4 ms·

It's always good to approach historical CO2 measurements with a degree of skepticism, especially when they cover such an extensive timeline. How confident are w

It's always good to approach historical CO2 measurements with a degree of skepticism, especially when they cover such an extensive timeline. How confident are we in the proxies used for pre-industrial CO2 levels? I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing a decline in the future followed by a flurry of research into the causes of that.

TheBlight 3y ago
I think it makes sense to be at least somewhat skeptical of the proxy data and treat them somewhat adversarially for the purpose of science. They seem to carry a significant amount of interpretive weight right now so they should be probed with equally substantial weight, IMO.
AnotherGoodName 3y ago
A question. Without going into detail on all the different ways to measure CO2 historically and how scientists align them against each other and also to modern direct measurements what difference does it make here anyway? We have the very accurate direct measurement for a while and the most alarming part of this in this recent direct measurement era. I feel that such questions like yours miss the rather obvious point here. How do you feel about CO2 going up ~50% since we started direct measurements?
- andreygrehov 3y ago
  There's a significant possibility that our assumptions about past CO2 levels might be off the mark. Considering this, it's conceivable that today's CO2 levels could actually be lower than they were at certain points in the past. What if CO2 levels fluctuate over millennia in a sinusoidal pattern, akin to seasons, and we are currently experiencing an upward trend? With that in mind, the accuracy of the existing measurements doesn't matter.
  - AnotherGoodName 3y ago
    So you think it's just a coincidence that CO2 has suddenly and massively increased at this point in time and this happens all the time?
    - andreygrehov 3y ago
      It's not so much about believing in coincidences; rather, it's about considering all possible variables. The sudden and substantial rise in recorded CO2 levels could be attributed to advancements in measurement techniques and the increased frequency of those measurements. If we had access to the same level of precision and quantity of data 500 years ago, it's plausible that we might have observed similar CO2 levels. Looking at the "Last 800,000 years" chart, one can observe many sudden spikes throughout the history, meaning the current "sudden spike" could be nothing but the organic state of the planet.

TheBlight 3y ago

I think it makes sense to be at least somewhat skeptical of the proxy data and treat them somewhat adversarially for the purpose of science. They seem to carry a significant amount of interpretive weight right now so they should be probed with equally substantial weight, IMO.

AnotherGoodName 3y ago

A question. Without going into detail on all the different ways to measure CO2 historically and how scientists align them against each other and also to modern direct measurements what difference does it make here anyway? We have the very accurate direct measurement for a while and the most alarming part of this in this recent direct measurement era. I feel that such questions like yours miss the rather obvious point here. How do you feel about CO2 going up ~50% since we started direct measurements?

andreygrehov 3y ago
There's a significant possibility that our assumptions about past CO2 levels might be off the mark. Considering this, it's conceivable that today's CO2 levels could actually be lower than they were at certain points in the past. What if CO2 levels fluctuate over millennia in a sinusoidal pattern, akin to seasons, and we are currently experiencing an upward trend? With that in mind, the accuracy of the existing measurements doesn't matter.
- AnotherGoodName 3y ago
  So you think it's just a coincidence that CO2 has suddenly and massively increased at this point in time and this happens all the time?
  - andreygrehov 3y ago
    It's not so much about believing in coincidences; rather, it's about considering all possible variables. The sudden and substantial rise in recorded CO2 levels could be attributed to advancements in measurement techniques and the increased frequency of those measurements. If we had access to the same level of precision and quantity of data 500 years ago, it's plausible that we might have observed similar CO2 levels. Looking at the "Last 800,000 years" chart, one can observe many sudden spikes throughout the history, meaning the current "sudden spike" could be nothing but the organic state of the planet.