the other half?

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:50:36 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:25:52 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:55:43 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:46:17 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:11:35 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:35:05 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:11:28 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:26:12 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 2:09:05 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> > > > > > > > > <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > Once somebody got enough data to have a good idea what was going on, and publish that, the literature does tend to go quiet.
> > > > >
> > > > > "May"s and "could"s are a feature of that kind of paper. It's climate change denial propaganda that goes in for positive assertions - their aim is convince, rather than inform.
> > > >
> > > > It was an accomplishment in its day but gobs of billions have been invested in space based Earth observatories since, In many cases the data has been a real eye opener. One example is NASA's OCO-Orbiting Carbon Observatory. A widely held belief prior was that the tropical rain forest jungles were the 'lungs of the Earth'. Turns out they're net emitters, and the real CO2 sinks are the boreal forests ( which are burning down worldwide right now).
> > > That rather ignores the phytoplankton soaking up CO2 in the southern ocean and sinking it to the seafloor in their carbonate skeletons. The oxygen released by their photosynthetic activities doesn't sink.
> > >
> > > https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/150656/breathing-life-into-the-ocean
> > >
> > > "Phytoplankton act as Earth’s lungs and have produced about half of all oxygen on Earth."
> >
> > Statement by a plankton nut. What's producing the other half?
> NASA isn't any kind of plankton nut. The other half presumably comes from vegetation on land. You've made an ass of yourself again.

All you're doing is repeating insults leveled against you at university some 60 years ago. They were well-deserved apparently...

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:24:13 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:39:31 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > > > > > > > Who said it was unprecedented?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > You did, in your subject line.
> <snip>
> > > The misbelief is all yours, and you don't know what you are talking about.
> > > > There are other characteristics of the molecular structure which when analyzed can locate the source to a particular region, after that region has been assayed. They can also do the same with CO2. Everything becomes unique when it's looked at in fine enough detail.
> >
> > > Care to name just one of them? Methane is just four hydrogen atoms symetrically - tetrahedrally - arranged around a central carbon atom. You do have three isotopes of hydrogen (though tritium doesn't last long enough to come into it) and three isotope of carbon, but that's it.
> >
> > Don't waste time handing out links.
> Handing out non-existent links to non-existent research is particularly time-consuming. You screwed up. Admit it.
> > > Simple molecules have got room for any other identifying features
> Name just one.
> > > > > > > > The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It was all about the transition from ice ages to interglacials which have been happening for the past 2.6 million years. The current episode is a transition to atmospheric C)2 levels which we haven't seen for about 20 million year, so this is a different "rodeo".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The rodeo is the oscillatory transitioning. No one is fixated on CO2 levels except as regards how they affect the oscillation, and that is mainly through the Earth solar energy imbalance. Apparently the CO2 induced warming is triggering a positive feedback of methane emission in the natural course of events.
> > > > >
> > > > > And it has done it at the end of every interglacial for the past 2.6 million years. The extra CO2 we have injected into the atmosphere is warming up frozen tundra \and other methane-ice clathrates that survived previous interglacials. We've no idea how much of it there is
> > > > >
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
> > > > >
> > > > > Most researchers don't consider it to be likely that this will to make anthropogenic global warming run away, but there's always a market for hysterical alarmism.
> > > >
> > > > That's just another example of your boring static thinking.
> > >
> > > Boring, static and correct. You have actually misunderstood what was being said, to a degree that puts you in the Flyguy category.
> >
> > You're thinking is wrong. And you're always accusing people of being confused or not understanding something, when you're own statements are so simpleminded and erroneous.
> You may find it satisfying to think so, as Flyguy does. but you haven't been able to demonstrate it.
> > > > It seems the current sudden increase in temperature they're experiencing now is completely novel because it departs from the climate parallel record of slow and gradual temperature increase from every other post-glacial they know about. The only other variable is time. The anthropogenic contribution is being applied very quickly, almost an impulse on climatic scale, and that is what's causing all this weird and unprecedented behavior, despite in absolute terms the AGHG being a relatively small fraction of the totality of what's going on. The dynamics of it gives it more weight.
> >
> > > "AGHG"?
> > Anthropogenic...
> The "A" was easy. Google came up with "American Global Health Group" which [robably wasn't what you had in mind.
> > > This isn't "post-glacial" warming. It's us replaying the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum by injecting more CO2 into the atmosphere. The extra methane that the article calls "unexpected" is coming out of the Arctic permafrost. The arctic is warming up some three times faster than the planet as a whole and people have been monitoring the extra methane coming out of the thawing permafrost for at least a decade now.
> >
> > You didn't even read the article, numbskull. Everything post-glacial is warming. The climate naturally undulates between glacier- furnace (tropical climate polls).
>
> If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).

un·du·la·tion
noun
the action of moving smoothly up and down

Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold. And there's no way the Erath could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.

>
> <snip>
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:28:51 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 11:49:59 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:24:13 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:39:31 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > > > > > > > > > Who said it was unprecedented?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You did, in your subject line.
> >
> > > <snip>
> >
> > > > > The misbelief is all yours, and you don't know what you are talking about.
> >
> > > > > > There are other characteristics of the molecular structure which when analyzed can locate the source to a particular region, after that region has been assayed. They can also do the same with CO2. Everything becomes unique when it's looked at in fine enough detail.
> > > >
> > > > > Care to name just one of them? Methane is just four hydrogen atoms symetrically - tetrahedrally - arranged around a central carbon atom. You do have three isotopes of hydrogen (though tritium doesn't last long enough to come into it) and three isotope of carbon, but that's it.
> > > >
> > > > Don't waste time handing out links.
> > >
> > > Handing out non-existent links to non-existent research is particularly time-consuming. You screwed up. Admit it.
> > >
> > > > > Simple molecules have got room for any other identifying features..
> > >
> > > Name just one.
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > The whole point of the article is the Earth's been at this rodeo before.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It was all about the transition from ice ages to interglacials which have been happening for the past 2.6 million years. The current episode is a transition to atmospheric C)2 levels which we haven't seen for about 20 million year, so this is a different "rodeo".
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The rodeo is the oscillatory transitioning. No one is fixated on CO2 levels except as regards how they affect the oscillation, and that is mainly through the Earth solar energy imbalance. Apparently the CO2 induced warming is triggering a positive feedback of methane emission in the natural course of events.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And it has done it at the end of every interglacial for the past 2.6 million years. The extra CO2 we have injected into the atmosphere is warming up frozen tundra and other methane-ice clathrates that survived previous interglacials. We've no idea how much of it there is
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Most researchers don't consider it to be likely that this will to make anthropogenic global warming run away, but there's always a market for hysterical alarmism.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's just another example of your boring static thinking.
> > > > >
> > > > > Boring, static and correct. You have actually misunderstood what was being said, to a degree that puts you in the Flyguy category.
> > > >
> > > > You're thinking is wrong. And you're always accusing people of being confused or not understanding something, when you're own statements are so simpleminded and erroneous.
> > >
> > > You may find it satisfying to think so, as Flyguy does. but you haven't been able to demonstrate it.
> > >
> > > > > > It seems the current sudden increase in temperature they're experiencing now is completely novel because it departs from the climate parallel record of slow and gradual temperature increase from every other post-glacial they know about. The only other variable is time. The anthropogenic contribution is being applied very quickly, almost an impulse on climatic scale, and that is what's causing all this weird and unprecedented behavior, despite in absolute terms the AGHG being a relatively small fraction of the totality of what's going on. The dynamics of it gives it more weight.
> > > >
> > > > > "AGHG"?
> > > >
> > > > Anthropogenic...
> > >
> > > The "A" was easy. Google came up with "American Global Health Group" which probably wasn't what you had in mind.
> > >
> > > > > This isn't "post-glacial" warming. It's us replaying the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum by injecting more CO2 into the atmosphere. The extra methane that the article calls "unexpected" is coming out of the Arctic permafrost. The arctic is warming up some three times faster than the planet as a whole and people have been monitoring the extra methane coming out of the thawing permafrost for at least a decade now.
> > > >
> > > > You didn't even read the article, numbskull. Everything post-glacial is warming. The climate naturally undulates between glacier- furnace (tropical climate polls).
> > >
> > > If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).
> >
> > un·du·la·tion
> > noun
> > the action of moving smoothly up and down
> The transition between ice ages and interglacials isn't all that smooth. It's more an alternation between quasi-stable states and the Younger Dryas in the middle of the most recent transition wasn't any kind of smooth progression. Undulation isn't the right word.
> > Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold.
> The most recent 2.6 million years has been unusual, even if you haven't noticed
>
> > And there's no way the Earth could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.
>
> https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
>
> You'd better think that one out again

They say sea level was 560 ft higher. Elevation makes a huge difference in average temperatures. Take a look at modern day Colombia at 4o N latitude. You would think the place is sweltering hot, but the big cities are at very high elevations, making the climate relatively mild. Cali at 1000 m, Bogota at 2640m, Medellin at 1560m. Proximity to equator means they don't have four seasons.

https://pelecanus.com.co/en/cities-colombia/

Too bad there's so much crime there, fueled by drug addicts in U.S.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:49:53 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

<snip>

>> If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).
>
>un·du·la·tion
>noun
>the action of moving smoothly up and down
>
>Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold. And there's no way the Erath could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.

How do you expect that the polar regions would be tropical the whole
year round ?

Did you notice that the sun doesn't rise for several months during the
winter (not even at noon), so no energy directly from the sun to keep
the temperatures above freezing.

While extremely strong sea currents might keep the ice away from
Arctic, how do you transfer enough heat to the Antarctic to compensate
for the heat loss into space during the several month long polar
night?

On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 6:18:27 AM UTC-4, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 06:49:53 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >> If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).
> >
> >un搞u損a暗ion
> >noun
> >the action of moving smoothly up and down
> >
> >Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold. And there's no way the Erath could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.
> How do you expect that the polar regions would be tropical the whole
> year round ?
>
> Did you notice that the sun doesn't rise for several months during the
> winter (not even at noon), so no energy directly from the sun to keep
> the temperatures above freezing.
>
> While extremely strong sea currents might keep the ice away from
> Arctic, how do you transfer enough heat to the Antarctic to compensate
> for the heat loss into space during the several month long polar
> night?

The same way it's happening in the present day. The sun is heating the scorching hot equator which causes very strong air currents to flow along the meridians to the poles and from there vertically into the stratosphere.

On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:36:00 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 5:41:52 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:28:51 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 11:49:59 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:24:13 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:45:39 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:39:31 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36 PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>
> <snip>
> > > > > If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).
> > > >
> > > > un·du·la·tion
> > > > noun
> > > > the action of moving smoothly up and down
> > >
> > > The transition between ice ages and interglacials isn't all that smooth. It's more an alternation between quasi-stable states and the Younger Dryas in the middle of the most recent transition wasn't any kind of smooth progression. Undulation isn't the right word.
> > >
> > > > Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold.
> > > The most recent 2.6 million years has been unusual, even if you haven't noticed
> > >
> > > > And there's no way the Earth could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.
> > >
> > > https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
> > >
> > > You'd better think that one out again.
> > They say sea level was 560 ft higher. Elevation makes a huge difference in average temperatures. Take a look at modern day Colombia at 4o N latitude. You would think the place is sweltering hot, but the big cities are at very high elevations, making the climate relatively mild. Cali at 1000 m, Bogota at 2640m, Medellin at 1560m. Proximity to equator means they don't have four seasons.
> >
> > https://pelecanus.com.co/en/cities-colombia/
> >
> > Too bad there's so much crime there, fueled by drug addicts in U.S.
> What's that got to do with anything? There aren't any temperate rain forests anywhere on the Antarctic land mass now.
>
> Wittering on about Bogota isn't any kind of appropriate reaction. I nailed you and you are trying to dance around the fact.

I'm not the slightest interested in some childish competition called 'nailing.'

The idiots who make the ice core measurements are nearly as dumb as you are.. You're a mindlessly passive reader/ information gatherer out of which you can't make any sense. The ice core people are the same with their measurements.

Until they figure a way to normalize these various "-ene" extremes so as to compare them to the present time, the totality of their phony conclusions are pure speculation.

The phony ice core gathering missions are just a scam for them to get on an enhanced pay scale.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 08:34:20 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 3:36:00?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> On Saturday, August 19, 2023 at 5:41:52?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:28:51?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 11:49:59?PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 2:47:04?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > > > On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 3:24:13?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 10:45:39?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > > > > > On Thursday, August 17, 2023 at 11:39:31?PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:01:19?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 10:30:44?PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 1:04:38?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 16, 2023 at 7:07:00?AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:30:06?AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 15, 2023 at 10:15:36?PM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>> > > > > If that's what you read into the article, you are as far gone as Flyguy. The climate has been cycling between ice and ages and interglacials ) which aren't any kind of furnace. for the past 2.6 million years. When the contents aren't in their current positions the average temperature of the planet is a bit higher but still not "furnace like" and doesn't undulate (or at least not nearly as much).
>> > > >
>> > > > un·du·la·tion
>> > > > noun
>> > > > the action of moving smoothly up and down
>> > >
>> > > The transition between ice ages and interglacials isn't all that smooth. It's more an alternation between quasi-stable states and the Younger Dryas in the middle of the most recent transition wasn't any kind of smooth progression. Undulation isn't the right word.
>> > >
>> > > > Maybe you understand it as something else? Barring a meteor strike of mantle plume, Earth's climate undulates between warm and cold.
>> > > The most recent 2.6 million years has been unusual, even if you haven't noticed
>> > >
>> > > > And there's no way the Earth could be anything less than a furnace when the polar regions turn tropical.
>> > >
>> > > https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
>> > >
>> > > You'd better think that one out again.
>> > They say sea level was 560 ft higher. Elevation makes a huge difference in average temperatures. Take a look at modern day Colombia at 4o N latitude. You would think the place is sweltering hot, but the big cities are at very high elevations, making the climate relatively mild. Cali at 1000 m, Bogota at 2640m, Medellin at 1560m. Proximity to equator means they don't have four seasons.
>> >
>> > https://pelecanus.com.co/en/cities-colombia/
>> >
>> > Too bad there's so much crime there, fueled by drug addicts in U.S.
>> What's that got to do with anything? There aren't any temperate rain forests anywhere on the Antarctic land mass now.
>>
>> Wittering on about Bogota isn't any kind of appropriate reaction. I nailed you and you are trying to dance around the fact.
>
>I'm not the slightest interested in some childish competition called 'nailing.'
>
>The idiots who make the ice core measurements are nearly as dumb as you are. You're a mindlessly passive reader/ information gatherer out of which you can't make any sense. The ice core people are the same with their measurements.
>
>Until they figure a way to normalize these various "-ene" extremes so as to compare them to the present time, the totality of their phony conclusions are pure speculation.
>
>The phony ice core gathering missions are just a scam for them to get on an enhanced pay scale.
>
>>
>> --
>> Bill Sloman, Sydney

If one were to inject a thin layer of hot into a mountain of ice, what
is the diffusion time constant?

And what is the gas diffusion time constant?

On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 04:23:18 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

>
>Fred is nuts, but
>
> https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
>
>points out that the Antarctic did host temperate rain forest 90 million years ago.

Apparently "temperate rain forest" refers to something like Canada's
wet west cost forests NOT to rain forests close to the equator.

The drilling site was close to the sea, so currents could bring a lot
of heat.

Today some forests occur inside the polar circle, so some tress
survive sub-zero temperatures ad a more or less darkness for a few
months.

The article did not mention what Earth's axial tilt was at that time,
which determines the winter night length and severity.

On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
>
>In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
>
>All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
>
>Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
>
>https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented

What a load of old cobblers.

On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:32:23 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:43 PM UTC+10, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 04:23:18 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
> > <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Fred is nuts, but
> > >
> > > https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
> > >
> > >points out that the Antarctic did host temperate rain forest 90 million years ago.
> >
> > Apparently "temperate rain forest" refers to something like Canada's wet west cost forests NOT to rain forests close to the equator.
> Obviously.
> > The drilling site was close to the sea, so currents could bring a lot of heat.
> They don't at the moment.
>
> > Today some forests occur inside the polar circle, so some trees survive sub-zero temperatures and more or less complete darkness for a few months.
>
> The only ones I can think of get the benefit of the Gulf Stream and the Alaska current.
> >
> > The article did not mention what Earth's axial tilt was at that time, which determines the winter night length and severity.
> https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/
>
> The axial tilt repeats on a 41,000 year cycle. Where it was 90 million years ago probably doesn't matter in the sense that whatever was being looked at was probably in place for longer than 41.000 years.

That was one of the surprising discoveries made by NASA's OCO, that the boreal forests sink more CO2 than anywhere else. Turns out the reason for this is warming has extended the active season of the forests enough to make a big difference. The will be for a while anyway until they're all turned to barren ash wastelands due to fire.

>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:23:30 AM UTC+10, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:32:23 AM UTC-4, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:36:43 PM UTC+10, upsid...@downunder.com wrote:
> > > On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 04:23:18 -0700 (PDT), Anthony William Sloman
> > > <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Fred is nuts, but
> > > >
> > > > https://earthsky.org/earth/a-temperate-rainforest-in-antarctica-during-the-age-of-dinosaurs/
> > > >
> > > >points out that the Antarctic did host temperate rain forest 90 million years ago.
> > >
> > > Apparently "temperate rain forest" refers to something like Canada's wet west cost forests NOT to rain forests close to the equator.
> > Obviously.
> > > The drilling site was close to the sea, so currents could bring a lot of heat.
> > They don't at the moment.
> >
> > > Today some forests occur inside the polar circle, so some trees survive sub-zero temperatures and more or less complete darkness for a few months.
> >
> > The only ones I can think of get the benefit of the Gulf Stream and the Alaska current.
> > >
> > > The article did not mention what Earth's axial tilt was at that time, which determines the winter night length and severity.
> > https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/milankovitch-orbital-cycles-and-their-role-in-earths-climate/
> >
> > The axial tilt repeats on a 41,000 year cycle. Where it was 90 million years ago probably doesn't matter in the sense that whatever was being looked at was probably in place for longer than 41.000 years.
> That was one of the surprising discoveries made by NASA's OCO, that the boreal forests sink more CO2 than anywhere else.

They don't, as I pointed out earlier.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/150656/breathing-life-into-the-ocean

Oceanic plankton sink more.

>Turns out the reason for this is warming has extended the active season of the forests enough to make a big difference.

But mo enough to make a relatively small area of forest the biggest carbon sink on the planet.

> The will be for a while anyway until they're all turned to barren ash wastelands due to fire.

Seems unlikely. Boreal forests do burn, but they also regenerate.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 2:45:22 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 05:15:30 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
> <bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Full terminations [ These great climate flips that ended each ice age are known as terminations. ] take several thousands of years to complete, but many include a creeping onset of warming, then a very abrupt phase of extremely rapid climate change that can take a century or less, followed by a longer, slower period during which the great ice caps finally melt.
> >
> >In the abrupt phase of the great change that brought about the modern climate, Greenland's temperature rose by around 10°C within a few decades. During these abrupt phases, methane climbs very steeply indeed."
> >
> >All indications are the Erath is undergoing a rapid onset of transitioning to an uninhabitable and hot climate,..."For example, around 131,000 years ago during Termination II, the British climate suddenly flipped from glaciers in the Cotswolds to hippopotami wallowing in what is now Trafalgar Square." - too funny.
> >
> >Mankind's imagined dominance of nature is a psychopathic pipe dream and doesn't exist at all on this scale. Of course they're going to put off acceptance of their imminent doom as long as practical.
> >
> >https://www.sciencealert.com/termination-zero-our-predicament-may-be-totally-unprecedented
>
> What a load of old cobblers.

Since Cursitor Doom doesn't post anything else, he's scarcely in a position to complain about Fred Bloggs' preferred brand of nonsense.

Cursitor Doom does seem to insist that his preferred nonsense is comically implausible, and since Fred is only posting over-the-top alarmism, it could be that Cursitor Doom is complaining that his sense of the ridiculous is being inadequately stimulated.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney