As long as I have a fire I guess

[chuckChuck]

Wilton, glad to see that you agree with my post about the realities of carbon cycle and NOAA's assessment of the CO2 levels which are comparable to the pliocene.

If I was the only on on Agrisilly who is confrontational then you might have a point about my tone. But it's very clear that the tone of my opponents is no better and is often worse. But you never mention anyone else when it comes to tone. Why is that?

What's very telling is that no one comes up with any science or evidence from credible scientific sources to counter my posts.

I see A5 wrongly thinks that NOAA somehow sees the pilocene as an optimum time for humans. Perhaps A5 would fit well into the pliocene, but sea level range estimates during the pliocene would have many of the worlds major coastal cities under water.

So does that sound like an optimum time for humans on the planet? Hardly.

Lets see if A5 can make a case that humans would better off in the pliocene period. LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Wilton, glad to see that you agree with my post about the realities of carbon cycle and NOAA's assessment of the CO2 levels which are comparable to the pliocene.

If I was the only on on Agrisilly who is confrontational then you might have a point about my tone. But it's very clear that the tone of my opponents is no better and is often worse. But you never mention anyone else when it comes to tone. Why is that?

What's very telling is that no one comes up with any science or evidence from credible scientific sources to counter my posts.

I see A5 wrongly thinks that NOAA somehow sees the pilocene as an optimum time for humans. Perhaps A5 would fit well into the pliocene, but sea level range estimates during the pliocene would have many of the worlds major coastal cities under water.

So does that sound like an optimum time for humans on the planet? Hardly.

Lets see if A5 can make a case that humans would better off in the pliocene period. LOL

If you disagree with the term climatic optimum, perhaps you should take it up with the poster who originally posted that phrase. Oh wait, that was you. And now you are arguing against yourself, that it wasn't optimum? I ask again, do you ever read your own cut and pastes, let alone make any attempt to comprehend what they say?

Do you know why scientists use the term optimum to refer to climates which resulted in massive explosions in both quantity and diversity of life?

Do you think that for every acre lost to rising sea levels, many multiples of previously uninhabitable inland acres will become habitable due to warmer temperatures and changing precipitation patterns?

Perhaps you should tell the scientists that they are wrong.

And hillariously enough, you aren't the only one trying to rewrite history. Modern politically motivated climate scientist( Not to be confused with actual scientists with integrity who use the scientific method) have been debating how to change the term and definition of these inconveniently optimum periods in earths history.

[Guest]

Helped daughter and husband at cabin
Some of these woke idiot imbecile sheeple that want NG unhooked need to try this to keep warm !

[foragefarmer]

[ATTACH]11247[/ATTACH][ATTACH]11248[/ATTACH]
Helped daughter and husband at cabin
Some of these woke idiot imbecile sheeple that want NG unhooked need to try this to keep warm !

Don't see any splitters, manual or mechanical in the photos.

Are these totally two different locations and you're trying to B.S. us on how hard you worked today?

Is it pine, or ash? Hard to tell from photos.

[biglentil]

THE MAN WHO INVENTED CLIMATE CHANGE AND INFLUENCED SCHWAB’S GREAT RESET AGENDA

https://expose-news.com/2022/10/23/the-man-who-invented-climate-change-and-influenced-schwabs-great-reset-agenda/

[chuckChuck]

According to NOAA's article during the pliocene the global "temperatures then averaged 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times"! Wouldn't that be nice!

That is far beyond what will cause severe changes to the planet and our climate.

Just because you live in a cold continental climate and it would be "nice" to have a more temperate winter do you really think that the possibility of having the dry desert south west climate move into Canadian prairies would be good for agriculture?

I know many of you dream of going to Mesa for the winter, but I didn't realize many of you want Mesa's climate to move to central Alberta! LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

According to NOAA's article during the pliocene the global "temperatures then averaged 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times"! Wouldn't that be nice!

That is far beyond what will cause severe changes to the planet and our climate.

Just because you live in a cold continental climate and it would be "nice" to have a more temperate winter do you really think that the possibility of having the dry desert south west climate move into Canadian prairies would be good for agriculture?

I know many of you dream of going to Mesa for the winter, but I didn't realize many of you want Mesa's climate to move to central Alberta! LOL

I ask again. Do you know what the word optimum means?

[chuckChuck]

Yes.

But do tell us your version again.

Then tell us why you think humans would be better off living on a planet that is on average 7 degrees F warmer than preindustrial time?

Who do you think will pay for all the coastal cities that will be flooded? Because during the pliocene optimum, the ice caps were nearly all melted.

I can't wait to hear your version of how great it will be? LOL

[cropgrower]

banks in london are giving 30 year morgages no problem , dont think they would be doing that if the buildings would soon be full of water CC ? just a scam to tax people more and the ones that cant think for themselves fall for it. been looking and it looks like even 40 year morgages are available , are the banks going to have a whole lot of underwater property CC ? you better go and tell them its a very bad idea

[AlbertaFarmer5]

You have clearly indicated that you haven't a clue what optimum means.
Just because humans are short sighted enough to build infrastructure on land that has been under the ocean in the past and likely will be in the future, that poor choice is unrelated to the productive capacity of the earth as a whole.
What fraction of Earth's agricultural land is at sea level? What percent of our energy resources would be at risk, and couldn't be recovered if under water(hint, have you heard of a technology called offshore drilling?, Yes you have because you posted how upset you are that Sask has such lax regulations about their offshore drilling industry...).
Are you aware that life also thrives in the oceans.
Optimum isn't about cherry picking one small sliver of Earth's surface, it is the sum total of all ecosystems.

And you still haven't answered why scientists refer to such periods where life flourished has been climactic optimums. According to your logic, the ice ages which significantly shrunk The habitable areas and saw significant loss of quantity and diversity of life, should be renamed as the optimums?

Perhaps you should tell the experts they are wrong.