-Video- Rapid Natural Climate Change; Evidence Of A Pattern?

Well if y'all went back and saw what I saw, I'm glad bc it def is a different type of core that I didn't know existed and I bet a lot of peeps on ATS haven't seen it before, it shows different than ice cores for sure, maybe not a better option but just another puzzle piece in how our earth changes over time

a reply to: reldra

Gotchya

originally posted by: tonycodes
Well if y'all went back and saw what I saw, I'm glad bc it def is a different type of core that I didn't know existed and I bet a lot of peeps on ATS don't, it shows different than ice cores for sure, maybe not a better option but just another puzzle piece in how our earth changes over time

Bro, freaking lake vostok, it has ice cores hundreds of thousands of years old, check it out.

a reply to: boymonkey74

My rebuttal is unfortunately this may have been out of our hands no matter what and we maybe sped up like 25 years... I feel these kind of cores can show that Earth can shake us off faster than we can even damage it.

a reply to: Vector99

I get it, I know what your talking about... But these cores are made differently, let's just call it all things equal but different departments. This look into the past is much different than those ice cores and vice versa.

a reply to: tonycodes

Yeah it sure could.
But us cutting off most of the lungs of our planet will throw her way of sync.
We only need to look at Venus to learn of the effects of high co2 levels.

a reply to: tonycodes

The ice on lake vostok is like rings of a tree, but for Earth, the evidence found in these "blue holes" will also be found on Vostok. Vostok samples are older, and undisturbed.

a reply to: boymonkey74

Trees aren't Earth's lungs

a reply to: boymonkey74

Well that is sound logic, but I feel if we killed the air today with chemicals and our geology has the same pattern from the past, then those chemicals should have been in the air then too. I know that's a stretch from what we know now but in theory it has connections.

a reply to: Vector99

Well they do say rainforests are.
You know it is a saying and not in the literal sense don't you lol.

a reply to: tonycodes

Except plankton metabolizes the majority of CO2 on Earth, not trees.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: Vector99

Well they do say rainforests are.
You know it is a saying and not in the literal sense don't you lol.

Beers have begun, sarcasm detection is malfunctioning, at best

a reply to: Vector99

Also makes our oil.
I was sad when I found out oil is not dinosaur juice.
Well some was but we would have used it in an hour or so.

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: tonycodes

Except plankton metabolizes the majority of CO2 on Earth, not trees.

No #, is that true? bc then wherever more plankton is, those are the island blue hole "mites" of Interest. The carbon would show if CO2 ushered in the rapid climate change. I believe these "mite" cores read like that from what I saw.

a reply to: Vector99

I wish I could join you worked over Xmas and have been told I must do a 14 hour shift tmr so no point me attempting to go out.

a reply to: [post=20206859]Vector99[/po

Happy new year! It's 3am here and I am ready to get a couple hours rest then drink till i # a frog lol

a reply to: tonycodes

Yes

Half of the world's oxygen is produced via phytoplankton photosynthesis

a reply to: tonycodes

The thing which no one seems to want to engage with at the moment, in my opinion, is that the argument as to what is causing the changes is not nearly as important as being prepared to mitigate for them, get out ahead of them, begin the EXTREMELY extensive infrastructural modifications which are required in order to future proof our nations against the changes incoming.

Britain, being as besieged by watery expanses on all sides as it is, will require enormous amounts of coastal flood defence, and my preference would be to see the next one hundred and fifty years of potential sea level rise accounted for, by a project to be completed over the next fifty, involving erecting defences of no less than twenty foot high at the lowest elevations facing the sea, not to mention being built to protect cliff faces from even more severe erosion than they are already being exposed to. Project Canute, a possible working title for the program, should also involve river flood defences comprising of enormously tall river sidings, to be applied the entire length of every large stream, tributary, canal, river, or other route of flowing water. I am talking about a system of channels built up from the origin of every spring, to the edge of every estuary and river delta in the land, to carry water safely and in a contained manner, from issuance, to the sea, without its spilling over the sides and drowning homeowners and their property.

There are going to have to be solutions, is what I am saying, rather than new versions of old arguments, because while this argument over who caused what, and why it is all happening, continues to rumble on without cessation, the problems which are coming up in the next little while, will go unsolved, and this will be the ruin of whole societies unless mitigation plans come into effect. Submersible homes, tsunami proofing, tornado proofing, hurricane proofing... These things need to come into existence yesterday, if we have any hope of surviving tomorrow. We need to get our heads out of the sand, and think productively, rather than divisively about the problems we face, or all will be lost!

a reply to: TrueBrit

The REAL thing no one addresses is there IS NO SOLUTION. The Earth is gonna do its thing whether we help or not. If we dropped the human footprint on Earth to zero, it would keep warming, or cooling, depending on her mood.

a reply to: Vector99

Well, with respect, I am not talking about lowering carbon foot print here. I am talking about infrastructural changes to help us survive the changing climate, not trying to prevent it from changing.

If the air was to become more acidic, we would have to develop mass production environment suits. If the Sun suddenly went ape and a solar flare knocked out all our tech, we would have to start over. Well, as it happens, the seasons are all broken nowadays, plants aren't flowering at the right times, bees are out in bloody December, in BRITAIN of all places, and what is more, flooding from coastal and river sources is increasingly worrisome. We need to get infrastructure in place to prevent damage from the change, not to prevent the change, just the damage.

Now, do I think that switching to solar is a good plan? Yes, absolutely, the moment it becomes effective to do so. Why? Not because the climate will benefit, but because I hate paying for fossil fuels, money for which ends up in the hands of deeply questionable persons, and is used for deeply questionable purposes. Screw big oil, and everyone who loves it.

The fact is that my reasons for wanting a cleaner future are nothing to do with the planet really. They are more to do with our species, its longevity here, and giving us a stable world from which to eventually launch ourselves into the solar system, and beyond. That is my main focus. I have no interest in stopping the planet from doing her thing, with or without our help, but I DO want to make sure that we have the best chance, going forward, of surviving and thriving in the new circumstances we will find ourselves in.