3,600°F. That was the mean global temperature from the earth's earliest days when it was colliding with planetesimals. Scientists estimate that the earth was 2,300 K (3,680°F) when it collided with the moon.
Even after collisions stopped, and the planet had tens of millions of years to cool, surface temperatures were more than 400°F.
-"But humans can't actually survive these temperatures? Why mention it?"
Because it debunks the climatological "Point of no Return"
. The earth was able to cool itself from a far higher temperature than humans could even imagine. The notion of the "Point of no Return" is anti-science, contradicts the history of the earth, and is only mentioned to create hysteria.
-What about the notion that humans have warmed the earth more than the earth has ever warmed itself? False. 600 myo-800 myo during the Neoproterozoic era the earth had sea ice down to the equator. Geologists reason that volcanic activity and a lack of rainfall brought the earth out of this ice age to average global temperatures of 90°F. (The average today is 60°F.)
According to Geologists, the earth was 100% responsible for the massive mean temperature spike. This evidence reaffirms the idea that natural global warming is far more devastating than human activity
-"Ok. So the earth is a dick to itself and the point of no return is nonsense. But what is the warmest temperatures since after the dinosaurs?"73°F
. (Remember the mean temperature today is <60°F.) 73°F was the mean during the PETM or Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum which occurred 56 myo. During the PETM, the poles were free of ice and palm trees and crocodiles lived above the arctic circle. Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that the Mesozoic era —the age of dinosaurs- saw even higher mean temperatures.
I have researched climate change extensively which is why I remain a skeptic.
There are many questions that Climate Science can't yet answer.
If the polar ice caps are melting then why is Antarctic sea ice reaching a new record maximum? (https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/antarctic_seaice_sept19_1.jpg
) Why is only the northern polar ice cap melting?
We know the world was much warmer before mankind than it is projected to be. How did our ancestors thrive and what can we learn from them?
If the world was able to cool down from the Hadean period, late Neoproterozoic era, and PETM then isn't the climatologist "Point of no Return" a blatant lie?
If climatology is an exact science then what is the effect of 1 ton of CO2 or CH4 on global temperatures? 2 tons?
Why can't humans adapt to the conditions of a warmer world?
What percent of climate change is caused by humans?
If the #1 cause of global warming is livestock discharge then why do regulations target fossil fuel corporations? Isn’t this counterproductive?
Climate science cannot answer any of these questions, yet. The public looks to climatologists as the ultimate arbiter of public policy but they are not gods. The mean temperature has not been warming for 15 years. Cooling in the pacific, which was not predicted by any of the computer models, has balanced out the deterioration of the arctic sea ice.
The IPCC's latest report shows that in the next 100 years sea levels will only rise by 2 meters and the temperature will rise by 4-7 C and then go into a period of cooling. I have much more faith in humans near the water to slowly move away and for less people to wear sweaters than for humanity to destroy its entire economy and plunge the world into poverty. Until, of course, evidence is shown on the contrary.
My personal preference (or bias for the cynics out there) for energy is nuclear. The IPCC has even recommended that the world double its nuclear production by 2050. France supplies 39% of its electricity through nuclear energy.
If we were to stop discovering new oil, coal, and natural gas reservoirs and we stopped inventing new technology, like fracking, then we would run out of fossil fuels in 110 years. Fossil fuels are short term. As someone who has lived for 19 years less than 17 km from a nuclear power plant, I am confident that nuclear is the way of the future. The other half of the nearby nuclear power-plant has had its construction halted for years and is deteriorating. Unfortunately, funding for nuclear has been sidelined for pie-in-the-sky solar and wind power based on ridiculous public hysteria.
I firmly believe that as we run out of fossil fuels in the coming generations that the debate will become Nuclear vs. hysteria rather than fossil fuels vs. green energy. And if that is the case then I have every belief that nuclear will win the argument.
Edited 6/5/2017 18:43:57