Why worry about global warming? (2)

[eclipsenow]

Graphs that go into imaginary years are worthless, really. You can graph out stuff from the last few thousand years. Thus far, and no further. You cannot pass.

So you believe in God the trickster, do you? The Milankovitch wobbles in the Earth's orbit are all confirmed by changes in atmospheric Co2 trapped in Antarctic ice cores. The planet wobbles in 3 directions, and every 100 thousand years these wobbles synchronise to cause ice ages. The physics is there. The CO2 is there, trapped in the ice. The evidence for ice ages is there.

God is out to trick us is He?

There are alternatives to letting hard corps creationism dictate that you be alienated from nearly every scientific discipline.
Framework interpretation (Genesis) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Allegorical interpretations of Genesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Theistic evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I believe Genesis is God's word and is true, just as I believe the Psalmist when he said the trees of the field clapped their hands, or Revelation when it says Jesus had 7 eyes and 7 horns and looked like a lamb that was slain. It's all true, but it is not helpful unless one knows how to read the meaning of the text, not just the words in the text. It's about context and hermeneutics. Otherwise, Jesus IS a Lamb and has 7 eyes, 7 horns, and a sword for a tongue.

 

[eclipsenow]

Double post

 

[dad]

So you believe in God the trickster, do you? The Milankovitch wobbles in the Earth's orbit are all confirmed by changes in atmospheric Co2 trapped in Antarctic ice cores.

Nope. Circular. Can you show that they are independent of each other? Or is one based on the other? Wobbles? Is this in real or imaginary time!? Nothing wobbled or waltzed or did the cha cha more than 6200 years real time ago.

The planet wobbles in 3 directions, and every 100 thousand years these wobbles synchronise to cause ice ages.

Preposterous. You seek to give wobble credit to imaginary time epochs. wobbles now...good. How they got here....you have no clue.

The physics is there. The CO2 is there, trapped in the ice. The evidence for ice ages is there.

No, actually, all that is trapped is your circular belief system. Say uncle.

God is out to trick us is He?

No. Why say such a silly thing?

There are alternatives to letting hard corps creationism dictate that you be alienated from nearly every scientific discipline.
Framework interpretation (Genesis) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Allegorical interpretations of Genesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Theistic evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I believe Genesis is God's word and is true, just as I believe the Psalmist when he said the trees of the field clapped their hands, or Revelation when it says Jesus had 7 eyes and 7 horns and looked like a lamb that was slain.

So you don't then. OK.

It's all true, but it is not helpful unless one knows how to read the meaning of the text, not just the words in the text. It's about context and hermeneutics. Otherwise, Jesus IS a Lamb and has 7 eyes, 7 horns, and a sword for a tongue.

You thought you knew? Think again. Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb. The lambs were slain to show that He would come one day. That doesn't make Him less the Lamb. Just because there is some symbolism, that represents reality, does not mean that nothing is real.

 

[RickG]

Graphs that go into imaginary years are worthless, really. You can graph out stuff from the last few thousand years. Thus far, and no further. You cannot pass.

By studying past climate through proxy data Climatologists are able to understand what the major factors affecting climate are. Paleoclimatology is a really interesting field. The main trigger for the past 4 glacial cycles are attributed to Milankovitch Cycles. Here's data on orbital variations going back 5,000,000 years.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/insolation/
Berger & Loutre 1991

Check it out.

 

[eclipsenow]

Jesus is the sacrificial Lamb. The lambs were slain to show that He would come one day. That doesn't make Him less the Lamb. Just because there is some symbolism, that represents reality, does not mean that nothing is real.

Is Jesus a beating animal with 7 horns or 7 eyes and a sword hanging out of his mouth? How do we know when the bible is symbolic, and when is it literal?

Answer: it depends on your hermeneutics.

 

[eclipsenow]

By studying past climate through proxy data Climatologists are able to understand what the major factors affecting climate are. Paleoclimatology is a really interesting field. The main trigger for the past 4 glacial cycles are attributed to Milankovitch Cycles. Here's data on orbital variations going back 5,000,000 years.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/insolation/
Berger & Loutre 1991

Check it out.

I agree. My hermeneutics of Genesis have not blinded me to the peer-reviewed science. I'm quite happy with the old universe we live in. It's still 'created' through the Big Bang and evolution and God's sovereignty. The problem for the atheist is that anything exists instead of nothing existing. Nothing dad has said remotely threatens the peer-reviewed science, nor the integrity of the hermeneutics Sydney Anglicans hold regarding Genesis. It really is a remarkable book detonating all manner of theological bombshells in the ancient world. But a science text book describing how we got here? That's like reading Jane Austen to learn how to fix your PC.

 

[RickG]

eclipsenow: The planet wobbles in 3 directions, and every 100 thousand years these wobbles synchronise to cause ice ages.

Preposterous. You seek to give wobble credit to imaginary time epochs. wobbles now...good. How they got here....you have no clue.

Oh! no, no, no....you misunderstand. eclipsenow is describing the Milankovitch Cycles which I also previously mentioned. Here is what is happening.

They are named after Miltuin Milankovitch who discovered this phenomenon a little less than 100 years ago. It deals with variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and procession of the Earth's orbit. He was first to suggest that these variations could affect climate and specifically the cause of ice ages. Since the mid 19th century it was already known that there had been multiple ice ages, not just one. However, at that time there was no way to date them. But Miltuin demonstrated the length of these cycles and showed where total solar irradiance (TSI) falling on the earth would vary favoring an ice age or a warm period.

Every sixth grader knows that the earth's orbit is an ellipse. What Miltuin discovered is that this ellipse varies. This is called eccentricity.

Left is a circular orbit while the right image shows 0.5 eccentricity. The full period for this to occur is 413,000 years.

The second component is the axial tilt (obliquity).

This variation takes 41,000 years.

The third variation is axial precession and takes 26,000 years. What happens is that approximately every 100,000 years, those three variations combine in such a way that there is significantly less TSI which is favorable for an ice age.

Technically we are still in an ice age, what what we are experiencing is an "interglacial". The last glacial maximum ended about 10,000 years ago.

Above is Vostok ice core date showing the past 400,000 years. Notice that the CO2 graph (blue) shows that the highest level over that period rarely and barely exceeded 280 ppm. The reason we need to be concerned about global warming is that the CO2 level has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution from 280 ppm to 390 ppm. That is an incredibly rapid increase and quite significant. Paleoclimate data from numerous sources suggest that a doubling of CO2 would cause a global average temperature rise on the order of approximately 3.5 deg. C. The current rate of increase will achieve that level by the end of this century.

I hope that clears your misunderstanding of Milankovitc Cycles and how they affect climate. Here's a link which does a much better job of explain this than I.

NOAA Paleoclimatology Program - Orbital Variations and Milankovitch Theory

 

[dad]

By studying past climate through proxy data Climatologists are able to understand what the major factors affecting climate are. Paleoclimatology is a really interesting field. The main trigger for the past 4 glacial cycles are attributed to Milankovitch Cycles. Here's data on orbital variations going back 5,000,000 years.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/insolation/
Berger & Loutre 1991

Check it out.

OK, done. A bunch of numbers...which need to stand for something, no? What they mean is what you should be talking about. The basis for paleo climate belief. So, get to it.

 

[dad]

Is Jesus a beating animal with 7 horns or 7 eyes and a sword hanging out of his mouth? How do we know when the bible is symbolic, and when is it literal?

Answer: it depends on your hermeneutics.

Animals represent things spiritual. Why do you think lambs were created?? Eyes and horns in the bible have meaning. So does sword. The pagan section is not a place to delve into that.

If I were to delve into something that some denominations professing Christ are into these days, it might be homosexual clergy. If anyone were so biblically dead of understanding to accept something like that, they would be in no position to try to grasp what the sword of the Lord was. Just sayin....

 

[dad]

Oh! no, no, no....you misunderstand.

That's what you think

eclipsenow is describing the Milankovitch Cycles which I also previously mentioned. Here is what is happening.

They are named after Miltuin Milankovitch who discovered this phenomenon a little less than 100 years ago. It deals with variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and procession of the Earth's orbit.

Rubbish. You can safely trash that whole ball of wax. How many actual cycles were observed!!!!? That is fantasy.

He was first to suggest that these variations could affect climate and specifically the cause of ice ages. Since the mid 19th century it was already known that there had been multiple ice ages, not just one.

Blather. Proof?

However, at that time there was no way to date them.

No way now either. So?

But Miltuin demonstrated the length of these cycles and showed where total solar irradiance (TSI) falling on the earth would vary favoring an ice age or a warm period.

All within fantasy lands of same state past based gobbledygook. No reality to it.

Every sixth grader knows that the earth's orbit is an ellipse. What Miltuin discovered is that this ellipse varies. This is called eccentricity.

How long has it varied? Proof?

Left is a circular orbit while the right image shows 0.5 eccentricity. The full period for this to occur is 413,000 years.

Utter drivel. Sorry. That is a woulda coulda shoulda scenario based on some unproven state past.

The second component is the axial tilt (obliquity).


This variation takes 41,000 years.

Basis? Go ahead try and show us. Lurkers get ready for a laugh.

The third variation is axial precession and takes 26,000 years. What happens is that approximately every 100,000 years, those three variations combine in such a way that there is significantly less TSI which is favorable for an ice age.

Basis?

Technically we are still in an ice age, what what we are experiencing is an "interglacial". The last glacial maximum ended about 10,000 years ago.

Nope. Cut the story telling. Every winter is an ice age. What cause the real big one science doesn't know. That is where you stand.

Above is Vostok ice core date showing the past 400,000 years.

No. It shows depth. Try again.

Notice that the CO2 graph (blue) shows that the highest level over that period rarely and barely exceeded 280 ppm. The reason we need to be concerned about global warming is that the CO2 level has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution from 280 ppm to 390 ppm.

No. We can relax actually. If the ice was rapidly formed, the carbon deep in the ice means something different than your chicken little fears.

That is an incredibly rapid increase and quite significant.

Recent levels that contrast with post flood levels may have significance. But nothing to do with fantasy time fear graphing!!

Paleoclimate data from numerous sources suggest that a doubling of CO2 would cause a global average temperature rise on the order of approximately 3.5 deg. C. The current rate of increase will achieve that level by the end of this century.

Nonsense. There was no paleo anything...ever. That is a fraud. You may not use deep ice and etc as some part of your silly eco fear graph fetish.

I hope that clears your misunderstanding of Milankovitc Cycles and how they affect climate. Here's a link which does a much better job of explain this than I.

I had none, I knew it was a total crock. Hopefully you start to see why.

 

[eclipsenow]

Animals represent things spiritual. Why do you think lambs were created?? Eyes and horns in the bible have meaning. So does sword. The pagan section is not a place to delve into that.

If I were to delve into something that some denominations professing Christ are into these days, it might be homosexual clergy. If anyone were so biblically dead of understanding to accept something like that, they would be in no position to try to grasp what the sword of the Lord was. Just sayin....

Are you implying I belong to a congregation that accepts homosexual clergy? Are you attacking my character, and the character of my church, without actually answering the core of what I was saying?

Should I report this? Or are you going to start to play the ball, and not the man? Can you just grow up a bit?

 

[eclipsenow]

That's what you think
Rubbish. You can safely trash that whole ball of wax. How many actual cycles were observed!!!!? That is fantasy.

Blather. Proof?
No way now either. So?
All within fantasy lands of same state past based gobbledygook. No reality to it.
How long has it varied? Proof?


Utter drivel. Sorry. That is a woulda coulda shoulda scenario based on some unproven state past.
Basis? Go ahead try and show us. Lurkers get ready for a laugh.
Basis?
Nope. Cut the story telling. Every winter is an ice age. What cause the real big one science doesn't know. That is where you stand.

No. It shows depth. Try again.
No. We can relax actually. If the ice was rapidly formed, the carbon deep in the ice means something different than your chicken little fears.
Recent levels that contrast with post flood levels may have significance. But nothing to do with fantasy time fear graphing!!
Nonsense. There was no paleo anything...ever. That is a fraud. You may not use deep ice and etc as some part of your silly eco fear graph fetish.
I had none, I knew it was a total crock. Hopefully you start to see why.

Wow, what a stunning rebuke of the science, so full of peer-reviewed arguments and data and logic. NOT!

All you have submitted is contradiction. It's like the Monty Python argument sketch.

You're wasting our time.

 

[RickG]

OK, done. A bunch of numbers...which need to stand for something, no? What they mean is what you should be talking about. The basis for paleo climate belief. So, get to it.

Glad you asked, they are data sets. Open the file titled "readme_insolation.txt". This file contains what each of the data files are and where the data comes from. You see, one of the great things about climate science as opposed to many other sciences, is that much of the accumulated data by scientists is freely available for anyone so they may either verify or falsify what is claimed about the data.

BTW, the data is no belief, it is actual measured data.

 

[Exial]

People often talk about globing warming using terms like "saving the planet".

Lets be honest, the planet is going to be fine. The coming and going of the human species potentially due to an inhospitable enviroment would be like a dog shaking off a bad case of fleas. In the past the earth has had far more dramatic climate changes from asteroids, shifts in continents and ice ages. It will still be here long after the human race has become extinct.

In truth, we are saving ourselves. Those who deny climate change put future generations at risk. The consensus among scientists seems to be that humans activity through the release of green houses gases is most likely causing or at least contributing to the current stage of global warming. The debate is generally confined to the layman as is the case with many scientific issues.

But even if we are not able to arrive prove for certain we that we are warming the planet with our activity we should act as if are for the simple reason the Earth is our only chance to run this experiment. If we are wrong about global warming and we are not warming at a significant rate, people lose money. If we continue to ignore calls to slow the release of greenhouse gases then the consequences could be far worse than we realise.

 

[dad]

Glad you asked, they are data sets. Open the file titled "readme_insolation.txt". This file contains what each of the data files are and where the data comes from. You see, one of the great things about climate science as opposed to many other sciences, is that much of the accumulated data by scientists is freely available for anyone so they may either verify or falsify what is claimed about the data.

BTW, the data is no belief, it is actual measured data.

I think we all had some inkling the numbers were data but let me ask the relevant question here....how far back in time do they supposedly represent, and based exactly on what facts? In other words, we don't want someone playing stick a number on every foot of a mile long ice core, pretending that it has some meaning, or some such! I don't dazzle easy, so smoke and mirrors and a meaningless splattering of number confetti really cannot help your attempted case here.

 

[dad]

Are you implying I belong to a congregation that accepts homosexual clergy?

Don't try and make this personal, try to stick to ideas. For example the idea that some denominations do engage directly in unbiblical things, which neuters any opinion they might have on some watering down of sacred scripture creation content, etc. So, if some one tosses out the fact that many different takes exist on basic bible stuff, I will point out...consider the source. This you or others may or may not like. It is what it is.

Are you attacking my character, and the character of my church, without actually answering the core of what I was saying?

? I am trying to consider what your position is here, and where you are coming from. Perhaps you could focus on presenting some cohesive position on some particular topic, that you can defend. I don't care or know what your church or character are.

 

[dad]

People often talk about globing warming using terms like "saving the planet".

Lets be honest, the planet is going to be fine. The coming and going of the human species potentially due to an inhospitable enviroment would be like a dog shaking off a bad case of fleas. In the past the earth has had far more dramatic climate changes from asteroids, shifts in continents and ice ages. It will still be here long after the human race has become extinct.

In truth, we are saving ourselves. Those who deny climate change put future generations at risk. The consensus among scientists seems to be that humans activity through the release of green houses gases is most likely causing or at least contributing to the current stage of global warming. The debate is generally confined to the layman as is the case with many scientific issues.

But even if we are not able to arrive prove for certain we that we are warming the planet with our activity we should act as if are for the simple reason the Earth is our only chance to run this experiment. If we are wrong about global warming and we are not warming at a significant rate, people lose money. If we continue to ignore calls to slow the release of greenhouse gases then the consequences could be far worse than we realise.

In the Iraq war, oilfields went ablaze. In Hiroshima, cities went ablaze. The US China and Russia, etc have nuclear weapons that could impact populations more than some other things. On the long list of things possible to do, such as don't litter, and haul groceries home some other way than bags...etc etc...all are welcome to do what they can. Just don't get preachy. Looking at the list, I start to think that maybe how much methane a cow toots should cause less fear than some would agitate for.

 

[eclipsenow]

Don't try and make this personal, try to stick to ideas. For example the idea that some denominations do engage directly in unbiblical things, which neuters any opinion they might have on some watering down of sacred scripture creation content, etc. So, if some one tosses out the fact that many different takes exist on basic bible stuff, I will point out...consider the source. This you or others may or may not like. It is what it is..

I'm the one that asked you to interpret Jesus having 7 horns and 7 eyes, remember? And your reply was something vague about animals representing spiritual realities and then going on about homosexual ordination. None of which answers the question: how do you tell which is biblically literal and biblically literary? What is real, and what is metaphor?

Answer: it depends on your hermeneutics. And if you're just going to try and tarnish 'hermeneutics' with homosexuality, you may as well just throw your bible in the fire for all the good it is going to do for you.

 

[eclipsenow]

In the Iraq war, oilfields went ablaze. In Hiroshima, cities went ablaze. The US China and Russia, etc have nuclear weapons that could impact populations more than some other things. On the long list of things possible to do, such as don't litter, and haul groceries home some other way than bags...etc etc...all are welcome to do what they can. Just don't get preachy. Looking at the list, I start to think that maybe how much methane a cow toots should cause less fear than some would agitate for.

But what you ignore is how all these factors intersect. On a planet crowded by 7 billion people suffering fresh water shortages, shrinking forests and farmlands and fertiliser reserves, and rapidly approaching peak conventional oil which might force some nations to run Coal-to-liquids programs which would be even WORSE for the climate; when one thing goes bad the flow on effects can be disastrous!

There are whole nations squabbling over water supplies now. Just add some serious climate related rainfall changes, and you could have international tensions sky-rocketing. Then add nukes. The perfect storm.

Don't get preachy? The Christian climatologists I know haven't even started yet!

 

[RickG]

That's what you think
Rubbish. You can safely trash that whole ball of wax. How many actual cycles were observed!!!!? That is fantasy.

Blather. Proof?
No way now either. So?
All within fantasy lands of same state past based gobbledygook. No reality to it.
How long has it varied? Proof?


Utter drivel. Sorry. That is a woulda coulda shoulda scenario based on some unproven state past.
Basis? Go ahead try and show us. Lurkers get ready for a laugh.
Basis?
Nope. Cut the story telling. Every winter is an ice age. What cause the real big one science doesn't know. That is where you stand.

No. It shows depth. Try again.
No. We can relax actually. If the ice was rapidly formed, the carbon deep in the ice means something different than your chicken little fears.
Recent levels that contrast with post flood levels may have significance. But nothing to do with fantasy time fear graphing!!
Nonsense. There was no paleo anything...ever. That is a fraud. You may not use deep ice and etc as some part of your silly eco fear graph fetish.
I had none, I knew it was a total crock. Hopefully you start to see why.

Paleoclimatology is the study of past climates. It utilizes a numerous proxy methods that have been preserved in rocks, ocean and lake sediments, ice cores, shells, tree rings, corals, and all types of micro fossils. Those proxy markers not only contain the unique signatures of climate but also the make up of the earths atmosphere. Many abrupt climatic changes in the past also coincide the mass extinctions. I first became interested in paleoclimatology in the 1970s while studying Earth Science in graduate school at the University of Memphis. When I first begin study there my main interest was plate tectonics, but the study of past climates begin to grab my interests as could also see a relationship with continental glaciations in relation to continental positions due to plate tectonics. Before I realized it, most of my study and research was focused on paleoclimates culminating with my Masters’ Thesis on the causes of continental glaciation throughout geologic history. At the time, paleoclimatology was a fledging field and there were few opportunities outside academia. Ultimately, I found employment as a chemist where I spent most of my working career. With the realization of anthropogenic global warming, I begin taking an interest once again in climatology. What I found out was that the field and resources had grown enormously, especially over the past 30 years. I don’t work in the field, but I am well versed in the field, its methods, and the validation of those methods. I am only presenting this personal information to you (dad) about my background to quantify my utter disgust with your behavior toward my posts, which have been honest, informative and well intended. The study of paleoclimatology is not a fraud.