Ice Age Cycles Revealed from Antarctic Ice Cores(Analysis of Antarctica Ice Sheet ) 

In school we are taught that, in the Quaternary, there is an increase in temperature due to orbital forcing (the Milankovich cycles). This causes a release of CO2 (degassing from the oceans and permafrost melt). Since CO2 is a greenhouse gas this compounds the warming forming a feedback effect. The conspiracy theorists know that not everyone is scientifically literate and point this out (omitting the whole feedback thing) and say: see? co2 lags temperature! Then play with peoples intuition saying "if Y can cause X then X can't cause Y". But the argument that "if Y can cause X then X can't cause Y" does not make sense if you think about it for more than just a second. If this was the case there would be no feedback phenomenons anywhere.

Troll who Parrots the obvious Crap that they can't be mutually reinforcing. Troll Parrot. Polly want a cracker ? Polly want a cracker ?

@@nunofoo8620 "The conspiracy theorists know....". LoL. It IS a random conspiracy theorist (aka money practicalist if you want to GET REAL). They ALL are. They ALL are Trolls and They ALL ALWAYS will be.

@@nunofoo8620 CO2 has had zero effect on climate in the last 600 million years, until the last 20, when carbon tax was invented! Does that tell you anything? .

@@niklar55 "CO2 has had zero effect on climate in the last 600 million years, until the last 20, whe carbon tax was invented!" You don't even have the ability to understand that, while you may think that statement is correct, me, a different person than you, do not believe that statement is correct. That statement is true in your mind. In my mind that is nonsense that you consumed in conspiracy theory videos and are spewing like it was facts. So to me, that tells me that you don't understand other people have a different mind than yours, other information, and value different information/data sources than you. That tells me that you don't understand "Theory of mind".

Yawn... That's getting old.

@@hosnimubarak8869 Really? The death of plant life is getting old. What is old is the tiresome reiteration of decades long tales of false woes that never come to fruition. Admit it. You had no idea of the 150 ppm danger did you?

@@trojanthedog We live in a time of rising CO2 levels, right" So your low CO2 comment is a strawman argument. Grow up, grow a pair and get back to us.

Also, some past climate models proved to be quite accurate.

@@hosnimubarak8869 CO2 caused temperature change is the strawman, projectocrat.

Thank you.

Drivel you have, I heard it before. It's summer sunshine at circa 65N, i correlates perfectly, The ice-snow albedo feedback that causes is a huge feedback. There's bound to be more dust but that ain't a hill of beans.

@@grindupBaker 536 a.d. catastrophe repeats and cosmic events are ACTUAL DANGERS... and FREEZING STARVATION!

Thank you.

The Milankovitch cycles drive the ice ages but his takes thousands of years and their effect is too weak to cause the shifts between glacials and interglacials on their own. Ice cores show us quite clearly that as orbital changes start the warm up phase after an ice age ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. Of course many prominent "deniers " try to cherry pick this information and claim CO2 "lags" temperature change and thus cannot be a driver but the science is clear.

@@hosnimubarak8869 so CO2 release follows warming … got it!

​@@hosnimubarak8869 No they don't, a wandering planet causes the Iceages, The Floods tipped the planet off it's Axis.. Milancovitch's theory is irrelevant. You saw that here, remember that all these channels will be saying that very thing. watch this space.

Icecores at The Arctic an Antarctica would be 8.5k yrs old, app'.

@@user-li5vr6cd6o About 800,000 years old.

Thank you

This affectation is unbearable. I would be interested in the content, but I can't listen to this cringe style of speaking.

Thank you for saving my sanity.

Go out and enjoy the sun, and let the little things go. We’re all deeply irritating to someone out there. Be kind

536 a.d. catastrophe repeats and cosmic events are ACTUAL DANGERS... and FREEZING STARVATION! b.s.

If it happened? There is no proof of that afaik.

We should be finding pairs of frozen effelumps in the ice. Maybe they're there but they thought they were Mammofs.

There were multiple floods. .

@@niklar55 I agree with that statement. I believe there were floods all around the world at different times, but not one worldwide flood.

Noah’s flood was caused by a septic tank breach that washed all the religious crap downstream. He whole thing stinks

Your Geology teacher was an ignorant fool! This planet is IN an Ice Age, that started 30-40 million years ago, and has many tens of millions of years to go before it finishes.

All excellent points! Extrapolation can only provide a rough guide. There is a huge amount of energy flowing through the Earth. With so many inter-related feedback cycles in operation, including the Milankovitch cycles, nature will always tend toward an equilibrium state but will never reach it. The equilibrium state is a moving target. The recent glacial - warming "cycles" over the recent 800,000 years has proven a range of safe (for us) conditions. We can only hope that a similar pattern emerges after the ongoing release of previously and naturally sequestered carbon. To keep that hope alive, we should reduce emissions of the fossil carbon (dioxide) as much as possible. We should replace the energy being derived from burning that fossil carbon with the source of energy that has the lowest full life cycle carbon footprint Nature will indeed correct itself in its inevitable trend towards equilibrium - even if that requires flipping into a very different state. Chaos is lurking out there somewhere. We also have the means to correct our actions and reason to hope that our corrections will have some regard for humanity.

@@virgilfenn2364 Well first you agree with me and then you seem to immediately return to the assumption that carbon driven global warming is a real and serious concern. So far as I can see, convincing evidence of impending carbon driven catastrophe is entirely lacking. We know that at least one third, and possibly more, of recent warming has been caused by the reduction in particulate and sulphur emissions due to such things as clean air acts, the switch to alternative fuels (including north Atlantic shipping) and of course Lockdown. In other words, anti-climate change legislation is actually causing warming. Even so, predicted sea-level changes and other catastrophes have dramatically failed to come true. Isn't that sufficient evidence to re-examine all assumptions and delay Draconian legislation that is threatening the very stability of the world economy?

@@kubhlaikhan2015 The prediction that no action is needed has even more uncertainty than my warning that we should at least replace the energy we are getting from fossil fuels with the source of energy that emits the least amount of CO2. We should do our best to NOT push the global climate even further from the relative stability of the recent 800,000 years. Convincing evidence that there will NOT be an impending carbon driven catastrophe is entirely lacking. Complacency in the face of a 50% increase in at least one of the materials involved in a crucial feedback loop is not wise.

"So, CO2 rises after a temperature rise. " Yes, that can happen "Not the other way around" Wrong. A rise CO2 will lead to rise in temperatures If your justification is "if Y can cause X then X can't cause Y" we would not have ANY feedbacks or a vicious cycles in nature. This is how conspiracy websites brainwash people with no scientific training. By playing with your intuition.

A small increase in temperature causes release of co2 from the oceans. This initial temperature increase doesn’t have to be a lot. When the co2 is released, this causes a warming effect, which releases more co2, which will in turn increases the temperature. This is the main driving force behind the interglacial periods, that is started by what’s called the milankovitch cycle, where the earth’s obliquity (the tilt of the earth) changes, in a cycle that’s about 80,000 years, when the tilt is back to the same degree again. Tl;dr: an increase in temperature releases co2, after that an increase in co2 raises the temperature.

@@Twinrehz CO2 in the concentrations we have in our atmospheres is mostly irrelevant, otherwise we would have a snowball effect where the planet would warm up to oblivion and stay there, the planet instead follows the cycles and CO2 comes and goes as a consequence, not as a driving force.

@@sjwarialaw8155 It would only warm up to oblivion if the supply of CO2 was infinite, which it for very obvious reasons is not.

@@Twinrehz therefore CO2 being mostly irrelevant.

Before, I used AI voice-over, but now I'm using human voice-over from a professional voice actor.