Yes very interesting, a little wide of the mark in a couple of...

  1. 543 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 25
    Yes very interesting, a little wide of the mark in a couple of spots - not sure where you referenced this from.

    Terrestrial plant life is a relatively modern feature. The atmosphere was oxygenated long before plants began to inhabit land. Cyanobacteria and algae were producing O2 from around 3.5 billion years ago (plants didn't get onto land until over 3 billion years later). The initial atmosphere and oceans were reducing, so most early O2 was used up weathering rocks and precipitating Fe out of the oceans (banded iron formations were laid down long long before plants were on the land) but once those oxygen sinks were exhausted the atmosphere contained free O2, however, it wasn't until plants began to inhabit the land in the Palaeozoic that levels really started to kick off.

    As amazing as the geological and biological changes that have occurred, the fact that the changes have occurred in no way invalidates the changes happening now that are anthropogenic. I really don't understand your rationale. It's like saying that there is no such thing as arson as bush-fires occurred in the Carboniferous.

    "Are you prepared to say that Earth's climate has evolved to its optimum just in time for your personal benefit, and only mankind is altering it?"
    Strictly speaking it was the Holocene that provided the climatic envelope for civilisation to flourish. So yes, it was for humanity's benefit, which is my benefit and yours. But it is erroneous, simplistic and another *** to project that anyone thinks the only climate changes occurring must be anthropogenic. It is obvious that there is natural climatic noise and cycles of varying periods, but sitting there within the noise is a gradual trend that is the anthropogenic component.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.