For the first time since like 5 million years ago, annual CO2 level has surpassed 400 ppm

[ultron]

ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

Annual Data | Atmospheric CO2 | CO2 Now | Current CO2

What Does 400 ppm Look Like? | The Keeling Curve

 

[NP-complete]

Earth's climate is such a complex phenomenon. I dont think today's technology is advanced enough to simulate it completely and make highly precise predictions. Unless they put every single thing they know about earth into the most powerful supercomputer and let it crunch the data and produced the best possible predictions about future climate, i am not buying current predictions arrived by disjointed scientists working in tiny labs on puny machines.

 

[ultron]

Earth's climate is such a complex phenomenon. I dont think today's technology is advanced enough to simulate it completely and make highly precise predictions. Unless they put every single thing they know about earth into the most powerful supercomputer and let it crunch the data and produced the best possible predictions about future climate, i am not buying current predictions arrived by disjointed scientists working in tiny labs on puny machines.

I only said CO2 increased to its top since like 5 million years ago. I said nothing about climate. Man is too puny to change climate. Man compared to Earth is like an ant compared to a mountain.

 

[war&peace]

Would that we could understand how

Earth's climate is such a complex phenomenon. I dont think today's technology is advanced enough to simulate it completely and make highly precise predictions. Unless they put every single thing they know about earth into the most powerful supercomputer and let it crunch the data and produced the best possible predictions about future climate, i am not buying current predictions arrived by disjointed scientists working in tiny labs on puny machines.

Lets go step by step and logically; First of all the OP, is concerned with only the measurement of CO2. Which is a very straight forward and simple to measure; You can buy sensors from the market to estimate ppm of CO2 and particles, I have 9 air-cleaners in my home with such detectors built-in and a large scale air-handling and filtration units for my office, yacht and even in RV. The estimation of CO2 in the past can easily be studied through geological and paleontological data. Are you aware that even the ocean floor has been mapped and by studying the sedimentation and the patterns, the scientist cannot only estimate the composition of the atmosphere but also the temperature changes, magnetic pole reversals and even large scale incidents and events like the collision of the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Thus I have no doubt about their estimation of CO2,

Now this out of our way, lets move to the climate change and the state of the research in this field. As far as climate change is concerned; it is very observable once we see global data over decades and todays latest computer technology, GIS/satellite imagery provides us with sufficient tool to see the change

( میینڈ ک نے ساری زندگی کنوئیں میں گزرا لیکن ایک دن بارش زیادہ ہوگیا تو وہ کنواں سے باہر آگئے تو دیکھا دنیا تو بہت بڑا ہے )​

Now we can clearly see the changes (contractions) in the ice cover of the Earth in Antarctica, arctic circle, Greenland, Iceland, in glaciers, and with access to geological data we can see in the distant past also. This is all observation and not much of simulations; however model and simulations are used to recreate the scenarios and once initiated with observed data as boundary conditions, we can also predict the future reasonably well. However we had problems in understanding the physics of the atmosphere and the complex interaction between the atmosphere, geology and geography and most importantly ocean and its cycle. For example the global warming has occurred at a slower pace than expected and one of the reason was that our ocean models were inaccurate since we had no understanding. I have been working with Prof Taylor R at DAMTP, Cambridge University on modelling the ocean dynamics and we have simulated the effects of zoo- and phytoplankton on the absorption of CO2 and their contribution to life in ocean, CO2 cycle. We have found that ocean has a much longer cycle time and it has absorbed the major chunk of CO2 which was not modelled in older models and thus the predictions were wrong. However, it is a bad news since once the ocean mean temperature goes up, it will cause far drastic changes which we cannot comprehend fully since oceans 3/4 of the earth's surface area and contain 90% of life which so essential for the life on land especially for us humans.

 

[NP-complete]

Would that we could understand how

Lets go step by step and logically; First of all the OP, is concerned with only the measurement of CO2. Which is a very straight forward and simple to measure; You can buy sensors from the market to estimate ppm of CO2 and particles, I have 9 air-cleaners in my home with such detectors built-in and a large scale air-handling and filtration units for my office, yacht and even in RV. The estimation of CO2 in the past can easily be studied through geological and paleontological data. Are you aware that even the ocean floor has been mapped and by studying the sedimentation and the patterns, the scientist cannot only estimate the composition of the atmosphere but also the temperature changes, magnetic pole reversals and even large scale incidents and events like the collision of the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Thus I have no doubt about their estimation of CO2,

Now this out of our way, lets move to the climate change and the state of the research in this field. As far as climate change is concerned; it is very observable once we see global data over decades and todays latest computer technology, GIS/satellite imagery provides us with sufficient tool to see the change

( میینڈ ک نے ساری زندگی کنوئیں میں گزرا لیکن ایک دن بارش زیادہ ہوگیا تو وہ کنواں سے باہر آگئے تو دیکھا دنیا تو بہت بڑا ہے )​

Now we can clearly see the changes (contractions) in the ice cover of the Earth in Antarctica, arctic circle, Greenland, Iceland, in glaciers, and with access to geological data we can see in the distant past also. This is all observation and not much of simulations; however model and simulations are used to recreate the scenarios and once initiated with observed data as boundary conditions, we can also predict the future reasonably well. However we had problems in understanding the physics of the atmosphere and the complex interaction between the atmosphere, geology and geography and most importantly ocean and its cycle. For example the global warming has occurred at a slower pace than expected and one of the reason was that our ocean models were inaccurate since we had no understanding. I have been working with Prof Taylor R at DAMTP, Cambridge University on modelling the ocean dynamics and we have simulated the effects of zoo- and phytoplankton on the absorption of CO2 and their contribution to life in ocean, CO2 cycle. We have found that ocean has a much longer cycle time and it has absorbed the major chunk of CO2 which was not modelled in older models and thus the predictions were wrong. However, it is a bad news since once the ocean mean temperature goes up, it will cause far drastic changes which we cannot comprehend fully since oceans 3/4 of the earth's surface area and contain 90% of life which so essential for the life on land especially for us humans.

Yea i know this thread has got nothing to do with climate change. It only about a statistic about co2 level. But i went along a tangent. Actually ive problem with the runaway effect scientists are claiming will happen if something is not done about it. That the planet will keep getting warmer irreversibly until all life is extinguished, due to the greenhouse effect. That co2 will not let the earth cool at night and the heat will accumulated. How are they so sure about the runaway effect ? Maybe the earth will just heat up a little and then the temperature will stabilize or even go back down. How are they so sure that temperatures will keep rising without an end?

 

[Koovie]

I only said CO2 increased to its top since like 5 million years ago. I said nothing about climate. Man is too puny to change climate. Man compared to Earth is like an ant compared to a mountain.

Still waiting for you to prove you BS claims on the other thread.

So I am not gonna explain everything again.. but remember this:
Man has become a geofactor. Thats why we call our time the Anthropocene in geology.

Would that we could understand how

Lets go step by step and logically; First of all the OP, is concerned with only the measurement of CO2. Which is a very straight forward and simple to measure; You can buy sensors from the market to estimate ppm of CO2 and particles, I have 9 air-cleaners in my home with such detectors built-in and a large scale air-handling and filtration units for my office, yacht and even in RV. The estimation of CO2 in the past can easily be studied through geological and paleontological data. Are you aware that even the ocean floor has been mapped and by studying the sedimentation and the patterns, the scientist cannot only estimate the composition of the atmosphere but also the temperature changes, magnetic pole reversals and even large scale incidents and events like the collision of the asteroid that destroyed the dinosaurs. Thus I have no doubt about their estimation of CO2,

Now this out of our way, lets move to the climate change and the state of the research in this field. As far as climate change is concerned; it is very observable once we see global data over decades and todays latest computer technology, GIS/satellite imagery provides us with sufficient tool to see the change

( میینڈ ک نے ساری زندگی کنوئیں میں گزرا لیکن ایک دن بارش زیادہ ہوگیا تو وہ کنواں سے باہر آگئے تو دیکھا دنیا تو بہت بڑا ہے )​

Now we can clearly see the changes (contractions) in the ice cover of the Earth in Antarctica, arctic circle, Greenland, Iceland, in glaciers, and with access to geological data we can see in the distant past also. This is all observation and not much of simulations; however model and simulations are used to recreate the scenarios and once initiated with observed data as boundary conditions, we can also predict the future reasonably well. However we had problems in understanding the physics of the atmosphere and the complex interaction between the atmosphere, geology and geography and most importantly ocean and its cycle. For example the global warming has occurred at a slower pace than expected and one of the reason was that our ocean models were inaccurate since we had no understanding. I have been working with Prof Taylor R at DAMTP, Cambridge University on modelling the ocean dynamics and we have simulated the effects of zoo- and phytoplankton on the absorption of CO2 and their contribution to life in ocean, CO2 cycle. We have found that ocean has a much longer cycle time and it has absorbed the major chunk of CO2 which was not modelled in older models and thus the predictions were wrong. However, it is a bad news since once the ocean mean temperature goes up, it will cause far drastic changes which we cannot comprehend fully since oceans 3/4 of the earth's surface area and contain 90% of life which so essential for the life on land especially for us humans.

In which field are you working now?

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

, I have 9 air-cleaners in my home with such detectors built-in and a large scale air-handling

​

​

9 wow! Are you in LA or something? What brand do you recommend? Will it work for houses with smokers?

 

[Koovie]

Yea i know this thread has got nothing to do with climate change. It only about a statistic about co2 level. But i went along a tangent. Actually ive problem with the runaway effect scientists are claiming will happen if something is not done about it. That the planet will keep getting warmer irreversibly until all life is extinguished, due to the greenhouse effect. That co2 will not let the earth cool at night and the heat will accumulated. How are they so sure about the runaway effect ? Maybe the earth will just heat up a little and then the temperature will stabilize or even go back down. How are they so sure that temperatures will keep rising without an end?

Those effects are nonsense. From where do you have them?

CO2 concentrations have been much much much higher in the past (around 800ppm during he Carboniferous period for example) and obviously there was life during that time. And obviously, it decreased again... so the the claim that it cannot be reversed is nonsense too.


But we do know that greenhouse gases like CO2 have an effect on the Earths climate.

 

[NP-complete]

Those effects are nonsense. From where do you have them?

CO2 concentrations have been much much much higher in the past (around 800ppm during he Carboniferous period for example) and obviously there was life during that time. And obviously, it decreased again... so the the claim that it cannot be reversed is nonsense too.


But we do know that greenhouse gases like CO2 have an effect on the Earths climate.

please enlighten me. why are we worried about climate change today ?

 

[war&peace]

Still waiting for you to prove you BS claims on the other thread.

So I am not gonna explain everything again.. but remember this:
Man has become a geofactor. Thats why we call our time the Anthropocene in geology.


In which field are you working now?

Well I recently started my business in corporate security Got two masters Fluid Dynamics and Computational Science and High Performance Computing, but i attended a lot of summer schools at Woods Hole Institute of Oceanography, worked with Prof Paul Linden and J. R. Taylor at Cambridge University, briefly worked on QST (Quite Supersonic Transport) project at MIT and NASA. All this with scholarships. My bachelor/undergrad is in aerospace engineering from Embry Riddle Aeronautical Univ.

CO2 concentrations have been much much much higher in the past (around 800ppm during he Carboniferous period for example) and obviously there was life during that time. And obviously, it decreased again... so the the claim that it cannot be reversed is nonsense too.

It can be reversed by nature if it plans to do it again but the main causality will be the human extinction. We need a certain type of environment, though we can live in a range of temperatures from Tundra to deserts but with CO2 at that extreme levels and high temperatures will cause droughts and many green areas would turn to in barren lands

 

[Koovie]

Well I recently started my business in corporate security Got two masters Fluid Dynamics and Computational Science and High Performance Computing, but i attended a lot of summer schools at Woods Hole Institute of Oceanography, worked with Prof Paul Linden and J. R. Taylor at Cambridge University, briefly worked on QST (Quite Supersonic Transport) project at MIT and NASA. All this with scholarships. My bachelor/undergrad is in aerospace engineering from Embry Riddle Aeronautical Univ.

Congrats
You have an impressive CV

It can be reversed by nature if it plans to do it again but the main causality will be the human extinction. We need a certain type of environment, though we can live in a range of temperatures from Tundra to deserts but with CO2 at that extreme levels and high temperatures will cause droughts and many green areas would turn to in barren lands

I dont think that such a scenario will lead to the extinction of the human race (Unless we are so stupid and nuke ourselves because of the consequences). Sure, it will mean the end of the current forms of civilization, but we would adapt, survive and live on.

please enlighten me. why are we worried about climate change today ?

Because 300 million years ago, there were no humans around and the world looked completely different from ours

 

[ultron]

Ice core proxy measurements say CO2 level has ranged below 300 ppm over the past 1 million years. Beyond that, there is no proxy measurement and estimates are not reliable.