"Yes, but that doesn't work anymore. That's weak."

[Athetotheist]

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to marke in post #300]

No, I have not measured the seal levels myself but I did compare photos of Ellis Island that were separated by more than 100 years and there seemed to be absolutely no evidence of a difference in seal levels.

So you eyeballed it?

Sea level is measured by two main methods: tide gauges and satellite altimeters. Tide gauge stations from around the world have measured the daily high and low tides for more than a century, using a variety of manual and automatic sensors. Using data from scores of stations around the world, scientists can calculate a global average and adjust it for seasonal differences. Since the early 1990s, sea level has been measured from space using radar altimeters, which determine the height of the sea surface by measuring the return speed and intensity of a radar pulse directed at the ocean. The higher the sea level, the faster and stronger the return signal is.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... %20sensors.

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #300]

No, I have not measured the seal levels myself but I did compare photos of Ellis Island that were separated by more than 100 years and there seemed to be absolutely no evidence of a difference in seal levels.

So you eyeballed it?

Sea level is measured by two main methods: tide gauges and satellite altimeters. Tide gauge stations from around the world have measured the daily high and low tides for more than a century, using a variety of manual and automatic sensors. Using data from scores of stations around the world, scientists can calculate a global average and adjust it for seasonal differences. Since the early 1990s, sea level has been measured from space using radar altimeters, which determine the height of the sea surface by measuring the return speed and intensity of a radar pulse directed at the ocean. The higher the sea level, the faster and stronger the return signal is.
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... %20sensors.

Marke: Yes, the two photos taken more than 100 years apart showed Ellis Island from the exact same point and the seal level at the base of the edifice on which the Statue of Liberty stood was eaxctly the same in both photos.

[Athetotheist]

[marke]

[Clownboat]

Marke: Trees need CO2 to survive and trees produce oxygen that humans need to survive. So why do some people believe CO2 is a bad thing?

I agree that trees need CO2 and that trees produce oxygen. I agree that oxygen is something humans need to survive.

Now why do you continue to fail to address that which we know carbon dioxide does in our atmosphere?

It seems to me that you admit that your thinking is illogical and admit that it fails to address that which we do know to be true about carbon dioxide, but continue to hold your illogical reasoning anyway. Would you continue to flush your blocked toilet? If the plumber that told you not to was a racist that cheated on his wife, would that be sufficient reason to continue to flush your blocked toilet? Flushing a blocked toilet, does what it does no matter who is informing you about it.

It seems that you would continue to flush your blocked toilet and you would do so, because 'Jesus'. I cannot respect such reasoning, but so far, that is all you have supplied.

Be well.

[marke]

Now why do you continue to fail to address that which we know carbon dioxide does in our atmosphere?

Marke: Atmospheric CO2 content has risen 25% in the last 65 years, according to researchers, yet the ocean temperature has risen only .67 degrees in 100 years. That hardly seems to be anything to be alarmed about since temperature rises are affected more by ocean temperatures than by any other factor. How do we know CO2 is causing global warming? We don't. What we do know is that proponents of the alarmist GW narratives assume C02 is melting ice, raising sea levels, causing weather disasters, and so forth. Sadly, those are assumptions, not proven facts.

Since researchers claim global warming is caused primarily by rises in sea temperaures, .67 degrees in 100 years seems hardly worthy of being blamed for all the disasters GW enthusiasts claim we are now experiencing as a result of those sea temperature rises.

AI Overview
Scientists have established the link between rising CO2 levels and negative environmental effects through multiple lines of evidence, including observed temperature increases, melting ice, rising sea levels, and changes in weather patterns, all consistent with the predictions of climate models that incorporate CO2 emissions.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to marke in post #306]

Atmospheric CO2 content has risen 25% in the last 65 years, according to researchers, yet the ocean temperature has risen only .67 degrees in 100 years.

Air has a lower heat capacity than water. It takes less energy to heat air, so air heats up more quickly.

Since researchers claim global warming is caused primarily by rises in sea temperaures, .67 degrees in 100 years seems hardly worthy of being blamed for all the disasters GW enthusiasts claim we are now experiencing as a result of those sea temperature rises.

I think your attempt to correlate atmospheric CO2 content with ocean temperature as gotten you turned around a little backwards.

AI Overview
The primary driver of global warming is the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, largely due to human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #306]

Atmospheric CO2 content has risen 25% in the last 65 years, according to researchers, yet the ocean temperature has risen only .67 degrees in 100 years.

Air has a lower heat capacity than water. It takes less energy to heat air, so air heats up more quickly.
Since researchers claim global warming is caused primarily by rises in sea temperaures, .67 degrees in 100 years seems hardly worthy of being blamed for all the disasters GW enthusiasts claim we are now experiencing as a result of those sea temperature rises.

I think your attempt to correlate atmospheric CO2 content with ocean temperature as gotten you turned around a little backwards.

Marke: Researchers claim ocean temperatures drive climate patterns in the atmosphere but there seems to be little connection between atmospheric C02 and fluctuating ocean temperatures.
AI Overview

MetLink - Royal Meteorological Society The Changing Water ...
Yes, ocean waters cycle through heating and cooling as part of the Earth's climate system, with ocean currents acting like a conveyor belt, transporting heat from the equator towards the poles and cold water back to the tropics.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
Heat Source:
The primary source of heat for the ocean is the sun, which warms the surface waters.

Thermohaline Circulation:
The ocean's circulation, driven by temperature and salinity differences, plays a crucial role in distributing heat.

Heating and Cooling:
In the tropics, water warms and becomes less dense, causing it to rise toward the surface.
In polar regions, water cools and becomes denser, sinking towards the depths.
This sinking water then flows back towards the equator, completing the cycle.

Ocean Currents:
Ocean currents, like the Gulf Stream, transport warm water from the tropics towards the poles and cold water from the poles back to the tropics.

Impact on Climate:
The ocean's ability to absorb and redistribute heat significantly influences global climate patterns and weather systems.

Evaporation and Precipitation:
Warmer ocean temperatures increase evaporation, adding more water vapor to the atmosphere, which can lead to more intense precipitation events.

Water Cycle:
The ocean plays a vital role in the water cycle, with evaporation from the ocean surface providing the moisture that forms clouds and precipitation.

AI Overview
The primary driver of global warming is the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, largely due to human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).
[/quote]

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to marke in post #308]

AI Overview
The primary driver of global warming is the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, largely due to human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).

I don't see this point refuted by the description of ocean currents.

[marke]

[Replying to marke in post #308]

AI Overview
The primary driver of global warming is the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, largely due to human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas).

I don't see this point refuted by the description of ocean currents.

Marke: Claiming human-contributed industrial emmissions are causing an almost imperceptible rise in earth's temperatures instead of oceanic influence over changing weather patterns is a claim promoted by GW enthusiasts but not proven by GW enthusiasts. GW enthusiasts have a long list of things that cause global warming, including poverty and cow farts. Those opinions are not proven scientific facts.

AI Overview
Learn more
We can prove Earth's atmospheric temperatures are rising by analyzing global temperature records, satellite data, ice core analysis, and observing the effects of climate change, all of which show a clear and consistent trend of warming.

The argument: "We can prove earth's temperatures are rising because we are observing the effects, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, mudslides, fires, and nearly every other catastrophe imaginable that we 'just know' are being caused by GW."