Ok Anons. How did it melt so fast?

Man made "climate change"?: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentide_Ice_Sheet

youtube.com/watch?v=-W6Lftgq8mg

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=tQwHi3VxOww
archive.4plebs.org/_/search/subject/knowledge bomb/username/anonymous5/tripcode/!!9O2tecpDHQ6/
youtube.com/watch?v=r7aZ6vqCk2E
youtube.com/watch?v=ue8rVSmrmZ0
scientificamerican.com/article/what-thawed-the-last-ice-age/
icecores.org/icecores/drilling.shtml
antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
youtube.com/watch?v=yXMcR1D-vSE
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

probably all the excess CO2 from campfires and mammoth oil

Here's an image of what the coastlines looked like 13,000 years ago. The cod level was about 280ppm at the end of the last ice age, and sea level was about 400 feet lower.

If it wasn't co2 or "man made climate change" why did it melt in less than 4000 years?

I'm at the point where I can't tell if you're asking legitimately or just dripping with sarcasm in an attempt to undermine the global warming narrative. There's so many idiots on here with flat-earther tier denialist arguments that I just can't tell anymore.

You can google "Why did the last ice age end" and it will answer all your questions.

Changes in insolation, inducing a small initial warming, which caused the release of CO2 from oceans and soils. Ice-albedo feedback from then on

In addition, a possible dust-load feedback caused by glacial slowdown of the water cycle

Meteor impact on the ice sheet itself, possible multiple impacts from a single object breaking up as it neared Earth. There's some pretty insane evidence of massive amounts of water flowing over the landscape from that period, more than most people even think about.

>google "Why did the last ice age end"
>articles all state
>might have
>possibly
>unexplained
>possibility that

ya, while I believe pumping CO2 into the air is bad, you all don't know shit and you are just playing a guessing game using the little evidence you have

Some have recently estimated (beginning ~2007) four small pieces of a comet struck the Cordileran Ice Sheet 11,800 years ago. The impacts threw large amounts of water into the upper atmosphere along with melting a large piece of the ice sheet. All the added water vapor induced a warming cycle that may have possibly accelerated the end of the ice age.

Joe Rogan is asking new questions too. youtube.com/watch?v=tQwHi3VxOww

The Deluge.

Mars got warmer. How did that happen? It wasn't my Ford explorer.

What gets my almonds activating is the rapid temperature drop that must have occurred to flash-freeze a fucking mammoth.
good source for the curious, any of the Carlson episodes are great but Hancock can come off as a thinskinned prat, even though I think he's right on a lot of things. Randal and his magic slideshow make a stronger case than Graham's "DMT showed me what really happened" stories. I think he's onto something though.

the residence time of an average water molecule in the atmosphere is much to short for that and its concentration is also limited by the temperature.
This means that any access of water vapor is precipitated out way too fast (in a matter of a few days) to cause any real change of equilibrium temperature

All that ice is on land but the shorelines seem to be normal.

When all that ice melted where did the water go?

The ice is not in the water so it should have increased ocean levels.

Pole shift

it did
5m/century at the peak

Future Humans learned how to pump heat back in time, ending both Global warming and saving our ancestors from the Ice Age

what makes you think that this (or any other) mammoth was "flash-frozen"?

It melted because prehistoric man wasnt properly taxed apparently.

Climate changes, not our fault, deal with it.

Slash and burn technique by cavemen.

so like newyork was frozen when people first had cars. wow you learn something new every day

pole shift doesnt rotate the earth

Current models are a lie. Prior to the end of the last cataclysmic cycle North America was the north pole.

meteor impact seems the mos plausible theory for the end of the Ice age

If only Mexico were a frozen tundra

Undigested flowering plants recovered from the stomach of that particular specimen. Given the mass and time required to freeze it solid the stomach contents should have been at least partially digested. The implication being that between eating the plants and becoming a mammoth-Popsicle there wasn't enough time for digestion to occur. Keep in mind how large the animal is and how long it takes to freeze something like that solid, and how cold it has to be to do it quickly.

>You can google "Why did the last ice age end"
Because you cannot explain it?

do you have a source where this is described?

Climate Cycles.(You have larger ones & smaller ones, it also depends on Region).

Archives: archive.4plebs.org/_/search/subject/knowledge bomb/username/anonymous5/tripcode/!!9O2tecpDHQ6/

Your mom farted and melted the ice it was like "PPPPPPTTTTTSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS" and then your mom caused a giant flood

meteor

SOLAR FLARE.
Radiation blasting earth like that is why we cant trust carbon dating.

It got hit by a huge fucking comet.

Based on this, the temperature rise has been even more gradual than previous.

WE FIXED GLOBAL WARMING!

>Temperatures are starting to go up just as CO2 from industrial outputs goes up
Just a coincidence goy

>Meteor impact on the ice sheet itself
no evidence for that

> There's some pretty insane evidence of massive amounts of water flowing over the landscape
no there isnt not more than you would expect from the current accepted theory.

stop watching pseudo scientists on the Rogan podcast.

what this meteor hypothesis really fails to explain is the periodicity of the glacial cycle.

similarly sized ice sheets have disintegrated several times before to the same extend, with a period of almost exactly 100.000 years.

Is there a string of giant meteors who happen to hit the same place (North America) with a steady rhythm of 100k years?

>you all don't know shit and you are just playing a guessing game using the little evidence you have
Welcome to science, retard

and why did it change? have you ever looked into that?

here a video for starters it includues your little graph too

youtube.com/watch?v=r7aZ6vqCk2E

>there was a time where it would've been impossible for Canada to exist
>you're alive at the time when you have to deal with the eternal leaf
>tfw

>In one of the coldest periods in the last 65 million years
>Be surprised when the temperature starts going up

see Randal Carlson for more details
>no there isnt
Oh shit nevermind then, I'm now convinced.

is there any scientific article or blogpost that would allow a tracing of the original source? If you don't have any of those, can you at least tell me the name of the mammoth you were talking about?

that's not how the climate works. It doesn't just get warm because it was cold earlier

imagine being one

Just wait until it all melts baby. We're barely halfway done.

There was one and only one ice age following the flood. It ended. The ice cap rings are misleading because they are not annual rings. They are laid down when there is melting and cooling. As many as a dozen rings can form in a week. The total thickness of the ice caps, given annual snow fall and compaction, amounts to about 4,500 years of total snow fall.

What happened 4,500 to 4,600 years ago? The flood.

youtube.com/watch?v=ue8rVSmrmZ0

Ice core data is provably a farce.

>scientificamerican.com/article/what-thawed-the-last-ice-age/

Scientists consensus is the rise in CO2 but the evidence suggests uneven temp rises.

Conveniently, "the full effects won't be felt for centuries" which shows alarmism is rampant for pseudo-scientists and that even if the climate scientists are wrong they won't be remembered enough to curse at anyway

What a shitshow

well the earth is flat for 1

why would you expect the "full effect" to be observable when there is a several kilometer deep ocean and several kilometer thick ice sheets on the planet?

>Randal Carlson
lay down the weed, bro, you think buying in to some dude's conjecture is science? as i said stop watching pseudo scientists on the JRE and especially stop spreading that cancer as science.

please refer to this video
youtube.com/watch?v=ue8rVSmrmZ0
Scientific America is using a provably false axiom for ice core dating. The rings are not annual rings. Glacer Girl, the plane taken out of the ice nearly a football field [300 ft] under ice and hundreds of "annual rings" deep, proves this and was not far from one of the ice core sets in Greenland if you simply look at where they were collected.

Sudbury area in canada is evidenced of a nickle meteor impact.

Comet(s), bruh!

too bad that the temporal gap between that impact and the deglaciation is about 1.8 billion years wide

This would be Crustal Displacement

youtube.com/watch?v=ue8rVSmrmZ0

Ice core data is provably flawed.
Any comments? Any thoughts?

If you think car farts is enough to fuck up what nature took over 4 billion years to perfect, you might be gullible

How do you know what the full effect is?

>SPOONFEED ME
No.

what that question essentially boils down to is how we know the equilibrium climate sensitivity, for which there are about half a dozen independent lines of evidence, everything from looking at the short-term climate variability (during an El Nino for example) to analysis of the entire temperature evolution of the Cenozoic.
All of these lines of evidence converge around 0.75°C/(W/m2).

The bottom line of this is that we expect a total warming of just under 2°C (compared to 1750) with the concentration of WMGHGs already in the atmosphere.

The deeper you go, the more compact the layers become.

For the love of god don't fall for the "earth is 6000 years old" nonsense. It's fucking dumb, dude.

Crazy how they've been mining that shit for well over a hundred years and it's still going. I think it's the second largest meteor mine deposit after somewhere in South Africa.

>The deeper you go, the more compact the layers become.

Exactly.
Did you even watch the video? You only can account for about 4600 years of total accrued ice core thickness.

>man is causing global waraming, zomg !!!
ok, what caused the second ice age to end?
>uh.....

icecores.org/icecores/drilling.shtml

>The oldest continuous ice core records extend to 130,000 years in Greenland, and 800,000 years in Antarctica

Boy, that sure is a far flung cry from 4,600.

we don't have to make assumptions about the age of ice cores and glaciologists certainly don't date them by counting out hundreds of thousands of annual ice rings.
To take just one example: interspersed between the ice are sharp horizons of volcanic tephra, which can be dated by various radiometric dating techniques

there are actually endeavors underway right now to try to recover 1.5 million year old ice from the East Antarctic ice sheet

Explain to me how ice core data can be trusted as a dating methodology when the rings are not annual.

In fact, explain to me any dating methodology to prove the earth is "old." Bear in mind that C14 in diamonds is measurable, yet should not exist in any measurable amount in diamonds that were formed over "millions of years of compression." There should simply be zero (or close to zero) C14 in the carbon of diamonds, yet there it is, every-time we look. We don't know how much daughter element is in other radio-graphic dating methodologies, so we cannot tell how old they are either.

And the fossil dating? Fossils are dated on layer of sediment. Layers of sediment are dated by the fossils we find. See the problem? It is circular logic. The sediment is also provably false. How do you explain things like this? (pic related)

Did the dinosaur that stepped over this track have a size 22 human foot? I think not.

of course it doesn't explain glacial cycles, but sure as hell explains how the Younger Dryas started,there's another hyphotesis about how the Lachar See went off bigtime and started the warming of the planet

but I stay behing the Clovis comet theory, there's abundant evidence for that

All you stupid heads who don't believe what the media and big money tell you too believe are stupid heads and you came from Reddit and Jews and stuff.
Science is cleverer than you and I'm really really really really clever and science is what I think you stupid headed stupid heads.
Oohhhh! Mom I got my dick stuck in the dohnuts again and there's jam all over my balls and Fido won't lick it off of me Mooooommm! Do something or you're Reddit and Jews and stuff.

radiometric dating techniques involve knowing the amount of parent element that was present. How do you determine that? There is measurable amounts of C14 in diamonds, (C14 having a very fast decay rate) in coal that is determined to be "millions or years old." It should not be there, plain and simple, yet there it is, in every diamond tested. Explain how coal can be this old when we see these in nature (pic related). It is a tree growing through "millions of years of sediment." That tree was standing when all those layers were laid down, in one catastrophic event: the flood.

your average Sup Forums IQ is showing

TFW
You don't need to indulge in sophistry when a lie is clearly a lie

Canadians have too much gay sex

Russian hackers

I'm getting really mixed messages here:
most people seem to put a meteor forward as an explanation for deglaciation (i.e. warming), now you're telling me that its an explanation for the Younger Dryas (i.e. cooling)

So do Canadians mums

>debate climate change

>on a board with flat-earthers, creationists, hollow-earthers, and general "anyone who disagrees with me is personally paid by Soros" conspiracy theorists

If I wanted to be this frustrated, I'd pay a prostitute for some tease-and-denial

Again, a petrified tree growing through "7 million years of sediment."

I contend that all the sediment was laid down all at once. The grand canyon and Canyon de Chay are both evidence of a singular, cataclysmic flood.

"this ice sheet melted in less than 4000 years"

Well no fucking shit. It doesn't take 6 million years to gas a fucking earth.

Reminder that our age, the Holocene, is an interglacial period and that we are still in an ice age.
[i]In the present interglacial, the Holocene, the climatic optimum occurred during the Subboreal (5 to 2.5 ka BP, which corresponds to 3000 BC-500 BC) and Atlanticum (9 to 5 ka, which corresponds to roughly 7000 BC-3000 BC). Our current climatic phase following this climatic optimum is still within the same interglacial (the Holocene). This warm period was followed by a gradual decline until about 2,000 years ago, with another warm period until the Little Ice Age (1250-1850).[/i]

sorry I meant the ending of the dryas, I'm hungover and can't think straight

The laurentide ice sheet over north america was hit repeatedly with comets, creating a melting feedback loop. There's literally no other way it could have melted that fast. I suggest watch the video in the OP, it's interesting as fuck.

don't you mean "6 gorillion"?

Solar output is slowly but constantly increasing. It becomes very noticeable over tens of thousands of years.

>no evidence for that
Watch the video before spewing this reddit line from your dumb face . There's metallic evidence in the geo record, immense water flow formations visible today, etc

The rings are fucking annual. antarcticglaciers.org/glaciers-and-climate/ice-cores/ice-core-basics/

Explain to me why in the fuck your listening to some goddamn creationist who flat out misleads the audience with that plane shit?

As for the fossil, I don't know jack shit about it and I ain't going to pretend to.

what do you mean with a "melting feedback loop"?

Mooooommmm! My friends won't believe me and it's not fair! Oohhhh! I'm soooo angwee mooommmm you bitch.

The grand canyon wouldn't be formed of a singular flood. It's intricate patterns dictate constant water erosion in very precise direction for millions upon millions of years.

Just how large is Antartica in that picture??

because that plane, after only being under the ice 46 years, had hundreds of "annual rings" above it. Shouldn't it have... 46?

By the way, it crashed a few miles from where they took ice core data.

I'm not listening
I'm doooing science!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

The term is named after Serbian geophysicist and astronomer Milutin Milanković. In the 1920s, he theorized that variations in eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession of the Earth's orbit resulted in cyclical variation in the solar radiation reaching the Earth, and that this orbital forcing strongly influenced climatic patterns on Earth.

Mohammad was a nigger

not really...
youtube.com/watch?v=yXMcR1D-vSE

There is plenty of evidence that people refuse to look at, that prove it was one single event.

How does a river channel through a mountain range of thousands of feet? Hard to explain with the gradual water erosion...

We burnt the bodies of french, natives, and americans, which melted the ice.

sure
can you explain that feedback you were talking about in a sentence or two?

Glad we are having a rational debate here?

Do you know what the best vaccination against knowledge?

Condemnation before investigation.