Chuck explain?

[AlbertaFarmer5]

dml, I followed your link. It was wikipedia, not a respected scientific organization, Chuck will be along shortly to discipline you.

But at least wikipedia does provide links to the sources. The impossible claim of 100 ppm supposedly comes from this paper.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190927033455/http://droyer.web.wesleyan.edu/PhanCO2%28GCA%29.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20190927033455/http://droyer.web.wesleyan.edu/PhanCO2%28GCA%29.pdf
For some reason only available through the wayback machine.
Which makes no mention of 100 ppm during the miocene. Neither do any of the other links attached to that reference.
The paper does say repeatedly that

, all cool events are associated with CO2 levels below 1000 ppm. A CO2 threshold of below 500 ppm is
suggested for the initiation of widespread, continental glaciations,

We are below 500, way below 1000. And we are cold, bouncing along the bottom of the range, stuck in a glacial epoch.
Unless you can find the source of the 100 ppm claim, Perhaps you should suggest an edit to Wikipedia.

The miocene was full of mammals (including our direct ancestors) and plants that we would recognize. How could they possibly have survivived through 100 ppm?
And no, the continents were not in significantly different positions 23 million years. About the only big change since then was the closing of the panama isthmus

[Guest]

Oh, oh chuck
God damn Details again

[Guest]

I’ll say it again co2 is not the problem, it’s been way higher or lower throughout the history of the world. The point is the world has managed just fine to adjust.

The issue with man is we pollute the oceans, cut down forests, etc. Think people, the carbon sink just can’t keep up, how much of it has been chopped down, roads and cities using up area that was once part of that sink. Oceans have massive plastic islands as well as pollutants vastly reducing the ability of phytoplankton to do its job of absorbing carbon dioxide (probably the biggest sink).

Yes man is impacting the world in a negative way but IMO it’s not co2 that’s the real enemy. When modern man leaves the planet the earth will probably breathe a huge sigh of relief.

Hurry up Elon, herd them on board, Mars here they come.

Absolutely true
Cities are the problem and they lecture us
We need to work on the problems we can see like water pollution
Air pollution in cities etc

[chuckChuck]

You can see shrinking glaciers! David Schindler was very clear about the impact losing glaciers will have on fresh water.

"But this way of thinking about Canada’s freshwater is misleading, Schindler said, because what sustains that water supply is runoff. With climate change already affecting Canada’s glaciers and increasing incidents of drought, our freshwater supply is in danger.

“You can’t talk about water without talking about climate change,” Schindler said. “We know that the snow packs in these mountain ranges are dwindling as last winter gave us a good example of. The glaciers supply a tiny amount of the total annual flow of a river but it comes at a critical time of the hot, dry summer.”

Schindler said the Bow River Glacier can supply up to 50 per cent of the river’s water during dry spells. But he said, over the last century, the Bow River Glacier has dramatically retreated threatening water supply for cities like Calgary as well as the cold water necessary to sustain the river’s famous cold water fish species during the hotter months of July to September.
Wildfires, Both Cause and Outcome of Climate Change, Consume Freshwater

[SASKFARMER]

Think for yourself instead of cut and paste we would maybe believe you if you show your reasoning.

[furrowtickler]

You can see shrinking glaciers! David Schindler was very clear about the impact losing glaciers will have on fresh water.

"But this way of thinking about Canada’s freshwater is misleading, Schindler said, because what sustains that water supply is runoff. With climate change already affecting Canada’s glaciers and increasing incidents of drought, our freshwater supply is in danger.

“You can’t talk about water without talking about climate change,” Schindler said. “We know that the snow packs in these mountain ranges are dwindling as last winter gave us a good example of. The glaciers supply a tiny amount of the total annual flow of a river but it comes at a critical time of the hot, dry summer.”

Schindler said the Bow River Glacier can supply up to 50 per cent of the river’s water during dry spells. But he said, over the last century, the Bow River Glacier has dramatically retreated threatening water supply for cities like Calgary as well as the cold water necessary to sustain the river’s famous cold water fish species during the hotter months of July to September.
Wildfires, Both Cause and Outcome of Climate Change, Consume Freshwater

Good thing the Forests were saturated last year in most of western Canada with an abundance of rainfall . Rivers and lakes at highest levels in decades

[dmlfarmer]

AF5

Glaciations occurred even during the Miocene era.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0031018282900037 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0031018282900037
"In South America at latitude 47°S, till was deposited sometime between 7 m.y. and 4.6 m.y. ago, at a time when the local climate was colder than today's. During this same interval glaciers extended to sea level in southeast Alaska, and widespread cooling of the ocean surface in middle latitudes, worldwide marine regression and change in the oxygen isotopic composition of ocean water occurred..."
https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2813/ https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2813/
During the late Miocene epoch, about seven million years ago, large areas of the continents experienced drying, enhanced seasonality, and a restructuring of terrestrial plant and animal communities. These changes are seen throughout the subtropics, but have typically been attributed to regional tectonic forcing. Here we present a set of globally distributed sea surface temperature records spanning the past 12 million years based on the alkenone unsaturation method. We find that a sustained late Miocene cooling occurred synchronously in both hemispheres, and culminated with ocean temperatures dipping to near-modern values between about 7 and 5.4 million years ago. The period of maximum cooling coincides with evidence for transient glaciations in the Northern Hemisphere and with a steepening of the pole-to-equator temperature gradient, as well. We thus infer that late Miocene aridity and terrestrial ecosystem changes occurred in a global context of increasing meridional temperature gradients. We conclude that a global forcing mechanism, such as the previously hypothesized decline in atmospheric CO2 levels between eight and six million years ago, is required to explain the late Miocene changes in temperature, climate and ecosystems.

[dmlfarmer]

AF5, if instead of pulling out just point I made about continental drift, you would have included the next sentence about earth being a molten mass you would have realized I was referring to other factors that influence climate, and not stating that continents were in a different position during the miocene era which of course they were not! Although it is during that era when the Himalayas were created if you are interested as a result of the Indian subcontinent pushing northward.

But that is okay, anything to deflect the conversation away from the original point of my posts on this site, that 415 ppm currently is higher than the 300 ppm that was the maximum measured level of CO2 in the last 800,000 years, and that current levels are not the lowest in the history of the world as Saskfarmer claimed in the very first post. Math must be hard!

And by distracting you do not have to come up with any reasons why this sudden increase in CO2 has happened or what the impact on climate this may have. We know it is better for plants, but only if plants have everything else they need to support more growth such as precipitation.

[fjlip]

FIRST one must "believe" the C02 planetary #'s....too much room for errors, doctored data, who benefits from change. All within margin of error, so nothing to see. Go on living, you can't change a thing, planet is too big to care about Canada's 1.6%.

Of course don't pollute! C02 is NOT pollution! That's a incorrect scare tactic.

[Hamloc]

I think governments believe that they can create more jobs by forcing the retooling of our industrial infrastructure. They are trying to create a new commodity boom. What interests me is how does the environmental disturbance compare between mining for the the elements needed for mass electrification compared to what we do now?! I was listening to Bill Gates being interviewed one day, he was talking about how carbon intensive concrete was an example and how greening concrete production would double its cost! One thing is guaranteed and that is that everything we do is going to become more expensive and that the size and cost of government is going to increase at a faster rate. I do however feel some sympathy for those who believe governments can solve our problems, governments today are run by special interest groups not by the desire to create sound legislation! As I have said before there are many things that will make farming profitably in the future more difficult but for me climate change isn’t even on the radar so I find arguing about it truly a waste of time. The price and availability of land, machinery costs, input costs like fertilizer and seed, government regulation and taxation all are much higher up the list!!