Coldest temp anomaly in the WORLD...here

[recapped]

CO2 as seen by Dr Patrick Moore:

Over the past 150 million years, carbon dioxide had been drawn down steadily (by plants) from about 3,000 parts per million to about 280 parts per million before the Industrial Revolution. If this trend continued, the carbon dioxide level would have become too low to support life on Earth. Human fossil fuel use and clearing land for crops have boosted carbon dioxide from its lowest level in the history of the Earth back to 400 parts per million today.

At 400 parts per million, all our food crops, forests, and natural ecosystems are still on a starvation diet for carbon dioxide. The optimum level of carbon dioxide for plant growth, given enough water and nutrients, is about 1,500 parts per million, nearly four times higher than today. Greenhouse growers inject carbon-dioxide to increase yields. Farms and forests will produce more if carbon-dioxide keeps rising.

We have no proof increased carbon dioxide is responsible for the earth’s slight warming over the past 300 years. There has been no significant warming for 18 years while we have emitted 25 per cent of all the carbon dioxide ever emitted. Carbon dioxide is vital for life on Earth and plants would like more of it. Which should we emphasize to our children?

<a href="https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/why-i-am-a-climate-change-skeptic">Complete article here</a>

[recapped]

Thought I knew how to hot link, guess not

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/why-i-am-a-climate-change-skeptic

[Klause]

Liberal logic:


1. The world might go back into an ice age if we didn't have human interference.

2. Human interference counter acts global cooling.

3. Let's stop this right now and plunge the planet into an ice age...

4. Let's start crying about all the people dying because a cold planet can't grow food or have enough energy to support 10 billion humans and all the Flora and fauna we have.

[Sheepwheat]

Liberal logic:


1. The world might go back into an ice age if we didn't have human interference.

2. Human interference counter acts global cooling.

3. Let's stop this right now and plunge the planet into an ice age...

4. Let's start crying about all the people dying because a cold planet can't grow food or have enough energy to support 10 billion humans and all the Flora and fauna we have.

Thing is, liberals want the world pop to be lower, so who knows what means they hope to get us there by! Lol

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Liberal logic:


1. The world might go back into an ice age if we didn't have human interference.

2. Human interference counter acts global cooling.

3. Let's stop this right now and plunge the planet into an ice age...

4. Let's start crying about all the people dying because a cold planet can't grow food or have enough energy to support 10 billion humans and all the Flora and fauna we have.

And the really unsurprising thing is that Chuck can't find a cut and paste that contradicts the contradiction he posted early and we both pointed out. Oh the webs we weave when at first we practice to deceive.

[grassfarmer]

Indian measurements.

Scotsman David Douglas came across it in 1827 so not unknown in 1843.

[Sheepwheat]

Scotsman David Douglas came across it in 1827 so not unknown in 1843.

My point is, who was tracking it? What was the extent in 1680?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Scotsman David Douglas came across it in 1827 so not unknown in 1843.

No doubt we have recorded history that far back, and geological history almost as far back as we want to go. Not sure why anyone would dispute that. I am reassured everytime we go to the icefields and see the signs indicating that they are still retreating at the same pace.

Please ignore the site this came from, as I know you would dismiss it, but if you follow the links and sources within, there is lots of information about Glacier advance and retreat during and since the little ice age. Brian Fagan is very much in the AGW camp, and he is referenced several times in this blog.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/glacial-advance-during-the-little-ice-age/

From the end of the blog post:

But even if they were not, it is clear that much of the 20thC rise in sea levels that we have seen is no more than a return to the conditions that existed 1000 years ago, before glaciers worldwide began to expand.

We do know that much of the glacial retreat since the 19thC actually took place before the middle of the 20thC, as the photo at the top illustrates.



There is no written law of nature that says glaciers should be the size they were in Victorian times. Indeed, there is no reason why they should not return to their state 4000 years ago.

As HH Lamb writes in “Climate, History and The Modern World” (pp 146).

“Most – and perhaps all – of the glaciers present today in the United States Rockies south of the Canadian border are believed to have formed since 1500 BC.”

[Sheepwheat]

A simple google search of growing glaciers, is interesting.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

My point is, who was tracking it? What was the extent in 1680?

In 1680, they would have been still expanding due to the little ice age, probably reached their maximum at around 1843 as the little ice age ended, so that is a convenient benchmark if you have an agenda. We can learn so much from history if we choose to. Of course it is much more convenient to just state that climate was stable and perfect until humans started releasing CO2. As Micheal Mann has proven with his hockey stick, indicating that the little ice age never existed. Tell that to all of the famine victims resulting from the cold climate