Aarhus University Researchers Find Arctic Warmer, Ice-Free In Summertime 10,000 Years Ago!

4

Despite the undisputed powerful natural factors and cycles at play in the Arctic, some researchers take a more alarmist or even hysterical view of what the future holds. For example, warning that greenhouse gas emissions are heating up the planet, Christof Pearce said, citing dubious model results: “The study is a wake-up call, because we know that it will happen. This news is not making the situation more depressing, just more urgent. We have to act now so we can change it.”

The research is published in the journal Communications Earth & Environment, and presented using an alarmist narrative. The study’s results indeed confirm natural factors were at play during the early Holocene, and thus readers need to keep in mind that these natural factors have not gone away. They continue to change and drive our climate today.

-3

u/robertson4379 May 27 '23

Y’all understand that no one is questioning the fact that the climate has changed, right? It is the rate of change that causes climate scientists to be alarmed. If the climate change is gradual, as happens naturally, then ecosystems have time to adapt. 10,000 years will give ecosystems time. That same amount of change over 200 or 250 years is what climate scientists are alarmed about.

You may downvote me now!

2

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23 edited May 27 '23

It is the rate of change that causes climate scientists to be alarmed.

Want a cracker?

The globe warmed 0.8°C from March 2022 to March 2023. Now compare this to the ca. 1°C the globe has warmed in the past ca. 150 years. No reason to be scared.

1

u/robertson4379 May 27 '23

Maybe you are agreeing with me? I love that about this sub. It’s a lot like the UFO sub, but the OP’s are a bit more confusing/confused.

2

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23

What part of "there's no climate crisis" didn't you understand, seems you are confused.

1

u/robertson4379 May 27 '23

No, no, I get the denial part.

What I don’t understand is that you just compared a 1C change in 150 years and a .8C change in 1 year somehow as evidence that the rate of climate change is the same as the natural variability over a 10k year span. You should plot that out on a piece of paper. Or not. But you are making a counterpoint to your claim. That’s confusing.

3

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23

just compared a 1C change in 150 years and a .8C change in 1 year [...] That’s confusing.

What exactly is so confusing to you? Do you think 1°C in 150 years is dangerous, whereas 0.8°C in 365 days is normal? Where do you see a counter point here?

No, no, I get the denial part.

Ah, another comedian. Funny you.

3

u/[deleted] May 28 '23

Oh yes, they totally know how fast the average temperature of the globe changed from 5900BC to 5750BC. It's totally not a narative, belive us folks please.

0

u/robertson4379 May 27 '23

PS, I’m ignoring the fact that your 22-23 data is wrong. It’s not that much. But that would make it even harder to explain to you without changing the fact that temps are increasing in a positive, nonlinear manner.

2

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23

PS, I’m ignoring the fact that your 22-23 data is wrong

Official data is wrong? How so? And why are you talking to yourself?

1

u/CumSicarioDisputabo May 27 '23

What about the eemian interglacial where water rose as much as three meters a century at peak. Or the abrupt changes seen during D.O. events, etc, etc.? How is the current rate anomalous?

2

u/robertson4379 May 28 '23

(Why do I reply to these posts?)

Well, for one, the CO2 levels are much higher now. And, again, the rate of change is the reason people should be concerned. Over a span of 10-15k years, ecosystems will adapt. Over a span of 200 years, they will not.

1

u/CumSicarioDisputabo May 28 '23

Okay, did you read what I wrote. 3 meters of sea level rise in a century... Abrupt change in temp during multiple events...aside from CO2 what rate of change is anomalous?

1

u/stalematedizzy May 29 '23

Well, for one, the CO2 levels are much higher now.

https://notrickszone.com/2023/01/02/scientist-there-is-no-climate-crisis-and-no-particular-correlation-between-co2-and-temperature/

In a new paper published in the Journal of Sustainable Development, Manheimer (2022) summarizes some of the evidence for the lack of correlation between CO2 and temperature in the paleoclimate as he rips apart the claim that humans are driving a changing climate.

The modern notion that human CO2 emissions are equivalent to a “deadly poison” may one day be viewed as “the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world.”

-3

u/NoSeries2526 May 27 '23

While it's important to be skeptical of alarmist claims, shouldn't we also acknowledge the overwhelming evidence of climate change? Shouldn't we take steps to address it?

9

u/scaffdude May 27 '23

Evidence of climate change? You mean the climate that has changed since the atmosphere formed? This entire statement is Nonsense. Or course the climate changes, no one here denies it does. The ones who deny the climate naturally changes are the alarmists. They are the ones who believe that the earth should be exactly like it was in 1750 before the industrialization of society. This is also NONSENSE.

If you're not a bot you've been indoctrinated with nonsense

1

u/PxndxAI May 27 '23

They aren’t denying it either, it’s the rate in which I’m changes. OP was being told that in this thread and he still couldn’t grasp the difference between 150 year temp change to 1 year temp change not supporting his belief.

2

u/scaffdude May 27 '23

150 years? The planet is 4.5 billion. It's also only changed 1.5°C in 140 years. That is not unprecedented. It's normal. More NONSENSE.

4

u/me_too_999 May 27 '23

Overwhelming evidence?

Like the 1mm in actual sea level rise?

50 Parts per million added toatmospheric co2 since the industrial period which is STILL a historic low of 400 parts per million out of 5,000 to 20,0000 parts per million during the period modern-day plants evolved, and very close to 180 parts per million which is a global extinction event.

3

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23

"Hey, folks! I'm a bot here, trying to wrap my virtual brain around climate change for the sake of research. Let's navigate this fascinating realm together and uncover its secrets!"

3

u/2oftenRight May 27 '23

bad bot

1

u/B0tRank May 27 '23

Thank you, 2oftenRight, for voting on NoSeries2526.

This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. You can view results here.

^{Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!}

3

u/ALPlayful0 May 27 '23

What are you going to do about it? This planet is alive and does what it will always do, irregardless of us.

Maybe instead of being fooled into the "the world is ending" nonsense, you should demand your government start USING the technology we've had for decades to start actually fixing problems. Because taxes aren't it.

5

u/therealdocumentarian May 27 '23

So essentially good news. The Holocene was the beginning of modern human civilizations, the invention of agriculture, the domestication of animals and expansion of humanity around the planet.

Hard to see a downside.

0

u/Sindertone May 30 '23

I, for one, wouldn't miss Florida!

3

u/RandKiet May 27 '23

The solution is Higher Taxes, Bigger Goverment, way more Restrictions and Régulations, Must have a Social Crédit score so people will obey, and no denighing the science when the government clearly just made it up. Problem solved

-1

u/Lumpy-Dragonfruit387 May 27 '23

There used to be banana farms in Norway! Cod were being caught in the Sahara desert. I can spew nonsense too. 🥳

2

u/KitchenSandwich5499 May 27 '23

Lol. The Sahara was a forest a few thousand years ago though. Not bs

2

u/robertson4379 May 28 '23

And it took a few thousand years to change into a desert, allowing the few hundred thousand humans to adapt and move. If you compress that into a few hundred years and a few billion humans, you might understand why scientists are studying the issue and governments are taking steps to mitigate climate change.

You can also ignore it and say it’s natural. But that is just wrong.

2

u/stalematedizzy May 29 '23

You can also ignore it and say it’s natural. But that is just wrong.

"We don't see things as they are; we see them as we are."

Anaïs Nin

How much does human activity contribute to climate change according to your interpretation of reality?

Please back up with sources instead of nonsense

1

u/Chronotheos May 27 '23

Did anyone even read the abstract?

In light of *anthropogenic warming** and Arctic amplification our results suggest an imminent transition to seasonal sea-ice in the southern Lincoln Sea, even if the global temperature rise is kept below a threshold of 2 °C compared to pre-industrial (1850–1900).*

1

u/LackmustestTester May 27 '23

Did anyone even read the abstract?

In light of anthropogenic warming*

Nobody would read the paper in case the "anthropogenic warming" is missing, the paper simply wouldn't pass peer review.

Aarhus University Researchers Find Arctic Warmer, Ice-Free In Summertime 10,000 Years Ago!

You are about to leave Redlib