|
Tkman117 -> RE: Liberal tolerance (5/18/2014 5:05:46 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tkman117
There is little to no evidence that D/O cycles occur outside of glacial periods and within interglacial periods. If they do occur their effects are minuscule and range from mild periods to cold periods, not hot periods.
Says the person I had to teach they existed.
Also to be noted: Not true.
But even if it *were* true there have, in fact, been thousands of such cycles. Hell man, there are a hundred or so documented since the eemian. And thats just a blink of an eye - what 150K years ago?
Absolutely fucking wrong, the evidence that DO cycles even happened came from the Greenland ice cores, which while they have stretched back to Eemian, only 25 of these cycles have been documented since the last glaciation. And if you decide to argue bond events instead, only 8 of these have been documented since the last glaciation. Once again I explain that DO events we're tied to the bipolar seesaw, where when it got colder in the north it got hotter in the south, and vice versa. The warming we are currently seeing World Wide has not been that of the seesaw, but that of a world wide warming event happening at the same time. If this was a DO event, we would see places like South America and Australia reporting cooler temperatures on average and we would be seeing Antarctica growing in land ice volume, not decreasing. As a result, DO events have been completely ruled out. Not to mention that since the end of the glacial period it's obvious that these DO events were getting weaker, giving more hints to the idea that DO events we're stronger during times of glaciation. I dislike using Wikipedia, but I thought it may be better to use it to drive the reality home since you have difficulty accepting "liberally biased sources" like SS. C'mon man, you may have introduced me to DO cycles, but you didn't teach me anything of value besides the name. Go get a proper education.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dansgaard–Oeschger_event
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_event
Lastly, why does your whole hypothesis hinge on a cycle which is still contested? Some scientists still don't see it as a proper cycle simply because of the fact that it's quasi-periodical and because it's magnitude of cooling isn't always the same each cycle. If your denial hinges on a concept which is still under scrutiny, then you really need to look in the mirror and ask why you so obsessively deny the existence of AGW.
|
|
|
|
