Earth's past is warning for the future

Mar 07, 2012 By Ambrosia Brody and Robert Perkins
USC Dornsife alumna Sarah Greene, who earned a Ph.D. in geological studies in 2011, and Rowan Martindale, a doctoral candidate in earth sciences, contributed to a recent study that looks at geological records for evidence that mass extinction events may have been caused by ocean acidification.

When the Earth’s carbon dioxide level increased at a rapid rate during the Triassic-Jurassic period 200 million years ago, nearly half the ocean’s marine life became extinct. USC Dornsife geologists contributed to a recent paper that examines materials embedded in ancient rocks to provide clues about the possibility of similar future global events.

The study published in the March 2 issue of Science indicates that may have been the cause of extinction events in the past, and warns of future extinctions because an even more severe acidification event is happening today.

USC Dornsife alumna Sarah Greene, who earned a Ph.D. in geological studies in 2011, and Rowan Martindale, a doctoral candidate in earth sciences, joined scientists from 18 institutions worldwide in researching geological records. The evidence suggests what the future holds if atmospheric human-induced carbon dioxide levels continue to increase.

Greene and Martindale along with 19 other scientists report that examining the fossil records of ancient acidification events may provide scholars with evidence to predict and plan for future global changes. Bärbel Hönisch of Columbia University was the paper’s lead researcher.

Martindale and Greene have scoured ancient rock beds in Austria, England, British Colombia and Nevada for evidence of acidification.

“The Triassic-Jurassic event tells us that carbon dioxide increase coupled with a hypothesized acidification event caused a mass extinction,” Martindale said. “That may tell us what organisms will die or survive in the near future and how long it will take for things to recover, if they do recover.”

The study discusses how carbon dioxide emissions affect marine life. When gases are emitted, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is absorbed into Earth’s oceans. When carbon dioxide and water bind together to create carbonic acid, the ocean becomes more acidic and water pH levels decrease; an event known as ocean acidification. The average ocean pH has decreased from 8.2 to 8.1 since the late 18th century industrial revolution and may decrease by additional 0.2 to 0.3 pH units by the end of this century, Martindale said.

David Bottjer, chair of USC Dornsife’s Department of Earth Sciences and professor of sciences and biological sciences, ignited Martindale’s interest in the Triassic-Jurassic period during her first year at USC by recommending she combine her interest in reef ecosystems with mass extinctions. Since 2007, she has researched evidence of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to determine the chemistry behind ocean acidification in order to understand effects on ecosystems.

“The contribution made by Rowan and Sarah to this paper is crucial to the study’s success,” Bottjer said, “particularly in the analysis of the possibility that the end-Triassic mass extinction was an ocean acidification event."

The geological record during the Triassic-Jurassic event provides scientists a strong indication that an ocean acidification event occurred. When the supercontinent Pangaea began to split apart into the continents that we know today, there was strong volcanic activity (volcanoes from Newfoundland to Morocco); these volcanoes caused atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to increase and the ocean’s pH level decreased.

Carbonic acids in the ocean can dissolve the shells of oysters and clams and also wreak havoc on marine life such as coral reefs. Lower pH levels also adversely affect nitrogen levels, which marine life rely on to survive, Martindale said.

Greene said the geological record parallels some important aspects of anthropogenic climate change — or the production of greenhouse gases emitted by human activity.

“We can look at the outcomes of these paleo-events to inform our predictions for the future,” Greene said. “The rate at which carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere is critical in determining the severity of ocean chemistry change that will result — and the faster the carbon dioxide release the worse it gets.”

Although similarities exist, no past event perfectly parallels future projections in terms of disrupting the balance of ocean carbonate chemistry, Martindale noted. 

“We want scientists and governments to look at these past events and learn from them,” Martindale said. “We see intervals in the rock record when pH dropped and those events led to extinctions of marine organisms. That result is really powerful because we’re showing it happened before and could happen again.”

Explore further: The mysteries of Antarctic sea ice

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

And the microbes shall inherit the Earth

Oct 13, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Global warming is not a novel phenomenon, and by studying what happened to the planet during a period of global warming about 250 million years ago, one USC Dornsife scientist hopes to discover ...

Limiting ocean acidification under global change

Aug 20, 2010

Emissions of carbon dioxide are causing ocean acidification as well as global warming. Scientists have previously used computer simulations to quantify how curbing of carbon dioxide emissions would mitigate climate impacts. ...

Recommended for you

User comments : 51

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Howhot
4.2 / 5 (10) Mar 08, 2012
From the thread;
The study published in the March 2 issue of Science indicates that ocean acidification may have been the cause of extinction events in the past, and warns of future extinctions because an even more severe acidification event is happening today.


HAPPENING TODAY! Not much needs to be added to that except for the alarm and panic!
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (20) Mar 08, 2012
howhot. . .don't forget to take your meds. . .and your antacid.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 08, 2012
Perhaps you could offer him some of your anti-psychotic stash of pills RitchieTard
_nigmatic10
1.5 / 5 (17) Mar 08, 2012
Until we can verify and prove what caused the mass extinction of the Triassic-Jurassic period, placing the events outcome at the feet of the after-event increase in CO2 levels amounts to alarmism and poor science.
rubberman
3.5 / 5 (17) Mar 08, 2012
Until we can verify and prove what caused the mass extinction of the Triassic-Jurassic period, placing the events outcome at the feet of the after-event increase in CO2 levels amounts to alarmism and poor science.


From the article.

" Since 2007, she has researched evidence of elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to determine the chemistry behind ocean acidification in order to understand effects on ecosystems."

Ya....researching the same thing for 5 years rarely enables someone to to postulate a viable hypothesis...you should contact her directly with your remark and see if she can rebut your insight.
Howhot
4.9 / 5 (7) Mar 09, 2012
Here are YOUR MEDS itchieguy;

Carbonic acids in the ocean can dissolve the shells of oysters and clams and also wreak havoc on marine life such as coral reefs. Lower pH levels also adversely affect nitrogen levels, which marine life rely on to survive


Yeah, Itchieguy, you need a massive dose of Carbonic Acid as part of your Medication regiment too. OYSTER SHELLS; how do you deal with the scum?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (16) Mar 09, 2012
nigmatic says:
Until we can verify and prove what caused the mass extinction of the Triassic-Jurassic period, placing the events outcome at the feet of the after-event increase in CO2 levels amounts to alarmism and poor science.


LOL. . .it's like cops arresting their suspect long before all the results come back from the lab. The finger-printing, blood samples, hair samples and skin cells, DNA sequencing isn't over yet, but the cops break the door down while yelling, "we know you did it. Put your hands behind your back and come quietly". The poor guy tells them, "Where's your evidence and your warrant?" And in their excitement and fervor they take him out back and hang him from a tree, and later on, they get a call from Forensics with the bad news. They hung the wrong person. The cops then convince each other that it didn't matter who done it. The important thing is there was a body and they had to blame someone. Anyone. Yah. .the AGWites are eager to hang the rest of

RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (16) Mar 09, 2012
humanity, but AGWites can't bear to let go of their own fossil fuel usage. The double standard lives on in the AGW community.
Acidification can come from many sources, including welling up of bubbles of CO2 and methane from undersea volcanoes, underwater landslides, tsunamis, and even from continental subduction. Fish eat algae, plankton and dead matter in the water. The earth cycles and recycles everything. Why, it even recycles AGWites. :)
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 09, 2012
from: http://www.coralf...faq.html

"One of the most important predators of corals is the Pacific Oceans Crown of Thorns Sea Star. It is estimated that a single Crown of Thorns Sea Star can eat from 2 to 6 square meters (6 to 20 square feet) of corals per year. Many fish species such as parrotfish, butterfly fish and tangs also include corals as part of their diet. Attentive divers and snorkelers hear the crunch of hungry parrotfish as they chew up their delectable meal that includes the skeleton. Other coral predators include some types of marine snails and marine slugs, known as nudibranchs. Interestingly, these coral predators digest the animal tissue and release the symbiotic algae (zooxanthellae) in their feces. The nudibranchs may also keep the nematocysts (stinging structures) and symbiotic algae for their own nutritional use."
Corals are eaten by sea life. That is a part of what is called. . . .er, um. . . .Nature.
Fertilizer runoff, et al can be controlled and housing
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 09, 2012
development can be discouraged or banned from estuary sites and, when all that can be done has been done to avert AGW and acidification is STILL happening, then it can't be AGW at fault. It's just Nature doing her thing. No need to panic and have heart palpitations, people. You CAN work with conservation groups and to educate the people who are the most likely to affect the environment with their usage of pollutive products. But if you just talk about it, all panicked and yelling at us who don't pollute, we're not solving the problem, IF their is a problem.

I'll have to remember next time to bring a bottle of smelling salts for howhot. :))
Howhot
4.6 / 5 (9) Mar 09, 2012
Itchieguy makes a bunch of lammo and obvious statements and then ends with
The earth cycles and recycles...


Obviously the earth recycles, but if you make the ocean acidic from GIGATONS of CO2 from burning fossil fuel, and the base level PH of the ocean becomes so low that it CAN'T SUPPORT LIFE, then it will take millions of years for earth to RECYCLE.

Your brain need recycling itchieguy. At least a re-education, cause your arguments are dumb.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (12) Mar 09, 2012
Who was burning coal and oil during the Jurassic?

"The flux of CO2 from deep-sea hydrothermal systems to the ocean may be significant."
http://www.scienc...97100460
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (12) Mar 09, 2012
"Scientists Discover Liquid Carbon Dioxide 'Champagne' Bubbles At Hydrothermal Vent"
http://www.scienc...4942.htm
Howhot
4.6 / 5 (9) Mar 09, 2012
So R2, that's a good link, but it's irrelevant because that was a natural event over a million year time period. The GIGATONS of CO2
that you, me and the rest of the world has put into the Earth's thin atmosphere has happened in the last 50 years.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 09, 2012
"Scientists Discover Liquid Carbon Dioxide 'Champagne' Bubbles At Hydrothermal Vent" - RyggTard

Ya, it's not often you find Liquid CO2, it is usually either a gas or a solid.

It takes some unusual conditions for it to be a liquid.

Is that your point Tard Boy?

http://www.myvids...sen_2012
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (6) Mar 09, 2012
"Who was burning coal and oil during the Jurassic?" - RyggTard

199 million years ago during the Jurassic period, the continents were not in the same location they are today.

http://www.myvids...sen_2012
There was no land mass at the south pole and the ocean currents were very much different.

Why do you think that the climate would be the same?

Poor RyggTard. Scientifically illiterate to the end.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.9 / 5 (7) Mar 09, 2012
Richie Tard seems to be blissfully ignorant of the fact that we observe the ocean surface waters to be acidifying, not the those of the deep ocean.

Poor Richie Tard. Other denialists have stated that there could be a million volcanoes under the arctic ocean all erupting at the same time to warm the arctic waters.

Richie Tard seems to be suffering from the same level of psychopathic delusion.

"Acidification can come from many sources, including welling up of bubbles of CO2 and methane from undersea volcanoes" - Richie Tard
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (14) Mar 10, 2012
So R2, that's a good link, but it's irrelevant because that was a natural event over a million year time period. The GIGATONS of CO2
that you, me and the rest of the world has put into the Earth's thin atmosphere has happened in the last 50 years.

OOOOO....GIGA TONS! Wow, sounds like a LOT!
Compared to ...what?
Mass of atm: 5.3 x 10^18 kg
50 Giga TONS ~10e-6 of mass of atm.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 10, 2012
Richie Tard seems to be blissfully ignorant of the fact that we observe the ocean surface waters to be acidifying, not the those of the deep ocean.


Poor Venditard seems to believe that CO2 and methane bubbles remain on the ocean floor and rarely, if ever, rises to the surface waters and into the atmosphere. Here's an experiment for you to perform, Vendi. . .get into a bathtub full of salty water and let out a fart or 2 and see if the CO2 and methane bubbles from your ass rise to the surface where you can give them the nose test. After that, wiggle around a bit in the water to simulate an undersea volcanic eruption while you fart some more and see if the bubbles stay down instead of rising to the water's surface and into your nose.

[qPoor Richie Tard. Other denialists have stated that there could be a million volcanoes under the arctic ocean all erupting at the same time to warm the arctic waters.

See above for Socialist AGWite bathtub experiment.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (15) Mar 10, 2012
thanks for that link, rygg2

from: http://www.scienc...4942.htm

"Out of the hundreds and hundreds of known hydrothermal areas, it was an exciting discovery to find another location with liquid carbon dioxide, said John Lupton, an oceanographer at NOAAs Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle. The only other reported area is in the Okinawa Trough in the Pacific Ocean.
The finding of liquid carbon dioxide will help scientists as they study the effects of carbon dioxide rich waters on organisms living in those waters. A study this summer reported on laboratory experiments where the shells of calcium-carbonate creatures dissolved in carbon dioxide rich waters.""

Well, that certainly appears to vindicate the "liquid CO2" from hydrothermal undersea vents, which make it a reality, not hypothesis. Add to that the clathrates that were found with the CO2 from cooler vents which dispursed somehow when the test bottle was raised to a certain height
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 10, 2012
and the CO2 in the bottle bubbled violently as it turned into CO2 gas, and there it is. . .the proof that CO2 is being produced by undersea volcanic action which adds to atmospheric CO2 as the bubbles well up from the hydrothermal vents and into Venditard's and howhot's noses, respectively.
Thanks also to NOAA scientists, the truth about CO2 sources emerge again and again.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (14) Mar 10, 2012
Undersea hydrothermal vents > from cooler vents > liquid CO2 and clathrates

http://fehm.lanl....2002.pdf
Howhot
5 / 5 (6) Mar 10, 2012
It's really good that you are actually looking up data points to prove you arguments R2 and Itchieguy. There is a problem though with both the analysis; First Itchieguy, that is a very cool link, I would have never imagined vents could make liquid CO2 but then it is under miles of ocean at alien pressures. The problem with your argument is that those hydrothermal vents didn't just magically appear 50 years ago. They've been there for as long as the oceans have existed, so the CO2 from the hydrothermal vents is just part of the natural background (which should be about 230ppm CO2) It's 400ppm NOW! 170ppm of that is all MAN MADE!

R2; you say the atmosphere is 50 Giga TONS ~10e-6 of mass of atm. Based on that, adding a GIGATON of CO2 (on top of what is normal) should be diluted be in that 50 tons. Almost all of that 50G Tons is nitrogen, then Oxygen and then CO2. Of those only CO2 Greenhouse gas. We are adding 4-5 gigatons of CO2 yearly!

It's a big deal! Major Huge!
Howhot
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 11, 2012
Also, if you think I'm lying or I'm just saying that for politics, look it up. Science isn't bullshitting you.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
They've been there for as long as the oceans have existed, so the CO2 from the hydrothermal vents is just part of the natural background

Part background? They continue to emit CO2. Or are you suggesting there are processes that maintain some sort of equilibrium for 'natural' thermal vent CO2 emissions but not others?
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 11, 2012
Also, if you think I'm lying or I'm just saying that for politics, look it up. Science isn't bullshitting you.

What science?
AGWites worship uncertain climate models that tell them what they want to hear. That is not science.
If politics was not an issue, why do you promote socialist solutions not scientific ones?
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
Hottie, science like this:
"Some scientists call the cosmological constant the "worst prediction of physics." And when todays theories give an estimated value that is about 120 orders of magnitude larger than the measured value, its hard to argue with that title. "
http://www.physor...firstCmt
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
howhot says:
It's really good that you are actually looking up data points to prove you arguments R2 and Itchieguy. There is a problem though with both the analysis; First Itchieguy, that is a very cool link, I would have never imagined vents could make liquid CO2 but then it is under miles of ocean at alien pressures. The problem with your argument is that those hydrothermal vents didn't just magically appear 50 years ago. They've been there for as long as the oceans have existed, so the CO2 from the hydrothermal vents is just part of the natural background (which should be about 230ppm CO2) It's 400ppm NOW! 170ppm of that is all MAN MADE!

Wrong. . .you are going on the false premise that hydrothermal vents under great pressure are static and never changing in their CO2 and methane emissions of bubbles to the surface.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
CO2 and methane emissions change - greater or lower - according to the pressure of the magma far below the vents. This also characterizes another property of the island building processes in the Pacific and other parts of the world. The Earth is still undergoing major changes which includes CO2 production. Deep sea hydrothermal vents as well as mid-range (closer to the surface) let out their gases just like Venditard/Cardacian in his bathtub experiment. The major difference between deep sea and mid-range vents is the difference in pressure that allows the CO2 to become gaseous bubbles that rush to the surface. Vents produce gases at varying volume. If magma is pushing upwards, the gases are pushed upward ahead of the magma, which causes the bubbling effect at the vent sites. These vents produce far greater CO2 and methane that affect sea life than CO2 produced by coal-fired furnaces and it is virtually impossible to scrub and filter vent-caused CO2 and methane in deep sea or mid-range.
Howhot
5 / 5 (5) Mar 11, 2012
About 7.8 GTons of CO2 corresponds to 1 ppm of CO2 rise. In the past it averaged a pretty consistent 280ppm up until the 1800s. It's rate of increase has in CO2 emissions has slowly rampped up exponentially, just as Al Gore showed in his movie; "An Inconvenient Truth", and is now at 2011 levels of 393.65ppm.
So somehow, (113 * 7.8) = 881 GTons of CO2 have been added (above and beyond background) to the atmosphere in 211 years (almost most of that from 1995-2011). 881 GIGA-TONS OF ADDED CO2!!!

That is not due to vulcanism or hydrothermal vents. It's people.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (12) Mar 11, 2012
About 7.8 GTons of CO2 corresponds to 1 ppm of CO2 rise. In the past it averaged a pretty consistent 280ppm up until the 1800s. It's rate of increase has in CO2 emissions has slowly rampped up exponentially, just as Al Gore showed in his movie; "An Inconvenient Truth", and is now at 2011 levels of 393.65ppm.
So somehow, (113 * 7.8) = 881 GTons of CO2 have been added (above and beyond background) to the atmosphere in 211 years (almost most of that from 1995-2011). 881 GIGA-TONS OF ADDED CO2!!!

That is not due to vulcanism or hydrothermal vents. It's people.

How much heat is 'trapped' by 1ppm CO2 at 15 um, at 300K?
Excalibur
2.7 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012
How much heat is generated by your inane bleating?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (12) Mar 11, 2012
About 7.8 GTons of CO2 corresponds to 1 ppm of CO2 rise. In the past it averaged a pretty consistent 280ppm up until the 1800s. It's rate of increase has in CO2 emissions has slowly rampped up exponentially, just as Al Gore showed in his movie; "An Inconvenient Truth", and is now at 2011 levels of 393.65ppm.
So somehow, (113 * 7.8) = 881 GTons of CO2 have been added (above and beyond background) to the atmosphere in 211 years (almost most of that from 1995-2011). 881 GIGA-TONS OF ADDED CO2!!!

That is not due to vulcanism or hydrothermal vents. It's people.

How much heat is 'trapped' by 1ppm CO2 at 15 um, at 300K?

Hottie claims to be a scientist. He/she should be able to calculate that energy.
Excalibur
2.8 / 5 (13) Mar 11, 2012
And, if you know enough to be able to confirm or deny his results, then you should also be capable of calculating how much heat is generated by your inane bleating.
Howhot
5 / 5 (3) Mar 12, 2012
R2 asks; "How much heat is 'trapped' by 1ppm CO2 at 15 um, at 300K?".

It's funny you would ask that R2. I remember losing in Jr. Science fair to a guy who built a CO2 infra-red laser. It was an amazing device, about a meter long, power by a Neon-lamp transformer and two precisely aligned mirrors; one fully silvered, the other half silvered in gold. Apparently gold reflected infra-red light better than silver.

Wikipedi a "CO2 laser" and you will see the thing. They say the CO2 laser principal wavelength bands center at 9.4 and 10.6 um. Not 15um (can you site a reference for context R2?)

Anyway, CO2 in the atmosphere acts like the half-silvered mirror in the laser. Some photons are transmitted and some are reflected. The atmospheric analogy is as you add more CO2 the "half-silvered" mirror becomes more and more reflective trapping heat. So your question is allegoric to the density of silver (or gold for CO2) on a half-silvered mirror.
Howhot
5 / 5 (3) Mar 12, 2012
Yes R2; I am suggesting just that, the deep sea thermal vents are just part of the "natural" background of CO2. Its part of the 280ppm of CO2 that has been at that level for millions of years.

ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (8) Mar 12, 2012
Yes R2; I am suggesting just that, the deep sea thermal vents are just part of the "natural" background of CO2. Its part of the 280ppm of CO2 that has been at that level for millions of years.


It's obvious you know little about the CO2 absorption bands.
If you are a scientist, you should know how to find that information and integrate the Planck equation.
CO2 in the atmosphere acts like the half-silvered mirror in the laser.

More signs of ignorance.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (8) Mar 14, 2012
Yep. . .it's now been confirmed. . .howhot believes that the CO2 that volcanic hydrothermal vents emit as bubbles never rise to the surface and the volume of CO2 coming from those vents has been consistently the same amount each day since the existence of the oceans began billions of years ago.And that's in spite of Vendicartard's bathtub fart bubble experiment. But now here's a new Physorg thread about the possibility of Santorini in the Aegean erupting and causing tsunamis.

http://www.physor...ise.html

Why, there is even talk of CO2 bubbles emanating from hydrothermal vents in that Santorini caldera. Now how in the world did that happen to make howhot into a liar?

http://oceanexplo...lan.html

http://www.volcan...011.html

http://oceanexplo...era.html

RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (8) Mar 14, 2012
bluehigh
1.7 / 5 (11) Mar 14, 2012
not sure if the bubbles would break the surface in all circumstances. i can see absorption under pressure being a factor. such that the bath water gets more dissolved CO2. whether that then leaches into the air would depend on the surface tension and i'd be guessing but maybe likely to be absorbed into the rock (limestone?) or used by the underwater plants. then again I accept I may have missed the point, this seems to be a re-hash of old arguments. hmmm ... back to the baked beans and rubber ducks.

Howhot
5 / 5 (2) Mar 15, 2012
Well if the CO2 released from the hydrothermal vents is simply dissolved gasses in the oceans, then it is just part of the ocean to atmosphere transference mechanism. Nothing to see there.

http://peswiki.co...gram.jpg

In other words, that CO2 has all been accounted for; it doesn't add to GLOBAL WARMING
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 15, 2012
Mass of the atmosphere, 5.3 x 10^6 gigatonnes < RyggTard

Mass of CO2 added to the atmosphere over the last decade 1x10^2 gigatonnes.

0.01% of the atmosphere, which is very substantial.

"GIGA TONS! Wow, sounds like a LOT!
Compared to ...what?
Mass of atm: 5.3 x 10^18 kg" - RyggTard

Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 15, 2012
Pre-industrial CO2 levels are readily measured via trapped ice bubbles and other methods. These measurements tell us that volcanic CO2 emissions have been stable over many millions of years if not more.

Fantasizing that invisible underwater volcanoes are adding to the CO2 content of the atmosphere fails on many levels, and not just that it violates the observed volcanic stability.

Geologists have long known that Man is emitting more than 100 times the about of CO2 into the atmosphere compared to Volcanoes.

RichieTard boy is chattering non-science nonsense.

"howhot believes that the CO2 that volcanic hydrothermal vents emit as bubbles never rise to the surface and the volume of CO2 coming from those vents has been consistently the same amount each day since the existence of the oceans began billions of years ago" - RitchieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 15, 2012
And you can do neither.

"If you are a scientist, you should know how to find that information and integrate the Planck equation." - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 15, 2012
None, since you have not specified a frequency range. Integrating the area under a point returns zero.

"How much heat is 'trapped' by 1ppm CO2 at 15 um, at 300K?' - RyggTard

Poor RyggTard. He not surprisingly proves himself to be ignorant of the basics of science.

But he does know that under Libertarian law it is legal for him to pimp children to pedophiles on street corners to make a dime.

Freeeeeeedom..... Freeeeeeeeeeedom.......

Freedom demands it.

Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 15, 2012
RyggTard somehow thinks that physics uses single equations can be used to describe physical systems.

In fact, this hasn't been the case since the James Clark Maxwell developed the set of equations that allow modern physicists to model electromagnetic radiation.

All physics is modeling.

RyggTard's refusal to accept the fact that science is modeling and his ignorant attacks on modeling are what makes him an enemy of science.

What a fool.

"What science? AGWites worship uncertain climate models that tell them what they want to hear." - RyggTard
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (7) Mar 15, 2012
Well if the CO2 released from the hydrothermal vents is simply dissolved gasses in the oceans, then it is just part of the ocean to atmosphere transference mechanism. Nothing to see there.

http://peswiki.co...gram.jpg

In other words, that CO2 has all been accounted for; it doesn't add to GLOBAL WARMING

Warmer water can't hold as much gas. Warmer water releases more CO2.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (7) Mar 15, 2012
"A working definition of a complex system is of an entity which is coherent in some recognizable way but whose elements, interactions, and dynamics generate structures admitting surprise and novelty which cannot be defined a priori. Complex systems are therefore more than the sum of their parts, and a consequence of this is that any model of their structure is necessarily incomplete and partial."
http://cybergeo.r...org/1035
Howhot
5 / 5 (1) Mar 16, 2012
How much heat is 'trapped' by 1ppm CO2 at 15 um, at 300K?


Well why don't you tell me R2? Obviously you know it like the back of your hand. Don't you? I didn't think so.

I have a paper dating back to 1934 that calculates exactly that! And not only that, but he uses that to estimate temperatures in 2010. He calculates low assuming 295ppm.

Shame I didn't bookmark it for you.
Howhot
5 / 5 (1) Mar 16, 2012
Itchieguy says "howhot believes that the CO2 that volcanic hydrothermal vents emit as bubbles never rise to the surface"

Yeah, that is exactly what I think. So what do you think happens to CO2 from hydrothermal vents 5 miles under the ocean?
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 16, 2012
"Warmer water can't hold as much gas" - RyggTard

Correct Tard Boy. The deep ocean is very cold.

Here is a graphic showing the typical temperature profile.

http://www.window...epth.jpg

You poor Tard you.