Earth has cycled through warm periods, ice ages

Advertisement

The past 150 years provide a natural experiment that shows that the global temperature anomaly has not responded to our anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions

Justin Gillis (“Global Temperatures Highest in 4,000 Years,” March 7, The New York Times) reporting on an effort by Marcott, Shakun, Clark and Mix published in Science, noted that; “Global temperatures are warmer than at any time in at least 4,000 years, scientists reported Thursday, and over the coming decades are likely to surpass levels not seen on the planet since before the last ice age.”

Of course, this falsified Mr. Gillis’ earlier (Jan. 9) claim that “Not Even Close: 2012 Was Hottest Ever in U.S.” on the front page of “the nation’s newspaper” (The New York Times). This is not surprising since scientists agree Earth has been much warmer many times in the past. The publication of such an arrantly untrue headline seems more consistent with a propaganda campaign than unbiased reporting.

More recently Mr. Gillis reports (“Heat Trapping Gas Passes Milestone, Raising Fears,” May 10) that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have “not been this high for at least three million years.”

The 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) substantiated the strong correlation between the GTA and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels up to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

It is striking that while temperatures are the highest they have been in 4,000 years, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are higher than they have been in over 3 million years. The correlation has been lost; the past 150 years provide a natural experiment that shows that the GTA has not responded to our anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions.

This is precisely what climate scientist Kevin Trenberth was reflecting when he wrote, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”

Disinterested scientifically literate people realize that the last 150 years is an experiment that has shown that our anthropogenic carbon dioxide has not had any effect on the GTA.

We also realize that 100 million years ago, in the mid-Cretaceous period, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were 1,000 ppm and warm-water organisms thrived at both poles.

Earth has cycled through many warm periods and ice ages since then, making the claim that a “continuing rise could be catastrophic” patently absurd.

Jim Robles

Walla Walla

Comments

stvsngltn 1 year, 1 month ago

One word to describe my opinion of this letter: BRAVO!

1

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Please, continue to keep your head tucked neatly away in the sand. If climate change is "no big deal", why is it a top issue for the US Department of Defense? http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/ADA552760.pdf

0

ImJustSayin 1 year, 1 month ago

"trends and implications" is far from stating it's a fact. nice try

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Glad the print was large enough for you to read the title. Perhaps having someone read you the entire 175 pages, then explain it to you would help. Nothing like denial of science and fact-based research to scoff at. Fortunately, the tea-bagging followers of the Koch brothers will fade into obscurity and irrelevance, soon.

Funny thing about science: it really doesn't care what your opinion is.

0

ImJustSayin 1 year, 1 month ago

Like you read the entire report jackass

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Actually, I have several times (there is a lot of detail to understand), along with numerous other studies as this is the most important issue of our time.

Since you've sunk to name-calling, your argument and position - both now and in the future - is rendered meaningless.

But thanks for trying.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

Bruce - does that mean that you referring to everyone not agreeing with your views are a member of some tea party - patriot conspiracy that your views, arguments and positions are also meaningless?

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

I'm not sure who "Bruce" is, but you're making false comparisons, as usual. I welcome thoughtful discussion on the facts -not on opinions, falsehoods or hysteria.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

Sorry Bruce - DHR - when you write your posts do you lay on your left side (just checking), You make opinions and try to justify them with facts that don't pan out. Your inferior complex must really keep you healthy and of course, sleep really good at night. Try coming off with some actual facts instead of the covered up innuendos of far left institutions that cover the same subjects.

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

So, you're questioning the authenticity of an exhaustive report by the Department of Defense, and thousands of academics, or do you just try and diffuse your inability to actually debate any given issue with validated data that can be referenced - and present it in a respectful manner - because you have none? First time I've heard of the DoD as a "far left institution".

I have "come up" with some actual facts, real data based on real science. Where are yours?

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

dhr - Question: If this was a Republican Administration would your actual facts with real data still prevail????

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

It's not an "Us versus Them", 'Liberal vs Conservative", "Democrat vs Republican"' issue. Facts are facts.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

You are a self-righteous fool contradicting yourself at every turn. Have a nice life?

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Other than your personal attacks, I have yet to see you contribute anything to the actual discussion, but I've learned - that's your style.

0

stvsngltn 1 year, 1 month ago

Those with heads in sand are they who believe the "catastrophic anthropogenic carbon dioxide" hypothesis being spoon-fed to society in order to cash in on a non-existant crisis. The DOD (as with the EPA) is part of the Executive Branch that dictates policy regarding the "climate change" issue. The basic problem isn't whether or not the planet is warming but what is causing it -- something we can control or not? Fact is, we cannot -- because changing climate is driven by natural cycles and due to solar and other factors that have nothing to do with human CO2 emissions.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

Steve - very well stated and totally agree.

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Agree all you want, but widely accepted science will survive willful ignorance every time.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

Science looks good on a chalk board and then as soon as they take the blackout covers off the windows they make an honest determination of the actual scenario outdoors. Maybe that's what you should do is go outdoors and get some fresh air!

0

jrobles 1 year, 1 month ago

Downhillracer,

Climate change is a big deal and the DoD is right to be concerned about it. I am concerned about what will happen if Earth continues to warm.

That does not make the warming we have experienced anthropogenic. It clearly is not. Carbon dioxide is a harmless to slightly beneficial gas. We face exigent environmental challenges. We should not be wasting our effort trying to regulate a harmless gas.

By the way, I hope you do not feel bad about your apparent inability to offer a science, logic or (scientific) fact based response to my argument. As far as I can tell, nobody can.

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Aside from finding your attempt at a passive-agressive "complement", there is a large body of science that directly contradicts your comment, unless you're following the logic of Joe Barton or Michelle Bachman.

What I feel bad about is the failure of our education system in general to avoid critical thinking. As far as I can tell, here is a starting point for you: http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

.. to teach critical thinking..

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

downhillracer - Allow me to help you expand your critical thinking theories. There will be a presentation from the Chinese Academy of Sciences on June 15, 2013 in Bejing, China. This presentation is entitled "Climate Change Reconsidered and Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report" which is excellent! Check it out so that you can clarify your myths!

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

I'll stick with the American Institute of Physics, and over 1400 other independent research organizations worldwide. Unbelievable the willful ignorance exhibited on this subject.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

As you have stated in the past that your consistent insults lead one to believe that your credibility is null and void. It also shows that your lack of ability to consider there is a lot of space around the globe and it takes more than computer science to justify any significant solution to a major endeavor. I will take my analysis from more than a couple of government paid for entities.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

dhr - you see I actually gave you a chance to gain some knowledge. The Chinese Academy of Sciences (ranked very high in the Ivy League schools) is just translating some work that was authored by the Heartland Institute located in Chicago, Il. They are utilizing this work to justify the rebuttal to the United Nations Climate Change findings. But of course you scoffed at that and just went to insults. Go figure?

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

Share with us the actual citations and offer evidence that can be researched. Otherwise, you're just blathering into the wind.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

dhr - I gave that info to you on a previous post above - the volumes are "Climate Change Reconsidered" and "Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report"! This is one of many that disputes your computer generated theories. I don't really have time to read them to you but I'm sure if you went to the Library you could get assitance to help you comprehend!

0

downhillracer 1 year, 1 month ago

So, in other words, you have nothing. Understood, and not surprised. But, if it makes you feel better about yourself acting out the way you do, by all means - please proceed.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

So another words - I will proceed and I will always have Mother Nature on my side! Much to your lack of knowledge.

0

namvet60 1 year, 1 month ago

Very good letter Mr Robles - something you can hang your hat on.

0

Kevconpat 1 year, 1 month ago

Natural cycles and solar and 'other cycles' are indeed in the for front of Earths warming. We are ...humans causing activity and climate change; a part of that, natural 'other cycle' as noted by and supported by both Mr. Robles and Namvet60. Why not get together on some issues, that make...........sense?

0

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in
4 free views left!