What happened here?
I farted
this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
152 points (99.4% liked)
History
23333 readers
8 users here now
Welcome to c/history! History is written by the posters.
c/history is a comm for discussion about history so feel free to talk and post about articles, books, videos, events or historical figures you find interesting
Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.
Do not post reactionary or imperialist takes (criticism is fine, but don't pull nonsense from whatever chud author is out there).
When sharing historical facts, remember to provide credible souces or citations.
Historical Disinformation will be removed
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
This website has such a stupid sense of humor because I was gonna comment this as soon as I saw this post but you beat me to it. All hexbear knows is peepee poopoo, fart, dirty owl, be gay and lie
And death to amerikkka
as a result of the industrial revolution and its effects on agriculture, a sharp upward trend occurred in the mass cultivation and consumption of the beanis (our fates were sealed soon thereafter) 
It's like the stock market. If it got this high, it can go higher.
Paleocene-eocene thermal maximum was like 2000-3000 ppm
This was 66-34 million years ago for anyone wondering.
And in the category of 'unfit for humans', though it was largely when the primates kicked out
Please label 1989
The co2 level in 1989 was 353 ppm, roughly there ^
Finally some clarity. Thank you.
Psh, another Swiftie
Sadly practical prefix that I am not at all a skeptic - I just think this graph doesn't show as much as one might argue.
Isn't ice core data actually only an indicator of 'average' CO2 concentration rolling over so many years (decades-centuries)? CO2 diffuses in fresh forming ice, and is already averaged over the 'trapping' period, so historical peaks and troughs would be largely smoothed out. I don't think this graph alone is really precise enough to claim CO2 levels could never have reached current levels for at minimum some decades (not that we have any evidence to suggest it did).
So- I'm actually not too familiar with how precise ice core measurements are. If you have something specific you think I should read I'd love to see. I'm also recovering from getting my wisdom teeth out, so I can't spend too long looking for information.
this (preprint) paper says:
broadly speaking, the shortest resolvable signal at high-accumulation sites is about one decade Trudinger, Etheridge, et al. 2002). At the lowest accumulation sites, centennial-scales features are markedly smoothed but still resolvable Nehrbass-Ahles et al. 2020
The British Antarctic Survery says:
The fastest natural increase measured in older ice cores is around 15ppm (parts per million) over about 200 years. For comparison, atmospheric CO2 is now rising 15ppm every 6 years.
Which- to me- says it jumping 100+ ppm for a few decades and then returning would leave evidence behind? And like, why would it jump so drastically?
I don't know, sorry if this isn't a lot of information, I really need to go lay down now.
Nah that's fair, and I certainly have no idea what I'm talking about either. But my understanding is that "ice core data" is a compilation of data from various ice core sampling, including those 'lowest accumulation sites' where they're saying you can only measure to the precision of centuries.
Again, I don't know, but I'm assuming we don't have "high accumulation" ice core data for all of that history, so jumping 100+ ppm for a few decades and then falling again wouldn't necessarily show up in those low accumulation sites.
Up and to the right baybeeeee 
FA
Soon, FO
Is FO when number go down?
Carbon in atmosphere goes up but somehow that makes carbon on the surface go down?
Come on, you expect me to believe that?
also
Alex Jones literally says "carbon in the atmosphere is good for you, when they say they want to reduce carbon they are just saying they want to reduce life. We are made of carbon. Think about it.
Listening to knowledge fight has made me realize how futile arguing with right-wingers actually is.