# Earth's CO2 Levels Now Highest in 2.1 Million Years



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

Peak CO2 levels over the last 2.1 million years averaged only 280 parts per million; but today, CO2 is at 385 parts per million, or 38% higher. 

More...


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I'd advise reading the whole article.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

Indeed.


> "We know from looking at much older climate records that large and rapid increase in C02 in the past, (about 55 million years ago) caused large extinction in bottom-dwelling ocean creatures, and dissolved a lot of shells as the ocean became acidic," he said. "We're heading in that direction now."


That doesn't sound very promising. But hey, let's not worry about CO2 right?  Cue rabid anti CO2 rehtoric...


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Who me? noooooooo, I'd never do that LOL

I think its a bit of a stretch to conclude that CO2 was the only influence on any extinction that may or may not have happened 55 million years ago. I have no way to prove this, but I suspect the earth was a very different place back then.

In the article they do mention that global temperature and CO2 content in the atmosphere seem to be connected, but they did not go as far as to say that one controls the other or if they do, which way that control works. This does not really contradict some climate skeptics that say CO2 content trails a rise in global temperature instead of leading it.

What I did find interesting is that they came to the conclusion that CO2 content did not change during several cold periods which according the the article, conflicts with pevious ideas.

Actually it doesn't seem to draw any difinative conclusions either way, thats why I suggested to read the whole article instead of just the title. I rather like this article because it has a mild and objective flavor to it instead of wreaking of green activism.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

david85 said:


> I think its a bit of a stretch to conclude that CO2 was the only influence on any extinction that may or may not have happened 55 million years ago. I have no way to prove this, but I suspect the earth was a very different place back then.


Certainly, it's a complex system and we need to try and figure out all the different components. It's also probably a good idea not to run a giant experiment on our climate when we really don't know what we are doing, but we've already had this discussion a few times


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

I don't think it can really be helped much anymore. Its hard for me to figure out what the official stats are since there are so many, but I think it would take some 300-500 years for CO2 to come back down again (assuming they are right and telling the truth).

Like it or not, the experiment is running. Might as well start taking measurments I guess.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

And maybe cut back on the compounds we are adding into the mix with unknown consequences


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Don't see much point in arguing over possibilities. I tried to focus on facts and it always seems to come back to a philosophical argument of better safe than sorry. There is merit in that, but I'm more interested in finding facts that can be measured and documented.

Something that has proven to be supprisingly difficult in the climate change debade since everyone seems to have an agenda.


----------



## JRP3 (Mar 7, 2008)

I think it also has a lot to do with the fact that it is a very complex system that we are really just starting to comprehend. I think most peoples agenda is to figure out the truth and act accordingly, and in the meantime try not to keep messing with a system we don't understand.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

JRP3 said:


> I think it also has a lot to do with the fact that it is a very complex system that we are really just starting to comprehend. I think most peoples agenda is to figure out the truth and act accordingly, and in the meantime try not to keep messing with a system we don't understand.


Well, this may be some scientist's goal, mere understanding. I think what upsets people is the interpretation of that by politicians.


----------

