Entire Antarctic Shelf splitting away from Continent.

[RiversideGator]

Meanwhile in the 'real world', where 'science' works like magic and 'rational' people look at 'evidence'....

But I posted evidence and you fail to even address it.  If you look at the CO2 and temperature chart above it is clear that there is a natural cycle causing all of this.  Perhaps it is willful ignorance borne of political radicalism that causes this GW syndrome.

This is not a good update.  Every thing is proceeding along worst case scenarios rather than best case, most conservative projections.

Funny you mention the Arctic sea ice.  It made a dramatic recovery recently due to our frigid winter of 2007/2008:

Recent cold snap helping Arctic sea ice, scientists find
Last Updated: Friday, February 15, 2008 | 10:17 AM ET
CBC News

There's an upside to the extreme cold temperatures northern Canadians have endured in the last few weeks: scientists say it's been helping winter sea ice grow across the Arctic, where the ice shrank to record-low levels last year.

Temperatures have stayed well in the -30s C and -40s C range since late January throughout the North, with the mercury dipping past -50 C in some areas.

Satellite images are showing that the cold spell is helping the sea ice expand in coverage by about 2 million square kilometres, compared to the average winter coverage in the previous three years.

"It's nice to know that the ice is recovering," Josefino Comiso, a senior research scientist with the Cryospheric Sciences Branch of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, told CBC News on Thursday.

"That means that maybe the perennial ice would not go down as low as last year."

Canadian scientists are also noticing growing ice coverage in most areas of the Arctic, including the southern Davis Strait and the Beaufort Sea.

"Clearly, we're seeing the ice coverage rebound back to more near normal coverage for this time of year," said Gilles Langis, a senior ice forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa.

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/15/arctic-ice.html

[RiversideGator]

Actually, current evidence points towards an age of 4.54 billion years but of course there is no way to absolutely prove this. 
http://sp.lyellcollection.org/cgi/content/abstract/190/1/205

So, what caused the CO2 spike on Earth 140,000 years ago?  Ancient SUVs?

[gatorback]

There was an astroid that hit, and all those cows.  Plus, I think a few friends kept running their mouths.  Hi um, oh yeah, we said we wouldn't talk about other people.

[RiversideGator]

Here's the answer:

Only time will tell.  These things are best judged in retrospect.

But, I am asking for your opinion, looking back retrospectively, of what caused the CO2 spike 140,000 year ago.  Perhaps an earlier version of mankind destroyed itself in a vain attempt to better itself and we are now just recovering from that wasteful period?  Please enlighten.   

[RiversideGator]

I do not believe the Bible explicitly says that the Earth is +/- 6000 years old.  I do believe the scientific evidence suggests that the Earth is 4.54 billion years old. 

Now, if we can please dispense with the games, please answer my question.

[RiversideGator]

Oh, just one more question, if you please;

So, then it would be safe to say that you endorse the validity of the method(s) commonly known as "radioactive dating" and more specifically "Carbon-14 dating" as valid scientific processes whose outcomes yield accurate results in terms of establishing the actual age of the objects thusly tested?

I just want to be sure that we are working with the same basic parameters here, that's all, because I'm not really clear about where you stand on this matter either.

No more games.  You answer my original question now.

[Charleston native]

My word! Midway, are you apt to playing childish games and stalling to avoid answering a simple question? Proper adult discussion and discourse involves asking and answering questions. I think this Riverside statement:

I do believe the scientific evidence suggests that the Earth is 4.54 billion years old.

should be adequate for your inquiry.

[RiversideGator]

Talk about sophistry, midway.  You cant even offer a straight answer to a basic question.  I guess the dialog is over and you agree that I am correct then since you seem to desire to talk about other issues.

I think you are projecting when you accuse me of sophistry.  For the record, I am using the following definitions:

sophistry

noun
a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sophistry

In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defense mechanism in which one attributes one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts or/and emotions to others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

[gatorback]

I really wouldn't use a word with the Greek root "soph"in it to describe his conversations RiversideGator.  LOL.  Hey Midway....I'm back.  Was in New england hope all is well.

[RiversideGator]

So, what caused the CO2 spike on Earth 140,000 years ago?  Ancient SUVs?

[gatorback]

RG:  There was a volcano back then.  That explains it.  Or a astroid hit the earth, either way...that's what happened.  Period.  OK?

[Charleston native]

The question is disengenuous charleston...

On the contrary, Stephen, it is a legitimate question, albeit somewhat rhetorical in nature.

The devastation of the comet strikes is theoretical, as much as other theories of why CO2 concentrations were higher despite the lack of human activity. Midway misses the point of the question, dismisses it, and again resorts to discreditation of our opinions by testing them on acceptance of a certain scientific technology.

It is a vain stall tactic, especially because it's so blatant. All Midway has to do is identify why he believes CO2 concentrations were higher 140,000 years ago. This stalling either indicates that he has no idea and doesn't want to reveal weakness, or he's trying to bait others here in undermining their credibility on even having a conversation about science. Notice the constant usage of supposed Christian theology. Do our Christian beliefs automatically disqualify us from this conversation? Is that the underlying purpose of asking those questions?

[gatorback]

Midway:  One can play games all one wants; however, that wont make one a good debator.  Talk to Stephen, he's a master debator.

[RiversideGator]

But anyway, I like this definition better, as it's more straightforward:

soph·ist·ry      /ˈsɒfəstri/  Spelled Pronunciation[sof-uh-stree]
â€"noun, plural -ries.
1.   a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
2.   a false argument; sophism.
[Origin: 1300â€"50; ME sophistrie < MF, equiv. to sophistre sophister + -ie -y3]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Tell us all about your psychology degree, therapist Joe. We love hearing about your exploits.

So, what caused the CO2 spike on Earth 140,000 years ago?  Ancient SUVs?

[gatorback]

So, what caused the CO2 spike on Earth 140,000 years ago?  Ancient SUVs?

No.  It was deep water hydrogen sulfide.  Basically, the theory goes like this.  Syberian Volcanos heated an area about the size of North America.  This caused deep water to warm up.  That in turned caused deep water hydrogen sulfide to produce this nasty green sulfur bacteria: organisms that required both light and free hydrogen sulfide (H2S).  That in turn caused the CO2 spike.  Everybody does know that warm water holds less CO2 right?   Google: Oceanic Anoxic Events.