A Complete Timeline Of Earth's Average Temperature, From 20,000 BC To Today And Beyond

Submitted by: normalfreak2 1 year ago in Science
earth_temperature_timeline
There are 19 comments:
Male 8,175
Why did this thread come back?
0
Reply
Male 1,824
Mevsthevoice Mevsthevoice Mevsthevoice do you here the echo
0
Reply
Male 1,824
I don't understand where in this chart is the temp stabilization from around 2000 to 2014 where the temp did not go up at all and remained relatively static, this chart should have at least a strait line from 2000 to now.
0
Reply
Male 41,551
Yup. What's more? It seems to show the temps rocketing up from around 1980 or 1985... this simply did not happen by ANY account. Conclusion: it's fake or a parody. But not funny either way. What is funny? Several 300+ year warm periods are 'smoothed out' of existence, but a 20 year ALLEGED warm spell is extended to 40 to show up on the chart more dramatically... fake, fraud, typical lies from AGW fanatics.
0
Reply
Male 41,551
NF2 you own chart here shows a prediction of over +4C by 2100, something you have claimed in past discussions that 'no AGW supporter says that'. Well? Here it is, just like I said, and you denied. What garbage. A +0.5C rise in temperature since 2000? Only using the 'altered' (faked) data, not the actual NASA readings. Or even the actual field readings, or any other method except lowering past temperatures (in secret) and inflating current ones (for no reason). Even the 'record temps' of 1998 have been "adjusted downwards" to make current temps the 'new record'. It's politics, not science, and this chart is propaganda. NOTICE how I don't insult you, even once? Notice how I stay on topic the entire time? See that? Good.
0
Reply
Male 41,551
This is filled with lies. For one easy example: The Northwest Passage is NOT 'open' it was solid ice in 2016. The single ship taking the most southerly (and long) route barely made it, by less than a day, before it froze solid too. The NWP was sailed in 1903, was that 'human caused' too? The Northern (shortest) rout was navigated in 1944, also 'human caused'. This timeline has many errors and outright lies snuck in among the off-topic factoids. It is pure AGW propaganda. We Were Lucky To Get Through from the expedition's own report.
0
Reply
Male 433
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen#Northwest_Passage_.281903.E2.80.931906.29 // This year, the Crystal Serenity made it through that "solid ice"
0
Reply
Male 40,490
I hit the "end" key to get past this. Hillary. Donald. Global Warming. Gun Control. ....... is this the new IAB ? Whatever happened to "enterainment". If I'm bored I want amused.... not a news source.
0
Reply
Male 41,551
I keep submitting anime, but FancyLad won't post it! :-x Short stuff mostly, like promotional vids or AMVs :-)
0
Reply
Male 40,490
I Am Bored . . . thats the name and the content makes sure you stay that way
0
Reply
Male 1,553
I think we have a new site slogan...
0
Reply
Male 8,777
Okay, now highlight in red the actual data. Say through core sampling you can guess what the temperature is at 1000 BC and 100 BC, so you connect the two with a line. It does no accurately represent the day to day, week to week, year to year or even decade to decade temperature variations. You are, in fact, representing in a linear fashion, two data points that may not accurately represent the fluctuations in between. And, let's just arbitrarily represent the 'current path' as actual fact. When I drive down my driveway my 'current path' would run me through my neighbor's living room, but is not an accurate representation of the path I will take.
0
Reply
Male 41,551
Exactly correct. We could be in a purely natural 'warming period' for the past 300 years. There's no way to tell until after it ends. Or if it doesn't end? Then perhaps it was human caused, but since they last 500+ years we won't know that for another 200 or 300 years. Just like the 1930's were hotter, and the 1970's cooler than average? The Earth's temperature looks flat on a 20,000 year long timeline, but in fact contains MANY spikes and dips. This 'graphic' mentions them dismissively, ignores them completely at other times. Like around 0AD for example. It shows a slight lowering when in fact it was the Roman Warm Period. So again I point out this chart is factually incorrect, as well as telling outright lies.
0
Reply
Male 433
Also there is no way to say all that CO₂ was released by men. Admitted, we have a lot of C-12 which is usually found in fossil fuels and coal, but maybe the sun's radiation stopped creating C-14. Or we missed that erupting super-volcano somewhere flooding half a continent with lava. Or maybe the earth was created last Thursday and we were just made believe that it existed! ∕∕ Nope, caught red-handed. Also, we have year-by-year records since about 12,000 BC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrochronology
0
Reply
Male 41,551
You are a funny person, that's a great joke you made there. Yearly records of CO2 in the atmosphere for 14000 years! LMAO! Nice one. True though: very few studies have actually researched where this new CO2 is coming from. One in UK found between 30-80% was human made, it varies widely! But no where was it 100%. Of course this study was roundly denounced as "not science" by AGW Holy Soldiers and thus ignored. This exact same thing happened with 'ocean oil' back in the 70's (iirc). Alarmists were 100% sure that ALL ocean oil was spilled by humans, but in fact a lot of it (40%? 60%? I forget) was simply natural. Also very tiny PPB on top of that, yet they called for billions to be spent 'fighting this pollution' which would 'destroy the world'... sound familiar? Only now it is TRILLIONS every year...
0
Reply
Male 433
You are correct, I missed the word "->temperature<- record", which can be deduced from the trees. You can only see the ratio of C-14 to C-12 in the trees. That's what I deserve for editing too much. // Off cause 30 .. 80 % man-made extra-CO₂ is a reasonable value. Take a glass of red wine and a carafe. use a small cup, fill it from the glass, pour it into the carafe, fill it from the carafe, pour it into the glass. That's the carbon cycle. Now add some white wine. Use the small cup again. You get exactly that result. // Your numbers for natural oil spills seem to be correct, I read 60 % in the US, 40 % in the world. Natural spills aren't unknown, they were used in ancient times. Also most of the human-caused oil spills are tiny, only some big events are noticeable. But then they really are really big and really noticeable. // People do freak out about tiny amounts of mercury in their light bulb, adding poison on corn fields, in their beef and in their tuna salad seems to be OK.
0
Reply
Male 8,175
XKCD where I can get sane, nerdy, facts presented in a humorous way anytime. =)
0
Reply
Male 41,551
From a comedy website, at least you admit it this time. And satire, are you sure this isn't a parody? >>>If only it did contain facts relevant to AGW theory, it might apply to reality in some way. But nope! It gets facts completely wrong, see below.
0
Reply