An ambitious effort to understand the Earth’s climate over the past 485 million years has revealed a history of wild shifts and far hotter temperatures than scientists previously realized — offering a reminder of how much change the planet has already endured and a warning about the unprecedented rate of warming caused by humans.
The timeline, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the most rigorous reconstruction of Earth’s past temperatures ever produced, the authors say. Created by combining more than 150,000 pieces of fossil evidence with state-of-the-art climate models, it shows the intimate link between carbon dioxide and global temperatures and reveals that the world was in a much warmer state for most of the history of complex animal life.
At its hottest, the study suggests, the Earth’s average temperature reached 96.8 degrees Fahrenheit (36 degrees Celsius) — far higher than the historic 58.96 F (14.98 C) the planet hit last year.
At no point in the nearly half-billion years that Judd and her colleagues analyzed did the Earth change as fast as it is changing now
They have no idea what the temperatures were on earth 1,000 years ago let alone 485 million. And they're using climate models, which means it's all based on nothing.
I must not have read the same article that you did.
Because the article that you're linking isn't "debunking" climate change.
You seem to think that because they acknowledge that the Earth has seen much higher temperatures (hundreds of millions years ago), that it means there's nothing harmful about the Earth growing hotter now.
Carbon dioxide is really that master dial,” Tierney said. “That’s an important message … in terms of understanding why emissions from fossil fuels are a problem today.”
“We know it to be the worst extinction in the Phanerozoic,” Tierney said. “By analogy, we should be worried about human warming because it’s so fast. We’re changing Earth’s temperature at a rate that exceeds anything we know about.”
The study also makes clear that the conditions humans are accustomed to are quite different from those that have dominated our planet’s history. For most of the Phanerozoic, the research suggests, average temperatures have exceeded 71.6 F (22 C), with little or no ice at the poles. Coldhouse climates — including our current one — prevailed just 13 percent of the time.
This is one of the more sobering revelations of the research, Judd said. Life on Earth has endured climates far hotter than the one people are now creating through planet-warming emissions. But humans evolved during the coldest epoch of the Phanerozoic, when global average temperatures were as low as 51.8 F (11 C).
Without rapid action to curb greenhouse gas emissions, scientists say, global temperatures could reach nearly 62.6 F (17 C) by the end of the century — a level not seen in the timeline since the Miocene epoch, more than 5 million years ago.
So, TL;DR (because I'm sure the majority of the people commenting here won't actually read the article):
1.The Earth has had huge shifts in temperature.
In those temperature shifts, Carbon dioxide was the cause of rapid heating of the planet.
Rapid heating of the planet caused huge mass extinctions.
Humans came in during one of the coolest ages of the planet.
Carbon dioxide is now causing the most rapid increase of temperatures of the planet, ever.
If humans don't figure out a way to curb the rise in carbon dioxide, we will be facing another mass extinction event, where we will most likely die off.
Now, let me make it abundantly clear that I'm not agreeing with what is being claimed in this article.
What I am saying is that you have grossly misunderstood what the article was saying.
People who believe in climate change have never claimed that the Earth has not seen hotter temperatures. I have no idea why you would think this is a big "Ah-ha! Gotcha!" moment, because it's not.
So, for the love of little baby Jesus, please, please, please, do not run around trying to redpill normies with this, because, without a doubt, they will laugh in your face and then believe you to be extraordinarily ignorant.
And that doesn't really help anyone here, does it?
The trouble is, the "most rapid increase of temperature of the planet, ever", is based on questionable temperature data (urban heat island effect, for example), and even if accurate, the natural fluctuations are greater than what is reported to be the trend. It's ludicrous to think it's possible to measure an average Earth temperature to tenths of degrees! The most important thing to realize is that a warmer Earth is ALWAYS better than a colder Earth, other than when it is so warm that there actually is significantly higher global sea levels. The fact that the rate of global sea level rise has not significantly increased during the past 50 years destroys the man-made global warming theory, and therefore, destroys the idea of man-made climate change.
I'm not arguing the validity of what the article is saying.
I stated that quite clearly in my original post.
Now, let me make it abundantly clear that I'm not agreeing with what is being claimed in this article- me
My point, which people seem to be making an effort to miss, is that the article is in no way debunking climate change.
I'm asking that people not start sending it out to their friends and families (or anyone else) thinking that it's some big "Gotcha!" moment, because it's not.
yes & no. They lamely try to defend climate change (maybe because they have to to get this published) but anyone who can read between the line can see how lame it is with the data they present. Could even be white hat trying to drop red pills that are painted blue on the outside
Yes and no, what? The OP was saying that this article was debunking climate change.
You're saying yourself that the article is defending the climate change argument. Even if you think it's a lame attempt, that's what they're doing. They're not in any way debunking it.
It's a pretty far stretch to say that this article, which is defending climate change (even if it's doing so lamely) is somehow a secret WH attempt to redpill people, like some kind of weird reverse psychology or it doing such a lackluster job that it somehow convinces people that climate change is a hoax.
I'm not sure why people feel the need to make these "nuh-uh!" type posts in response to me saying that the OP grossly misunderstood what the article was saying, and that trying to present this as it debunking anything about climate change will simply discredit you in the eyes of whoever it is that you're trying to redpill with it.
I mean, seriously. It's like people are addicted to shooting themselves in the foot, and making themselves a laughingstock while they do so.. And the entire Q community along with them.
And who would that be, other than people who were already skeptical of climate change theory to begin with? Do you think many normies fit that label?
My entire reason for posting was to try to prevent people from attempting to redpill normies with that article, thinking that it's debunking climate change. Because the vast majority of people who read it aren't going to "read between the lies" of the article.
If you want to send this to your Uncle Bob, who already doesn't believe Climate Change is real, so you can share a few giggles over the ineptitude of the people who wrote the article, then that's great. Send it to him. I'm sure he would enjoy it.
But if redpilling normies is the goal (which I thought was our main objective here), sending them this article and telling them it debunks climate change is not going to turn out like you want.
I swear, it's like people have just spontaneously forgotten that normies have an overwhelming tendency to believe whatever the current consensus among scientists says is true. It's why they're still normies after almost a decade of Q being known.
I'm really trying to understand why people are bent on arguing with me about this. It's like people can't understand how someone can think climate change is BS, but at the same time realize that this article isn't debunking climate change.
theyre doing what they always do, lying with a bit of truth to further the desired lie. they say at no point in history has it risen as fast as it is now, and somehow they know its because of current co2 emissions. they concede to the point that its been way hotter in the past, while shoving the "but right now its your fault so do as we say" point down the readers throat. fucking demons.
Agreed. We've had tropical ages where dinosaurs roamed the world, and then we've had the ice ages where our world was under ice. We weren't around to cause those changes. So how'd that happen? No one can answer that. LOL
Oh dear, that is frustrating to read. The gymnastics they go through to conclude the most inane conclusions one could possibly conclude. If I read that article on TV, I would most certainly smash my TV. Which I can't do. It so nicely fills the little space in my entertainment center. Plus, it removes an amount of dust from the air in my home. OK, I got sidetracked. That article should have a stamp that says, "By retards, for retards".
An ambitious effort to understand the Earth’s climate over the past 485 million years has revealed a history of wild shifts and far hotter temperatures than scientists previously realized — offering a reminder of how much change the planet has already endured and a warning about the unprecedented rate of warming caused by humans.
The timeline, published Thursday in the journal Science, is the most rigorous reconstruction of Earth’s past temperatures ever produced, the authors say. Created by combining more than 150,000 pieces of fossil evidence with state-of-the-art climate models, it shows the intimate link between carbon dioxide and global temperatures and reveals that the world was in a much warmer state for most of the history of complex animal life.
At its hottest, the study suggests, the Earth’s average temperature reached 96.8 degrees Fahrenheit (36 degrees Celsius) — far higher than the historic 58.96 F (14.98 C) the planet hit last year.
Ooops!! 😂😂 Oh yes this gets Sticked! Share far and wide Anons!
"Climate change is about global governance, nothing more. Globalists..." https://www.zerohedge.com/weather/msm-journos-inadvertently-reveal-shocking-truth-about-global-warming
36 degrees, wow staycation every day.
Can I get a global warming tax refund?
ONLY if you open your wallet and say "AHHHHHHH"!!!!!!!
Tried that didn’t work.
Oh well, I guess our scientists, journalists and civil servants just made a mistake.
Anyway, who’ll fix the roads?
More junk science:
They have no idea what the temperatures were on earth 1,000 years ago let alone 485 million. And they're using climate models, which means it's all based on nothing.
They cannot accurately measure the earths temperature today
I vaguely recall that some other crisis occurred in recent times was based on 'models' 🤭
Uncalibrated models at that!
I must not have read the same article that you did.
Because the article that you're linking isn't "debunking" climate change.
You seem to think that because they acknowledge that the Earth has seen much higher temperatures (hundreds of millions years ago), that it means there's nothing harmful about the Earth growing hotter now.
So, TL;DR (because I'm sure the majority of the people commenting here won't actually read the article):
1.The Earth has had huge shifts in temperature.
In those temperature shifts, Carbon dioxide was the cause of rapid heating of the planet.
Rapid heating of the planet caused huge mass extinctions.
Humans came in during one of the coolest ages of the planet.
Carbon dioxide is now causing the most rapid increase of temperatures of the planet, ever.
If humans don't figure out a way to curb the rise in carbon dioxide, we will be facing another mass extinction event, where we will most likely die off.
Now, let me make it abundantly clear that I'm not agreeing with what is being claimed in this article.
What I am saying is that you have grossly misunderstood what the article was saying.
People who believe in climate change have never claimed that the Earth has not seen hotter temperatures. I have no idea why you would think this is a big "Ah-ha! Gotcha!" moment, because it's not.
So, for the love of little baby Jesus, please, please, please, do not run around trying to redpill normies with this, because, without a doubt, they will laugh in your face and then believe you to be extraordinarily ignorant.
And that doesn't really help anyone here, does it?
The trouble is, the "most rapid increase of temperature of the planet, ever", is based on questionable temperature data (urban heat island effect, for example), and even if accurate, the natural fluctuations are greater than what is reported to be the trend. It's ludicrous to think it's possible to measure an average Earth temperature to tenths of degrees! The most important thing to realize is that a warmer Earth is ALWAYS better than a colder Earth, other than when it is so warm that there actually is significantly higher global sea levels. The fact that the rate of global sea level rise has not significantly increased during the past 50 years destroys the man-made global warming theory, and therefore, destroys the idea of man-made climate change.
We have had faster warming in the past. Look up Younger Dryas where we had degrees of warming in a decade.
Also, we have had far greater CO2 levels before. Around 7,000 ppm if memory serves.
I'm not arguing the validity of what the article is saying.
I stated that quite clearly in my original post.
My point, which people seem to be making an effort to miss, is that the article is in no way debunking climate change.
I'm asking that people not start sending it out to their friends and families (or anyone else) thinking that it's some big "Gotcha!" moment, because it's not.
Yes! Was wondering if someone was gonna bring up the Younger Dryas...
Had an Oh thank God moment when I read that. Thanks for taking the time to why the article isn't debunking anything.
yes & no. They lamely try to defend climate change (maybe because they have to to get this published) but anyone who can read between the line can see how lame it is with the data they present. Could even be white hat trying to drop red pills that are painted blue on the outside
Yes and no, what? The OP was saying that this article was debunking climate change.
You're saying yourself that the article is defending the climate change argument. Even if you think it's a lame attempt, that's what they're doing. They're not in any way debunking it.
It's a pretty far stretch to say that this article, which is defending climate change (even if it's doing so lamely) is somehow a secret WH attempt to redpill people, like some kind of weird reverse psychology or it doing such a lackluster job that it somehow convinces people that climate change is a hoax.
I'm not sure why people feel the need to make these "nuh-uh!" type posts in response to me saying that the OP grossly misunderstood what the article was saying, and that trying to present this as it debunking anything about climate change will simply discredit you in the eyes of whoever it is that you're trying to redpill with it.
I mean, seriously. It's like people are addicted to shooting themselves in the foot, and making themselves a laughingstock while they do so.. And the entire Q community along with them.
It's debunking to those who can read between the lies (as is everything else) but with the extra help of the graph
And who would that be, other than people who were already skeptical of climate change theory to begin with? Do you think many normies fit that label?
My entire reason for posting was to try to prevent people from attempting to redpill normies with that article, thinking that it's debunking climate change. Because the vast majority of people who read it aren't going to "read between the lies" of the article.
If you want to send this to your Uncle Bob, who already doesn't believe Climate Change is real, so you can share a few giggles over the ineptitude of the people who wrote the article, then that's great. Send it to him. I'm sure he would enjoy it.
But if redpilling normies is the goal (which I thought was our main objective here), sending them this article and telling them it debunks climate change is not going to turn out like you want.
I swear, it's like people have just spontaneously forgotten that normies have an overwhelming tendency to believe whatever the current consensus among scientists says is true. It's why they're still normies after almost a decade of Q being known.
I'm really trying to understand why people are bent on arguing with me about this. It's like people can't understand how someone can think climate change is BS, but at the same time realize that this article isn't debunking climate change.
Don't ya love it when they prove Trump is right about Global Warming! Keke
Surprising no one who was awake.
Oops, they accidentally told the truth. We will have to watch them backtrack soon. LOL That is , if they are smart enough to catch it.
theyre doing what they always do, lying with a bit of truth to further the desired lie. they say at no point in history has it risen as fast as it is now, and somehow they know its because of current co2 emissions. they concede to the point that its been way hotter in the past, while shoving the "but right now its your fault so do as we say" point down the readers throat. fucking demons.
Agreed. We've had tropical ages where dinosaurs roamed the world, and then we've had the ice ages where our world was under ice. We weren't around to cause those changes. So how'd that happen? No one can answer that. LOL
That’s why they changed from global warming to climate change
All we had to do was have Trump go in hard for climate change and that would have been the end of that.
Oh my word
Despite what WaPo claims, scientists have known about higher temperatures for at least a couple of decades.
Oh dear, that is frustrating to read. The gymnastics they go through to conclude the most inane conclusions one could possibly conclude. If I read that article on TV, I would most certainly smash my TV. Which I can't do. It so nicely fills the little space in my entertainment center. Plus, it removes an amount of dust from the air in my home. OK, I got sidetracked. That article should have a stamp that says, "By retards, for retards".
The fact that weather monitors at airports are being urbanized (more concrete and black top) is how they come up with this bullshit