Your ideas about climate change, carbon dating and climatology are idiotic.
Would you like to refresh your memory?
You are a scientific know nothing
I did show the problems with your statements previously, but if you prefer I'll repeat how idiotic your claims are.
Says the idiot
1) Establishing that you accept that risks posited by climatologists are serious.
"I have also never said I know more than the scientists
To be fair I have also never said I do not"
that statement does not establish any acknowledgement about risks what so ever
What is wrong with you?
Refusing to accept that you do not know as much about climatology as thousands of scientists who have studied it their lives.
Egotistical, bordering on Dunning Kruger effect.
Look stupid, I know enough to be skeptical of morons making absolute claims
I have the training to make an impartial evaluation which is neutral
Where as you blindly accept the propaganda conclusion without an understanding of the science
A mind is a terrible thing to waste
Ignorant claim based on total lack of understanding of the science used.
Look stupid any
estimate dating back hundreds of thousands of years has to be based upon a reference & there are limitations and errors involved in calculating such an estimate
And at the end of the day measuring past history is an estimate and always will be an estimate. If you understood even a miniscule amount of science you would know this
Carbon dating was the technique you mentioned , however limitations will apply to most other techniques
Ignorant claim based on the total lack of understanding of the science used.
Note that no mention is made of carbon dating as it is not used, despite your ignorant claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology#Reconstructing_ancient_climates
In one sentence you admit that radioactive decay is a great tool with rates that are 'essentially constant' yet in the next sentence you claim using these same techniques wouldn't be 'credible'.
You stupid moron
They know how the decay works of a short period of time (hundreds of years), however they do not know how this works over hundreds of thousands or millions of years
As pointed out carbon dating is useful for 5,000 to 10,000 years , perhaps 20,000 if strict experimental procedures are followed
Ignorant claim based on your very stupid focus on a technique not used in paleoclimatology.
Look stupid, again it boils down to an estimate and attempting to date something over a couple hundred thousand years is going to be a shaky estimate
And the capper, where you note that you refuse to admit you ever make a mistake.
This post will be copy and pasted every time you make a claim about my ignorance of science.
Fair?
You are an ignorant fool
My mistake was thinking you might lean something
Explain to us, oh self declared wise one, why humanity shouldn't worry about temperatures and CO2 levels that are rising way, way faster then the planet did during the PETM?
Because it
may
1. Not be true
2. Not be meaningful
3. not be within our control stupid
The freezing & thawing cycle of the earth continues
Can you say with absolute ceratining that temps & co2 levels have never been higher over the 4.5 B year history of the planet?
No
Which makes you nothing more than a sheep bleating out the word "denier"
your absolute opinion & especially your criticism of alternative are completely invalid as you do not understand what you preach about