Analyses on anthropogenic global warming

[Christophe]

phew ...

to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of this forum

yves

And especially to lower the sterile and invective polemics!

[eclectron]

+ 1, uh ... I do not vote for the banishment of Ahmed!

QED !! Thank you Obamot to confirm my comments and ridicule you the same occasion!

This was your 11085th and last message here! No soma this time, when we are on a reprieve ... we must know it!

I'm new here, I do not have history.
As much as I do not appreciate the tone used by Obamot, (sometimes-often , as long as it's not for me, it's pretty much, though I do not like it), as much as it disturbs me that it's banned, because it's interesting.

Can not Obamot commit, by swearing at his dearest, to make Obamot light? or Obamot lexomil?

This banishment makes me feel a little guilty because each time I exchange with clivant people (so interesting), they are ejected from a forum.
Izentrop can testify moreover ...
I have the impression of provoking these evictions and I do not like rejection because I think that everyone can express themselves and progress. It makes everyone progress indirectly.
remains to reduce the noise and let only the signal, only Obamot has the key ...

I like controversy because it makes everyone, either one or the other, but the controversy friendlyit's so much better.
Is it possible, Mr Obamot?

To celebrate my 100e message?

[Christophe]

It is always sad to ban a long-time member ... but from a certain threshold it is the only solution!

Yes, he made certain interesting remarks but often created controversies with regard to some of his "opponents" (and even others: he had to break sugar on someone permanently, it was unbearable! !) ...

You knew him in a rather "calm" period because in the end he largely contributed to destroy the "human" quality (in the sense of exchanges) and the atmosphere of this forum (which has nothing to do with the quality, which I sincerely appreciated sometimes, of some of his interventions ...)

As you are new, I suggest you read (fast) this subject, which does not date from yesterday: bistro / what is it-how-to-obamot-t12250.html

He had already been banned several times, he knew his reprieve and his reaction "pee poo" above is intolerable on a forum quality so I will not cry about his case (as expected he already sent 2 long mails ... and patati and patata ...)

[pedrodelavega]

And to end my comments on climate-optimistic videos
I remained Benoît RITTAUD to listen in full: nothing to say, "perfect", posed, dispassionate and poses things well, smoking the IPCC once again who is wrong, mostly in good faith ...

Benoît RITTAUD:
http://iceblog.over-blog.com/article-la ... 70717.html
http://blog.lefigaro.fr/climat/2010/03/ ... tique.html
http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2015/10/06/a ... ues-261511

[Christophe]

I have just divided the messages of the day that concerned the philosophical part: Company-and-philosophy / this-man-who-privileged-the-economy-a-la-vie-the-biodiversity-and-nature-t14978.html

[dede2002]

Does anyone have a curve of oxygen levels in the air over time? To reduce the oxygen level, or that of CO2 to the values ​​of that time, it would not be enough to burn oil, it would also be necessary to attack the limestone ...

Evolution of the dioxygen concentration of the Earth's atmosphere. High limits in red and low in green1.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grande_Oxydation



http://acces.ens-lyon.fr/acces/terre/li ... re/oxygene

As much oxygen as now in the atmosphere of the dinosaurs' time, so

Interesting! I naively thought that the proportion of CO2 would affect the oxygen level, in fact they are not the same units. There is a lot more oxygen than CO2 for a long time, it is not with ppm that we will change percents.
Which gives reason to Christophe, there was more oxygen at the time of the dinosaurs than now.

[Christophe]

Which gives reason to Christophe, there was more oxygen at the time of the dinosaurs than now.

Apparently yes: the curves going in the same direction as the findings of good sense of scientific observation ...

[morgaf]

A little surprised: For a very long time I have not read the posts of Obamot anymore; Undrinkable.

[izentrop]

About atmospheric oxygen at the time of the dinosaurs, wikipedia may not be up to date?

atmospheric oxygen was considerably rarer in Earth's geological past than previously thought. More precisely, they indicate that, almost throughout this period of 220 Ma, oxygen was far from being 21% of the atmosphere as it is today. "We suggest figures between 10 and 15%," explains Tappert. "We found that particularly low oxygen levels coincided with episodes of high global temperatures and high concentrations of carbon dioxide," he adds. The researchers deduce that the increase in carbon dioxide levels caused by very strong volcanism was accompanied by a decrease in atmospheric oxygen. The rates proposed by this new work are much lower than those put forward by previous studies, some of which suggested for example up to 30% oxygen in the atmosphere for the Cretaceous period (-145 to -65 Ma). This deals a blow to certain theories which attributed the gigantism of certain animals to high levels of atmospheric oxygen. http://www.maxisciences.com/oxyg%E8ne/a ... 31370.html
Copyright © Gentside Discovery

[eclectron]

And to end my comments on climate-optimistic videos
I remained Benoît RITTAUD to listen in full: nothing to say, "perfect", posed, dispassionate and poses things well, smoking the IPCC once again who is wrong, mostly in good faith ...

Benoît RITTAUD:
http://iceblog.over-blog.com/article-la ... 70717.html
http://blog.lefigaro.fr/climat/2010/03/ ... tique.html
http://rue89.nouvelobs.com/2015/10/06/a ... ues-261511

Before reading the review, let's first listen to Benoît RITTAUD, and let us make a personal opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BisEbFRV0mw
presentation during the conference:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/ ... lide=id.p3

questions answers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj9Ld0lPZuY