Carbon dioxide levels highest for 800,000 years.

[missing transmission]

According to data gathered at the Mauna Loa Observatory while concentrations of carbon dioxide are now in their seasonal decline from their May peak (402 parts per million), the daily averages have stayed consistently above 400 ppm..

Pre industrial levels were about 280 ppm



The increase in this and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has warmed Earth’s average temperature by 1.6°F since the beginning of the 20th century.

"Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas emitted through human activities. In 2012, CO2 accounted for about 82% of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from human activities. Carbon dioxide is naturally present in the atmosphere as part of the Earth's carbon cycle (the natural circulation of carbon among the atmosphere, oceans, soil, plants, and animals). Human activities are altering the carbon cycleâ€"both by adding more CO2 to the atmosphere and by influencing the ability of natural sinks, like forests, to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. While CO2 emissions come from a variety of natural sources, human-related emissions are responsible for the increase that has occurred in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution." Source

Other Sources
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/co2-milestone-400-ppm-climate-17692

[albrecht]

According to data gathered at the Mauna Loa Observatory while concentrations of carbon dioxide are now in their seasonal decline from their May peak (402 parts per million), the daily averages have stayed consistently above 400 ppm..

Pre industrial levels were about 280 ppm



The increase in this and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has warmed Earth’s average temperature by 1.6°F since the beginning of the 20th century.

"Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas emitted through human activities. In 2012, CO2 accounted for about 82% of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from human activities. Carbon dioxide is naturally present in the atmosphere as part of the Earth's carbon cycle (the natural circulation of carbon among the atmosphere, oceans, soil, plants, and animals). Human activities are altering the carbon cycleâ€"both by adding more CO2 to the atmosphere and by influencing the ability of natural sinks, like forests, to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. While CO2 emissions come from a variety of natural sources, human-related emissions are responsible for the increase that has occurred in the atmosphere since the industrial revolution." Source

Other Sources
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/co2-milestone-400-ppm-climate-17692

I'm no CO2 scientist but it would seem to me that a place right next to so many active volcanoes would not be a place to measure global CO2. It would be like me taking a CO and CO2 measurement near the exhaust of my running, old 2-cycle lawnmower and saying "we've seen an amazing spike in CO and CO2 levels in the USA. Greatest in 300 years!"

[The General]

It's much less alarming when viewed in context...

[attachimg=1]

[PB the Deplorable]

Carbon Dioxide is plant food.  It isn't the same as Carbon Monoxide, which is a poison.

Part of the game for these 'political' scientists is to use scare tactics, and a certain number of people are going to confuse Carbon Dioxide with Carbon Monoxide and these frauds will get their desired effect.

And don't forget - water vapor is easily the most prevalent 'greenhouse gas'.  Scary and dangerous water vapor. 


This is all a bunch of crap designed to raise taxes, to grab for more governmental control over us, and to de-industrialize the West.  It dovetails nicely with Obama taking his wrecking ball to our county.

[albrecht]

Carbon Dioxide is plant food.  It isn't the same as Carbon Monoxide, which is a poison.

Part of the game for these 'political' scientists is to use scare tactics, and a certain number of people are going to confuse Carbon Dioxide with Carbon Monoxide and these frauds will get their desired effect.

And don't forget - water vapor is easily the most prevalent 'greenhouse gas'.  Scary and dangerous water vapor. 


This is all a bunch of crap designed to raise taxes, to grab for more governmental control over us, and to de-industrialize the West.  It dovetails nicely with Obama taking his wrecking ball to our county.

Oh, I realize that. I'm hoping these CO2 levels, if true, will really help my tomatoes! Was only using the CO and CO2 as an example from my dirty lawnmower to wonder why they would put a measuring device next to a volcano that is still active and claim results for the world. We need to ban dihydrogen-monoxide as it kills many, many people every year- even small children!! Maybe we can set up a trading scheme? Oh, yeah, rich folks are already buying up aquifers and water rights.

[wr250]

According to data gathered at the Mauna Loa Observatory while concentrations of carbon dioxide are now in their seasonal decline from their May peak (402 parts per million), the daily averages have stayed consistently above 400 ppm..

Pre industrial levels were about 280 ppm

and  mauna loa is a volcano. even inactive volcanoes emit co2. some more than others. given the close proximity of erupting volcanoes to mauna loa, its a safe bet it is emitting co2. could this skew the results? 

[NowhereInTime]

This thread makes me sad.  This "fuck it all" attitude toward our home planet is disgraceful.

[PB the Deplorable]

This thread makes me sad...

What a wonderful Utopia we would have if only everyone would just go along with all the lies the Democrats put out there.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

This thread makes me sad.  This "fuck it all" attitude toward our home planet is disgraceful.

The General has a point.  There's no records of humans back in the Paleozoic Era bitching about CO2 levels that were far higher than now.  And just remember, back then there was FAR less forest acreage than now.  Drink up, Shriners!  Nothing to worry about!

[PB the Deplorable]

This thread makes me sad.  This "fuck it all" attitude toward our home planet is disgraceful.

It's a strange thing.  Little is mentioned or done about the pollution of our groundwater, the emptying of our aquifers, habitat destruction, islands of plastic in the oceans, coral reef destruction, overfishing, and a zillion other things.  Things everyone agrees are real and are big problems.

Yet phony environmental alarmism is where all the effort goes.  Despite the ongoing exposure of the lies, the debunking of the 'evidence'.  FFS the fact that Al Gore is the spokesman for this ought to tell a person something.


Are we supposed to believe it's a coincidence that of all the environmental issues out there, the one they focus on while ignoring the others is the one whose answer is more taxes, more government control, and the long time goal of anti-capitalist deindustrialization?

[onan]

It's a strange thing.  Little is mentioned or done about the pollution of our groundwater, the emptying of our aquifers, habitat destruction, islands of plastic in the oceans, coral reef destruction, overfishing, and a zillion other things.  Things everyone agrees are real and are big problems.

Yet phony environmental alarmism is where all the effort goes.  Despite the ongoing exposure of the lies, the debunking of the 'evidence'.  FFS the fact that Al Gore is the spokesman for this ought to tell a person something.


Are we supposed to believe it's a coincidence that of all the environmental issues, this is the one whose answer is more taxes, more government control, and the long time goal of anti-capitalist deindustrialization - and it also just happens to be the one they focus on while ignoring the others?  Really?

I got my start hating corporations with the learning of strip mining in Colstrip, Montana. Watching aquifers be destroyed. Watching companies come in and name themselves Montco, while having no history with Montana. I watched them say they wanted to reclaim the land, back to its natural state and then in memos state reclamation meant a blade of grass per acre. I watched them claim natural streams as their gift to Montana. And now fracking is as natural as breast feeding.

I learned of big money in oil creating the "Gillette Syndrome" in Wyoming. I still am waiting for Exxon to clean up the Valdez oil spill.

As far as CO2 in the Cambrian period... the chart shows a significant fundamental misunderstanding of the dangers of green house gases. During the Cambrian period, there was mostly marine life. But at some point the high CO2 levels helped to bring in the first large forests, which flourished and over thousands of years those trees, died, decayed and formed our coal beds and in the northern climes those forests turned into large sinks/reservoirs of methane. The cold has kept that methane locked away but with rising temps that methane can escape into the atmosphere and it makes CO2 a distant contender in the worst of green house gases. And there is no way to capture that methane. That thawing mass covers million of square miles. (yes I condensed the story significantly)

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

Yet phony environmental alarmism is where all the effort goes.  Despitet the ongoing exposure of the lies, the debunking of the 'evidence'.  FFS the fact that Al Gore is the spokesman for this ought to tell a person something.

Believe me, I'm not a fan of Al Gore, but it seems that climate change denial is based, to a great extent, on reflexive opposition to any position he advocates.  His beliefs aren't inherently invalid just because a person happens to despise him, which in itself is a strange reason for opposing anything.  Why does climate change have to be a bitterly partisan issue, anyway?  If it's a threat that we can take measures to alleviate, what"s there to lose by putting aside differences and investigating it further without turning it into tawdry political theater?  That would seem to be the sensible and reasonable thing to do.

[PB the Deplorable]

...  Why does climate change have to be a bitterly partisan issue, anyway?  If it's a threat that we can take measures to alleviate, what"s there to lose by putting aside differences and investigating it further without turning it into tawdry political theater?  That would seem to be the sensible and reasonable thing to do.

Indeed.  We can start with the truth - not exaggerating, not fear mongering, not insisting it's all 'settled science', not amplifying data points that support 'man-made' global warming, and tossing out the ones that don't, and all the rest.


It's been a bit of a bumpy ride.  First it was Global Cooling, then Global Warming, then Climate Change.  Now it's Climate Disruption.  Based on the data, it wouldn't surprise me to find it's back to Global Cooling.

And every step of the way, man was responsible.  And every step of the way, the science was settled.  So you'll have to forgive a bit of skepticism.

[PB the Deplorable]

I got my start hating corporations with the learning of strip mining in Colstrip, Montana. Watching aquifers be destroyed. Watching companies come in and name themselves Montco, while having no history with Montana. I watched them say they wanted to reclaim the land, back to its natural state and then in memos state reclamation meant a blade of grass per acre. I watched them claim natural streams as their gift to Montana. And now fracking is as natural as breast feeding...

I'm not for any of that either.  I grew up going on family vacations to my grandparents home in the Redwood Country of coastal Northern California.  Driving past mountain after mountain logged completely clear.  And thinking this is just what we see from the road.  Disgusting.

I also grew up watching politicians lying to us, raising taxes ever higher, growing government and stealing more and more of our freedoms.  And thinking what we learn about them is mostly limited to what's reported in the news. 

This global warming crap has all the tell-tale signs of another Big Lie.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

This global warming crap has all the tell-tale signs of another Big Lie.

Stephen Hawking believes; you don't.  Which side do I take?  Decisions...decisions....

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

Little is mentioned or done about the pollution of our groundwater, the emptying of our aquifers, habitat destruction, islands of plastic in the oceans, coral reef destruction, overfishing, and a zillion other things.  Things everyone agrees are real and are big problems.

Dude...can I call you dude?  Dude, it's like we are sharing a mind or something.  The same exact thoughts went through my mind when MV banned me during the Dark Times.

I was like, wtf dewd, don't you have anything better to do, like fixing plastic islands and halibut destruction and a zillion other things?  How about banning that shit? 

But you know MV.  If you aren't in his inner circle clique thingy, you're like dog food around here.

[PB the Deplorable]

Stephen Hawking believes; you don't.  Which side do I take?  Decisions...decisions....

Well, I don't know.  Is he a meteorologist?  A climatologist?  A Liberal?

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

Well, I don't know.  Is he a meteorologist?  A climatologist?  A Liberal?

Is he an anonymous Internet retard honking a political agenda?

Answer: no

[PB the Deplorable]

If they thought 'Climate Change' or whatever they are calling it this week was truly a problem, the Democrats would be acting much differently.

Oh they would still be harping endlessly about it for sure, but they would insist it was all the fault of the other party and at the same time do what they could to make it worse, and block any attempt to improve things.

Like, you know, education, homelessness, poverty, anything having to do with the economy, crime, health care, income inequality, racial divisiveness...

[PB the Deplorable]

Is he an anonymous Internet retard honking a political agenda?

Answer: no

When I hear Hawking claiming his colleagues and fellow grant recipients are correct on global warming, it sounds almost exactly like Warren Buffett begging Obama to increase our taxes.

[NowhereInTime]

When I hear Hawking claiming his colleagues and fellow grant recipients are correct on global warming, it sounds almost exactly like Warren Buffett begging Obama to increase our taxes.

Fascinating.  People who are demonstrably smarter than you, people of achievement, people of incredible gift and intellect and you presume to discard them and their opinions.
Where's your billions?  Where's your theory on Mutil Dimensional travel?  To what office have you been elected?
These people have all done something difficult and achieved, yet their opinions are invalid.
Instead we should follow the meek chirping of a cranky shut-in.

[Bart Ell]

Hawking has a speech writer.
All he does is sit in the chair and look pretty.

[wr250]

Fascinating.  People who are demonstrably smarter than you, people of achievement, people of incredible gift and intellect and you presume to discard them and their opinions.
Where's your billions?  Where's your theory on Mutil Dimensional travel?  To what office have you been elected?
These people have all done something difficult and achieved, yet their opinions are invalid.
Instead we should follow the meek chirping of a cranky shut-in.

i donated the billions back the the us govt. warren buffet should follow suit. the IRS will always accept more money as a donation, yet none of these people actually do it. instead they look for every possible loophole to save their money from the IRS, while whining about taxes being to low (looking at you 0bama). talk about hypocritical.

did hawking do something difficult? for you and me perhaps what he did would be difficult indeed. for him it may have been difficult, but he is gifted in that respect, certainly moreso than i. does that make him a climate scientist/meteorologist? no, it does not. my dad was a virologist for 30 years, he says man-made climate change is junk science. i believe he is right, however its not his field so his opinion is equal to hawkings.

as far as getting elected, all you need is the ability to lie and make people believe it. it seems thats all you need to hold office on many levels of gov't.

[Yorkshire pud]

What a wonderful Utopia we would have if only everyone would just go along with all the lies the Democrats put out there.

Yeah, okay... What about where there are no Democrats?

[PB the Deplorable]

Fascinating.  People who are demonstrably smarter than you, people of achievement, people of incredible gift and intellect and you presume to discard them and their opinions.
Where's your billions?  Where's your theory on Mutil Dimensional travel?  To what office have you been elected?
These people have all done something difficult and achieved, yet their opinions are invalid.
Instead we should follow the meek chirping of a cranky shut-in.

In my career I've encountered very smart very successful people who were brilliant in business or in their fields.  They are used to being the smartest people in the room. 

One thing I've noticed from more than a few of them is they automatically assume they know more about whatever subject is brought up than anyone else in the meeting.  And too often they don't.  I've had them want to argue with me about details in my field they have no knowledge of.  They can be social clods. Or wrong about any number of issues, but too full of themselves to notice.  I've seen some disastrous decisions made due to this.  Being smart doesn't mean being right.


So lets take the case of Stephen Hawking, and speculate a bit.  No doubt a very busy man.  Absorbed in his field - writing, thinking, learning, keeping up on the latest, managing his staff.  Like most successful people at his level, he probably spends much or most of his time in meetings.  I doubt he even has time to keep up on all the science from the various fields other than physics. 

There is no reason to assume he spends any time at all on 'Climate Change'.  Most likely he believes what his colleagues have to say about it, thinks anyone challenging it is some right-wing nut, and that's it.  He isn't doing the research, doesn't have any more insight than the rest of us do, and probably pays even less attention to the political component.

[PB the Deplorable]

Fascinating.  People who are demonstrably smarter than you, people of achievement, people of incredible gift and intellect and you presume to discard them and their opinions.

Where's your billions?...

Warren Buffett has most of his wealth hidden away in trusts and foundations that won't be taxed when he dies.

His reportable taxable income consists mainly of dividends and capital gains, which are taxed at a fixed lower rate, and government bonds, which are mostly not taxed at all.

When he's yapping about his 'secretary' paying a higher tax rate than he does, he doesn't mention why - his income is tax advantaged and hers is regular W-2 wage income.  This 'secretary' makes over $500,000 per year - not exactly what people are thinking of when they think of a 'secretary'.  So right there he's being dishonest with the term 'secretary', trying to conjure a false image of some hard working lady barely getting by and paying more tax then he does. 

His company, Berkshire Hathaway, seems to be constantly fighting the IRS over the tax treatment of something from one of it's subsidiaries - pretty strange behavior for someone always talking about the need for the rest of us to be taxed more.

But say income taxes go up - his won't.  He knows they aren't going to increase the cap gains rates or dividend rates.  His companies will still shuffle things around so they pay little if any corporate tax.  He'll still pay the minimum estate tax possible

He's gotten quite a bit from the Obama administration in exchange for his clamoring for more taxes.  The Goldman Sachs deal.  The Bank of America deal.  Warren Buffett, through owning shares of various companies, received more bailout money than any other person.  Perhaps he could start by giving that money back.


So no, his call for more taxes doesn't really impress me.

[NowhereInTime]

i donated the billions back the the us govt. warren buffet should follow suit. the IRS will always accept more money as a donation, yet none of these people actually do it. instead they look for every possible loophole to save their money from the IRS, while whining about taxes being to low (looking at you 0bama). talk about hypocritical.

did hawking do something difficult? for you and me perhaps what he did would be difficult indeed. for him it may have been difficult, but he is gifted in that respect, certainly moreso than i. does that make him a climate scientist/meteorologist? no, it does not. my dad was a virologist for 30 years, he says man-made climate change is junk science. i believe he is right, however its not his field so his opinion is equal to hawkings.

as far as getting elected, all you need is the ability to lie and make people believe it. it seems thats all you need to hold office on many levels of gov't.

Stephen Hawking was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics for Cambridge University (once held by Sir Isaac Newton) for 20 years.  Leaving aside his estimated 160 IQ (not the 280 stated in the Simpsons), he has 12 honorary degrees aside from his own doctorate and has written extensively about our Universe.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/

Point being, I'm sure your father was a great virologist; Hawking is a brilliant mathematician who could not only easily review climate data but can extrapolate conclusion from said data.  Doing so for the Universe makes meteorology merely an excercise in discipline.
Please do not even attempt to denigrate or disqualify his comprehension of climate change.  Or anything else, for that matter.

As to getting elected?  I've tried with mixed results.  It's not so easy.  You have to connect with people on an emotional level and persuade them that they should head to the polls and choose you to represent/lead them.  Not to mention persuading donors to support the campaign effort.  Not as easy as it seems.

[DigitalPigSnuggler]

So lets take the case of Stephen Hawking, and speculate a bit.  No doubt a very busy man.  Absorbed in his field - writing, thinking, learning, keeping up on the latest, managing his staff.  Like most successful people at his level, he probably spends much or most of his time in meetings.  I doubt he even has time to keep up on all the science from the various fields other than physics. 

There is no reason to assume he spends any time at all on 'Climate Change'.  Most likely he believes what his colleagues have to say about it, thinks anyone challenging it is some right-wing nut, and that's it.  He isn't doing the research, doesn't have any more insight than the rest of us do, and probably pays even less attention to the political component.

Incredible.  This pile of nested assumptions, not a single one of them reflecting the reality of Hawking's life right now, seems more plausible to you than the idea that he has researched the matter and believes climate change to be a concern?  Simply incredible.  No wonder you are a right-winger.

[NowhereInTime]

Warren Buffett has most of his wealth hidden away in trusts and foundations that won't be taxed when he dies.

His reportable taxable income consists mainly of dividends and capital gains, which are taxed at a fixed lower rate, and government bonds, which are mostly not taxed at all.

When he's yapping about his 'secretary' paying a higher tax rate than he does, he doesn't mention why - his income is tax advantaged and hers is regular W-2 wage income.  This 'secretary' makes over $500,000 per year - not exactly what people are thinking of when they think of a 'secretary'.  So right there he's being dishonest with the term 'secretary', trying to conjure a false image of some hard working lady barely getting by and paying more tax then he does. 

His company, Berkshire Hathaway, seems to be constantly fighting the IRS over the tax treatment of something from one of it's subsidiaries - pretty strange behavior for someone always talking about the need for the rest of us to be taxed more.

But say income taxes go up - his won't.  He knows they aren't going to increase the cap gains rates or dividend rates.  His companies will still shuffle things around so they pay little if any corporate tax.  He'll still pay the minimum estate tax possible

He's gotten quite a bit from the Obama administration in exchange for his clamoring for more taxes.  The Goldman Sachs deal.  The Bank of America deal.  Warren Buffett, through owning shares of various companies, received more bailout money than any other person.  Perhaps he could start by giving that money back.


So no, his call for more taxes doesn't really impress me.

Grover Norquist's call for more taxes wouldn't impress you.

He pays his secretary a great wage.  The point is as much about paying the people who work for you as it is about tax rates.  Why is that anethma to conservatives?

As to the rest, why shouldn't he play the game the same as everone else?  Is he supposed to "unilaterally disarm" and pay more than his competitors?  Absurd. 

You don't know the half about the Goldman Sachs deal.  Thank Hank Paulson for that one.

His call is valid; including his assertion about taxes on money made from money being too low.

[PB the Deplorable]

Incredible.  This pile of nested assumptions, not a single one of them reflecting the reality of Hawking's life right now, seems more plausible to you than the idea that he has researched the matter and believes climate change to be a concern?  Simply incredible.  No wonder you are a right-winger.

I'm just trying to figure out why a smart guy like Hawking would throw in with the people lying about climate change.

Let's say Global Warming is real, it's caused by people, and we truly only have a short period of time to reverse it.  The Democrats and the Left have been so dishonest, have been so cynical in trying to divide us, have 'cried wolf' on so many things, that people just don't trust you or believe you anymore. 


The results put out have been riddled with errors - always on the side of alarmism.  The 'scientists' have been caught discussing how to amplify data that supports them and how to suppress data that doesn't, on and on.  And the solution is clear:  More Taxes, yay. 

Golly, why would anyone be skeptical?