World carbon dioxide levels highest for 650,000 years, says US report

[TheStripey1]

It's amazing what the non-corporate sponsored scientists have to say about the state of our environment...

Well... I hope y'all are ready for a wild ride... cuz I fear we are due for one...



World carbon dioxide levels highest for 650,000 years, says US report
· Rise in chief greenhouse gas worse than feared
· Earth may be losing ability to absorb CO2, say scientists

David Adam, environment correspondent The Guardian,
Tuesday May 13 2008
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/13/carbonemissions.climatechange)

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has reached a record high, according to the latest figures, renewing fears that climate change could begin to slide out of control.

Scientists at the Mauna Loa observatory in Hawaii say that CO2 levels in the atmosphere now stand at 387 parts per million (ppm), up almost 40% since the industrial revolution and the highest for at least the last 650,000 years.

The figures, published by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on its website, also confirm that carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas, is accumulating in the atmosphere faster than expected. The annual mean growth rate for 2007 was 2.14ppm - the fourth year in the last six to see an annual rise greater than 2ppm. From 1970 to 2000, the concentration rose by about 1.5ppm each year, but since 2000 the annual rise has leapt to an average 2.1ppm.

Scientists say the shift could indicate that the Earth is losing its natural ability to soak up billions of tonnes of CO2 each year. Climate models assume that about half our future emissions will be reabsorbed by forests and oceans, but the new figures confirm this may be too optimistic. If more of our carbon pollution stays in the atmosphere, it means emissions will have to be cut by more than is currently projected to prevent dangerous levels of global warming.

...snip

A study last year suggested that the recent surge in atmospheric CO2 levels was down to three processes: growth in the world economy, heavy use of coal in China, and a weakening of natural "sinks", forests, seas and soils that absorb carbon. The scientists said the increase was 35% larger than they expected.
...snip



Larger than expected rises... more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than has been there for 650,000 years... this does not bode well for our civilization, such as it is... nay, this does not bode well at all...

Got uhhhh, spaceship?

[stephanie]

We Are All DOOMED..

nice knowing ya all..:cheers2:

[theHawk]

Which means that there have been higher levels of carbon dioxide as little as half a million years ago. The earth has cycles of ice ages and warming periods, the earth has already been alot warmer than it currently is. There is no reason to be alarmed that the world has been and will continue to warm naturally since the last ice age ended over 15,000 years ago.

My question to the alarmists is, if such high levels of carbon dioxide and temperature have already come and gone several times naturally in the past, why should we be concerned today?

[Abbey Marie]

We Are All DOOMED..

nice knowing ya all..:cheers2:

Sure Stephanie, gloat up there in cold Alaska. :laugh2:

[stephanie]

Sure Stephanie, gloat up there in cold Alaska. :laugh2:

Current conditions as of 11:53 am AKDT

Fair
55°
Barometer:29.29 in and falling
Humidity:34%
Visibility:10 mi
Dewpoint:27°
Wind:ENE 13 mph
Sunrise:4:40 am
Sunset:11:07 pm

we are up to 18hrs. of daylight now..:laugh2:

[Dilloduck]

It's amazing what the non-corporate sponsored scientists have to say about the state of our environment...

Well... I hope y'all are ready for a wild ride... cuz I fear we are due for one...



Larger than expected rises... more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than has been there for 650,000 years... this does not bode well for our civilization, such as it is... nay, this does not bode well at all...

Got uhhhh, spaceship?

Make jogging illegal.

[Psychoblues]

Are there none of you shitheads able to produce a credible ounce of opposing ideology or is denouncing the article offhand and without at least concerned speculation your modem operandi?

The article remains credible so I guess the bullshit is just that?

[Silver]

It's amazing what the non-corporate sponsored scientists have to say about the state of our environment...

Well... I hope y'all are ready for a wild ride... cuz I fear we are due for one...



Larger than expected rises... more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than has been there for 650,000 years... this does not bode well for our civilization, such as it is... nay, this does not bode well at all...

Got uhhhh, spaceship?

WOW .... Whats the surprise....?

We all should know by now that as the earths temperature rises due to solar activity, the CO2 levels in the atmosphere go up afterwards....

[Psychoblues]

Can you address the current climatic anomoly or are you really that disinterested?



WOW .... Whats the surprise....?

We all should know by now that as the earths temperature rises due to solar activity, the CO2 levels in the atmosphere go up afterwards....

Does the dramatic rise of CO2 gasses post the industrial age thing not concern you? I could go on and on but maybe this elementary question will keep you thinking for at least a minute or two. At least I expect that the minute or two is about all you'll give it. Conservatives have no scientifically demonstrated answer to the "No, it's not just a cosmic rhythm thing.", don't you know?

[Silver]

Can you address the current climatic anomoly or are you really that disinterested?




Does the dramatic rise of CO2 gasses post the industrial age thing not concern you? I could go on and on but maybe this elementary question will keep you thinking for at least a minute or two. At least I expect that the minute or two is about all you'll give it. Conservatives have no scientifically demonstrated answer to the "No, it's not just a cosmic rhythm thing.", don't you know?

Historic evidence shows that CO2 levels increase AFTER an increase in the temperature in earths climate...

That should end this debate....

[Psychoblues]

'Zat all you got? OK. I'm still not convinced.




Historic evidence shows that CO2 levels increase AFTER an increase in the temperature in earths climate...

That should end this debate....

But, you're probably correct. The debate was ended in your original observation that a problem existed.

[Dilloduck]

'Zat all you got? OK. I'm still not convinced.





But, you're probably correct. The debate was ended in your original observation that a problem existed.

Hey psycho----I'll panic if it'll make you feel any better. :laugh2:

[stephanie]

Sheesh...I'm still traumatized from panicking over the world going to end with global cooling back in the 70's..

[Psychoblues]

I ain't worried about your most recent panic, dd.



Hey psycho----I'll panic if it'll make you feel any better. :laugh2:

Are you still pissing on your shoes from the last one?

[82Marine89]

Are there none of you shitheads able to produce a credible ounce of opposing ideology or is denouncing the article offhand and without at least concerned speculation your modem operandi?

The article remains credible so I guess the bullshit is just that?

Come on Psychoblows, you're better than that. When articles say 'may' and 'could' it is only speculation. I would also like to see documentation of CO2 level from 650,000 years ago so I know this is a credible report.

[Psychoblues]

See what I mean, 82latrine?



Come on Psychoblows, you're better than that. When articles say 'may' and 'could' it is only speculation. I would also like to see documentation of CO2 level from 650,000 years ago so I know this is a credible report.

According to the primo acadacio conservatives, there was no earth at that time, biblically speaking of course. Whatever, there certainly weren't any scientists or religious nuts.

[82Marine89]

See what I mean, 82latrine?

According to the primo acadacio conservatives, there was no earth at that time, biblically speaking of course. Whatever, there certainly weren't any scientists or religious nuts.

As I said Psychoblows, when you use the words 'may' and 'could' you are speculating. It means you have no definitive proof to back up what you are saying. This article is rubbish based on that alone.

You may be a genius and you could be good looking, but chances are you some drunk, pimply faced, shit head posting from your parents basement.

[Psychoblues]

I didn't use those words (may and could), 82latrine. From what document did you retrieve that information?





As I said Psychoblows, when you use the words 'may' and 'could' you are speculating. It means you have no definitive proof to back up what you are saying. This article is rubbish based on that alone.

You may be a genius and you could be good looking, but chances are you some drunk, pimply faced, shit head posting from your parents basement.

I am a 57 year old father of 3, a veteran of the United States of America wars, a husband of my wife of 32 years, a retired political electee and a hell of a lot more than that, 82latrine. What are you? An 82latrine?

[82Marine89]

I didn't use those words (may and could), 82latrine. From what document did you retrieve that information?

Then you are showing your ignorance. Those words are used in this article. The very article you are defending.


I am a 57 year old father of 3, a veteran of the United States of America wars, a husband of my wife of 32 years, a retired political electee and a hell of a lot more than that, 82latrine. What are you? An 82latrine?

Me? I'm just another part in the grand scheme of life. No one special. Never claimed to be. I seriously doubt you, your service, and your political status.

[Psychoblues]

I have never had much respect for 82latrines either.



Then you are showing your ignorance. Those words are used in this article. The very article you are defending.



Me? I'm just another part in the grand scheme of life. No one special. Never claimed to be. I seriously doubt you, your service, and your political status.

You used those words directly to me as if I had used them. That's a cheapshot loser technigue. I suggest you lose it.

[actsnoblemartin]

can we please get out of the gutter people :lame2:

[avatar4321]

So we have the highest levels of concentrated carbon dioxide in hundreds of thousands of years the same year as our 10th year of deceasing tempatures.

I think it's clear to any thinking person that carbon dioxide cannot be causing global warming. Otherwise we wouldnt have had ten years of decreasing tempatures with this increase of carbon dioxide.

I am sure there are still those of you who are going to argue that CO2 is a pollutant. However, I would hope that you remember that we breath CO2 out. Its a natural product of breathing. I can't imagine how something that is naturally produced can pollute the world. But I suppose you all are so much smarter than lil ole me.

I would just recommend you to be careful. It wont take long before some environmental crusader will come along determining that the only way to stop all carbon emissions is to eliminate all mankind. It's the only logical conclusion to this line of thinking. And it's one that has dangerous consequences.

[Psychoblues]

Damn, just for a moment I thought you had something there, a'21.



So we have the highest levels of concentrated carbon dioxide in hundreds of thousands of years the same year as our 10th year of deceasing tempatures.

I think it's clear to any thinking person that carbon dioxide cannot be causing global warming. Otherwise we wouldnt have had ten years of decreasing tempatures with this increase of carbon dioxide.

I am sure there are still those of you who are going to argue that CO2 is a pollutant. However, I would hope that you remember that we breath CO2 out. Its a natural product of breathing. I can't imagine how something that is naturally produced can pollute the world. But I suppose you all are so much smarter than lil ole me.

I would just recommend you to be careful. It wont take long before some environmental crusader will come along determining that the only way to stop all carbon emissions is to eliminate all mankind. It's the only logical conclusion to this line of thinking. And it's one that has dangerous consequences.

Care about some more fearmongering? Sorry. I rather look at more credible information. I was opposed to the information provided by the government and the MSM prior to the invasion of Iraq and the proprietor of this board can verify that. I was correct. I depended on verifiable information. WAR was declared on unverifiable information. To put it short, War was declared on lies. Lies also permeate this environmental question.

[82Marine89]

I have never had much respect for 82latrines either.

You used those words directly to me as if I had used them. That's a cheapshot loser technigue. I suggest you lose it.

I suggest you lay off the bottle there Psychoblewsomeguy, but that won't happen. I used the word 'you' as a generic term, but you, (actually meaning you) are to dumb to realize that and take it as a personal attack. Instead of addressing my points that the use of the words 'may' and 'could' render this article irrelevant, you (actually meaning you) try to change the subject.

[Psychoblues]

It is your obsession with the words "may" and "could" that intrique me, '82latrine.



I suggest you lay off the bottle there Psychoblewsomeguy, but that won't happen. I used the word 'you' as a generic term, but you, (actually meaning you) are to dumb to realize that and take it as a personal attack. Instead of addressing my points that the use of the words 'may' and 'could' render this article irrelevant, you (actually meaning you) try to change the subject.

I didn't use them, the article addresses far more specific points and you tend to ignore the truth. Are you satisfied now?

[82Marine89]

It is your obsession with the words "may" and "could" that intrique me, '82latrine.


I didn't use them, the article addresses far more specific points and you tend to ignore the truth. Are you satisfied now?

The world may end tomorrow or it may not. There's a chance you could have posted sober, but not likely. Both sentences are speculation. Just like the article.

[manu1959]

highest levels in 650,000 years ......

this would mean that at some point prior to that it was higher .....

man was not present at that point ......

seems to me the ego of man thinks they created this issue......

seems the earth does as it pleases.......

does not more c02 mean more "air" for plants.......anyone notice more growth this year in their garden......

anyway my garden seems to be trying to fix this issue.....

[Psychoblues]

Like I said, may and could seem to be your obsessions.



The world may end tomorrow or it may not. There's a chance you could have posted sober, but not likely. Both sentences are speculation. Just like the article.

Are you now denying them?

[82Marine89]

Like I said, may and could seem to be your obsessions.


Are you now denying them?

I'm obsessed with the truth. If the Author of the article needs to use these words, then that means he has no definitive proof. If he did he would have used words like 'is' and 'shall'.

[Psychoblues]

Obviously you didn't read the article, '82latrine.



I'm obsessed with the truth. If the Author of the article needs to use these words, then that means he has no definitive proof. If he did he would have used words like 'is' and 'shall'.

If you had read it you would have some comment on what the writer descibes as "truths". Have you always been such a dildo?

[stephanie]

this scientist can say..World carbon dioxide levels highest for 650,000 years, says US report..
why not..?
who the hell is still around from 650,000 yrs. ago to compare and verify this?

P.T Barnum here they come..:coffee:

[Psychoblues]

Scientists and potential cowboys just fuck you up, don't they, stevie?



this scientist can say..World carbon dioxide levels highest for 650,000 years, says US report..
why not..?
who the hell is still around from 650,000 yrs. ago to compare and verify this?

P.T Barnum here they come..:coffee:

Tell me you ain't older than dirt?

[stephanie]

Scientists and potential cowboys just fuck you up, don't they, Stevie?






Tell me you ain't older than dirt?
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/alaskamomma/hatsoff.gif

[Psychoblues]

You know I'm not right, don't you, stevie? But you also know that I am correct. Ain't it a hoot!!!!!!!!!!