by Sojourner » Tue Jun 21, 2011 11:27 pm
by fish » Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:48 pm
by smac » Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:19 pm
by Psyber » Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:13 pm
Yes, the 130 year sample is also a small snippet since the end of the "Little Ice Age" that ended during the 1850 to 1890 period.smac wrote:But isn't a 130 year sample also but a snippet in the history of the 3rd rock from the Sun?
Disclaimer: I don't know what I think about climate change as I haven't bothered to look into it, but all parties seem to provide whatever evidence in whatever format they need to support their case, while ignoring anything that may support the alternative view. Typical politics, really.
by BenchedEagle » Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:36 pm
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:38 pm
by fish » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:21 pm
LOL anything to get a few more people onto the Politics Forum!Dogwatcher wrote:I keep looking at this thread title and thinking it's about cricket.
by fish » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:49 pm
Yep - however I only included instrumental records (ie those directly measured by scientific instruments) as these pertain to the modern era that Mr. Fielding was referring to and the instrumental records were sufficient to demonstrate the error that he has made.smac wrote:But isn't a 130 year sample also but a snippet in the history of the 3rd rock from the Sun?
The worlds scientists have been quite clear for many years about climate change. This is what the latest science says:smac wrote:...all parties seem to provide whatever evidence in whatever format they need to support their case, while ignoring anything that may support the alternative view. Typical politics, really.
by fish » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:17 pm
Agreed Psyber - Palaeoclimatology (the history of climate) is an invaluable field of study as it teaches us about what has caused changes in our climate and atmosphere over the life of the earth.Psyber wrote:Yes, the 130 year sample is also a small snippet since the end of the "Little Ice Age" that ended during the 1850 to 1890 period. Perspective comes in the longer term view: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeoclimatology
by Banker » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:38 pm
by redandblack » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:46 pm
Banker wrote:fish- could you please post a graph of the trend once the Australian Carbon Tax begins next year? Im expecting a sharp decline
by fish » Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:04 am
Sorry Banker I'm not too good at making graphs - I just use ones other people have made. But if I find one I'll post it for you.Banker wrote:fish- could you please post a graph of the trend once the Australian Carbon Tax begins next year?
by Banker » Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:15 am
fish wrote:Sorry Banker I'm not too good at making graphs - I just use ones other people have made. But if I find one I'll post it for you.Banker wrote:fish- could you please post a graph of the trend once the Australian Carbon Tax begins next year?
by Psyber » Sat Jun 25, 2011 1:38 pm
Where is the original source of that graph on the net, Fish?fish wrote:.... I've posted this graph elsewhere on this forum but it's probably worth posting again - it shows the atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere with the data obtained from both Palaeoclimatology and direct measurement:
by fish » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:38 pm
Psyber I have posted that comparison here.Psyber wrote:I still haven't been able to find out how directly comparable CO2 levels from flask air are with CO2 from air bubbles trapped in ice for many years.
[In theory some of the CO2 trapped in the ice could be absorbed from the bubbles if the ice liquefies at times under pressure, thus giving lower readings.]
by Psyber » Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:14 am
Thank you, Fish.fish wrote:Psyber I have posted that comparison here.Psyber wrote:I still haven't been able to find out how directly comparable CO2 levels from flask air are with CO2 from air bubbles trapped in ice for many years.
[In theory some of the CO2 trapped in the ice could be absorbed from the bubbles if the ice liquefies at times under pressure, thus giving lower readings.]
The carbon dioxide levels measured from air bubbles in ice cores match the levels measured from air flasks very well...
by fish » Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:31 pm
Psyber - to jump to a (false) conclusion about historical carbon dioxide levels that neglected to consider the last 2,300 years or so of records is, as I stated, a monumental blunder on your part.Psyber wrote:PS: Apropos you opening sentence of June 6th: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30294&start=60
My not at first knowing the youngest Vostok ice core samples were 2300 years old would be a "monumental blunder" for someone trained in earth sciences, but in someone educating himself in the field they are just the ignorance of not having found it out yet.
by Psyber » Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:12 pm
As I said, at that stage I hadn't yet learned the information that the youngest available ice cores were 2300 years old.fish wrote:Psyber - to jump to a (false) conclusion about historical carbon dioxide levels that neglected to consider the last 2,300 years or so of records is, as I stated, a monumental blunder on your part.Psyber wrote:PS: Apropos you opening sentence of June 6th: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30294&start=60
My not at first knowing the youngest Vostok ice core samples were 2300 years old would be a "monumental blunder" for someone trained in earth sciences, but in someone educating himself in the field they are just the ignorance of not having found it out yet.
I can't see how it can be described as anything less.
by fish » Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:18 pm
by dedja » Sat Jul 09, 2011 12:01 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |