Carbon dioxide levels lower than thought during super greenhouse period

October 12, 2017
Ball-and-stick model of carbon dioxide. Credit: Wikipedia

Concentration of carbon dioxide during an intense period of global warmth may have been as low as half the level previously suggested by scientists, according to a new Dartmouth College study.

The study found that dioxide may have been less than 1000 parts per million, or ppm, during the Earth's early Eocene period. This runs counter to thinking that concentration levels were as high as 2000 ppm in the same time frame.

By comparison, current levels of carbon dioxide observed at NOAA's Mauna Loa Observatory are around 400 ppm.

"This research provides important information about the planet's climate past and adds an important chapter to the Earth's history book," said Ying Cui, Obering Postdoctoral Fellow at Dartmouth College.

Climate researchers focus on the early Eocene, a so-called "super greenhouse" period, to better understand how the Earth historically responds to changes in carbon dioxide levels, and to help make better climate projections. Both the Arctic and Antarctic were ice-free in this time period as temperatures averaged about 10 degrees Celsius warmer than present day.

The early Eocene was also characterized by five periods of extreme warmth—known as hyperthermals—that occurred between 52-56 million years ago when the Earth warmed an additional 2 C - 8 C above the already higher temperatures.

Although there were no cars or power plants 56 million years ago, the same carbon rich in the isotope carbon-12 was released into the atmosphere. Up until now, researchers have grappled with where that carbon came from, what triggered its release, and to what extent carbon dioxide accounted for warming relative to other greenhouse gases.

Unable to access information on carbon dioxide from ice cores that only date back approximately 800,000 years, the research team used a new method to reconstruct levels of carbon dioxide associated with the temperature spikes within the early Eocene.

The Dartmouth research result was derived by assessing past carbon dioxide concentrations using sediment samples found in terrestrial and deep-sea drilling sites. The ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-13 isotopes in those samples helped the team determine that the most likely source of the carbon came from thawing permafrost during the period studied.

"This changes our understanding of what the concentration of carbon dioxide should be in relationship to global temperature as well as how we should revisit climate models in order to better project future climate change," Cui said.

While the Dartmouth research, published in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters, finds that the carbon was most likely released by permafrost thaw, there is still question as to what triggered the warming that caused the release of extra carbon into the atmosphere. Separate research points to the roles of extreme volcanic activity and water vapor during Earth's earlier warming periods.

"The challenge is to reconstruct what the past is and to utilize these geochemistry proxies the best we can - essentially, how can we best interpret these records using geological archives," said Cui.

Although focusing on a timeframe that is over 50 million years ago, Cui says the research relates directly to efforts to understand the Earth's current warming trend, and to project how human activities and other natural dynamics could impact future warming.

"The geologic past can provide a useful insight into our understanding of current and future environmental change," said Cui. "Policy makers, economists and others who study projections on temperature can utilize this information to see how ecosystems recover after rapid change of climate and use it as lessons for the future."

The research team hopes to use the new technique to broaden understanding of the role of for a longer stretch of Earth's history.

Explore further: Tundra loses carbon with rapid permafrost thaw

More information: Ying Cui et al, Atmospheric p CO 2 reconstructed across five early Eocene global warming events, Earth and Planetary Science Letters (2017). DOI: 10.1016/j.epsl.2017.08.038

Related Stories

Tundra loses carbon with rapid permafrost thaw

September 7, 2017

Frozen in permafrost soil, northern latitudes store almost twice as much carbon as is currently in the atmosphere. Rapid Arctic warming is expected to expose previously frozen soil carbon to microbial decomposition and increase ...

Scientists investigate what breaks down permafrost carbon

February 14, 2017

A Florida State University researcher is delving into the complexities of exactly how permafrost thawing in the Earth's most northern regions is cycling back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide and further fueling climate ...

Extreme global warming in the ancient past

November 10, 2010

Variations in atmosphere carbon dioxide around 40 million years ago were tightly coupled to changes in global temperature, according to new findings published in the journal Science. The study was led by scientists at Utrecht ...

Cutting carbon dioxide helps prevent drying

March 24, 2011

Recent climate modeling has shown that reducing the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would give the Earth a wetter climate in the short term. New research from Carnegie Global Ecology scientists Long Cao ...

Recommended for you

New Amazon threat? Deforestation from mining

October 18, 2017

Sprawling mining operations in Brazil are destroying much more of the iconic Amazon forest than previously thought, says the first comprehensive study of mining deforestation in the world's largest tropical rainforest.

Scientists determine source of world's largest mud eruption

October 17, 2017

On May 29, 2006, mud started erupting from several sites on the Indonesian island of Java. Boiling mud, water, rocks and gas poured from newly-created vents in the ground, burying entire towns and compelling many Indonesians ...

50 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

katesisco
1 / 5 (3) Oct 12, 2017
How can scientists differentiate from CO and CO2 as CO degrades into CO2? OR does it matter?
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
Article: "Climate researchers focus on the early Eocene, a so-called "super greenhouse" period, to better understand how the Earth historically responds to changes in carbon dioxide levels"

The problem here is that in order to make the case that we should be concerned about carbon dioxide, the researchers have completely brushed aside the known anomalies which these models certainly cannot explain.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
God Star
Dwardu Cardona

"The Canadian High Arctic

The Canadian island of Axel Heiberg, in Nunavut, well above the Arctic Circle, well beyond the present tree line, is littered with the remains of ancient forests -- stumps, logs, and remnants of leaves and even fruit ...

'Tall trees not unlike the towering redwoods of the Pacific Northwest -- and genetically similar to birch, alder and swamp cypress -- grew beside a meandering river delta hundreds of kilometers wide. Some of these giants were 35 m high, with stumps 2.5 m around, and appear to have lived for as long as 1,000 years.' [37]

The problem that has been facing paleobotanists is how such forests could have thrived in a latitude which at present would have forced them to 'sleep' through the long polar night. As Art Johnson who, independent of Basinger, have been studying these remains, noted: 'We have no forests on Earth where the trees are so big and have to sit in the dark for three months.' [38]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"Axel Heiberg Island is not the only area in Canada's High Arctic where the remains of ancient forests have been found. The coal-bearing sediments of the Eureka Sound Group scattered throughout most of the Arctic Archipelago also contain such remains. Plants dated to the Paleocene from Fosheim Peninsula of Ellesmere Island resemble similar Paleocene flora from Western Canada's interior, indication of a cosmopolitan temperate zone. [39] Some of the plants from these Tertiary forests have been described as being akin to those growing in the present cypress swamps of Florida. [40] Others, like oak, do not grow in swamps. Trees from the middle Eocene in the same area reached up to 50m high.

The fossils of animals found buried amid the remains of these forests -- ancestors of the horse and rhinoceros, giant lizards, land tortoises, salamanders, snakes, alligators, crocodiles, flying lemurs [41] -- all testify to the warmth of the climate at that time ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... as so does the discovery of fossil palm trees and huge exotic ferns by Soviet paleobotanists in the islands of Spitsbergen in the Svalbard archipelago far within the Arctic Circle. [42] Even fossil tapirs, the descendants of which now live in the equatorial Amazon forest, were found on Ellesmere Island. [43] As Ian Johnson ... noted, finding the tropics in such high latitudes raises serious implications for paleontologists:

'This far from the equator means 4 months of polar darkness ... If the night temperature was always 10 degrees Celsius, in conjunction with 4 months of darkness, plants would die. Mammals found to date are likely middle Eocene creatures. Crocodiles, lizards and turtles are well adapted to forest life but some of the discovered species [the crocodilians] cannot tolerate near freezing temperatures for very long. This implies that there had to be considerable warmth in the Eocene High Arctic all throughout the the year.' [44]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... 'the crocodilians have been consistent throughout their long evolutionary history in their limited tolerance of the cold. Crocodilia have never occupied ecological niches where near-freezing cold persists continuously for months.' [45] Alligators are more adapted to cold weather than crocodiles. Crocodiles require shallow water, but crocodiles in water that is colder than 65 F tend to sink to the bottom in lassitude and drown as they do in places even like Florida during severe cold weather.

The scientific establishment, meanwhile, has not been entirely silent when it comes to propositions concerning the solution of the puzzle which the one-time existence of these Arctic forests raise. Thus, for instance, writers in New Scientist proposed that the Arctic Eocene's subtropical climate can be explained if the oceans transported far more heat to the poles than they do at present. [46] ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... But evidence of the atmospheric circulation required for this, which depends on temperature differential, is lacking. Moreover, the small size of particles retrieved from Eocene deep-sea sidements confirm the lack of wind speeds at that time. [47]

Continental drift must also be ruled out because Axel Heiberg Island is 'only a few hundred kilometers closer to the North Pole than it was when the forests flourished' [48] -- which is definitely not enough for it to have been located outside the Arctic Circle at that time. As Johnson noted: 'Modern geological field work has confirmed that the northern lands of the globe have been located in polar latitudes for at least the last 100 million years, despite ongoing continental drift.' [49] ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"Curt Teichert was honest enough to admit that 'attempts to explain rapid climatic changes throughout the Tertiary have been 'especially vexing and unsatisfactory'.' [55] As D H Campbell wrote: 'It is difficult to imagine any possible conditions of climate in which these plants could grow so near the pole, deprived of sunlight for many months of the year.' [56] Or, as David Mech was forced to conclude, the causes behind such a radical different climate 'remain a mystery.'" [57]

[37][38] J George, "The Forest of the Past," Macleans's (September 6, 1999), p 17.

[39][40] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, p 17.

[41] "The Eocene Climate Puzzle," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:1, p 27; IC Johnson, "Anomalous Occurrence of Crocodilia in Eocene Polar Forests," Chronology and Catastrophism Review XIV (1992), p 7.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

[42] "Fossils Date the Tilt of Earth's Axis," Globe & Mail (June 8, 1984). NOTE: For even earlier Triassic remains, which also point to "a warm and humid climate," see Soviet Weekly (July 21, 1984).

[43] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, p 11.

[44] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, p 17. (emphasis added)

[45] Idem, "Anomalous Occurrence of Crocodilia in Eocene Polar Forests," Chronology and Catastrophism Review XIV (1992), p 7; see also ibid, Part Two, Chronology & Catastrophism Review XV (1993), pp 23-26.

[46] New Scientist (December 10, 1987), p 28.

[47] "The Eocene Climate Puzzle," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1988:1, p28.

[48] "The Eocene Climate Puzzle," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1988:1, p27.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

[49] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, (Part One), p 8.

[50] H Thurston, "Icebound Eden," Equinox (May/June 1986), p 74.

[51] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, p 13.

[52] H Thurston, "Icebound Eden," Equinox (May/June 1986), p 81.

[53][54] "The Eocene Climate Puzzle," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshiop 1988:1, p28.

[55] IC Johnson, "Basinger's Lecture on the Eocene Forests of the Canadian High Arctic," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1989:2, p 8.

[56] DH Campbell, "Continental Drift and Plant Distribution," Science (January 16, 1942), as quoted by I. Velikovsky, Earth in Upheaval (NY, 1955), p 45.

[57] LD Mech, "Life in the High Arctic," National Geographic (June 1988), p 757.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (9) Oct 12, 2017
"It is the primary responsibility of a scientist to face, and resolve, discrepant observations."

- Halton Arp, Seeing Red

"The most interesting phenomena are of course in the new places, the places where the rules do not work -- not the places where they do work! That is the way in which we discover new rules."

- Richard Feynman

"There is much misinformation presently circulating among those who refuse to look at the evidence themselves, and the history of science is full of cases of refusal to face and deal with anomalies -- and of major advances in knowledge when the anomaly is finally acknowledged and confronted."

- Robert L. Hall, Journal of Scientific Exploration, 15(3), 396
Paulw789
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
The Cretaceous Hothouse, the Permian Hothouse, the Devonian warm period, the Cambrian warm period were all much warmer than the Eocene.

The climate people have some unhealthy fascination for the Eocene and the PETM event.

There were many other periods which were warmer and the Eocene was not that high really.
barakn
5 / 5 (9) Oct 12, 2017
At the end of the Cambrian and during the Devonian much of the landmass was gathered into Gondwana. During the Permian, most of the land mass was Pangaea. Even during the late Cretaceous, the continents were all quite close together and the Atlantic was a baby with not enough space for massive circulation. So the obvious answer to the "unhealthy fascination for the Eocene and the PETM event" is that it's the only such event where the landmass distribution and thus atmospheric and oceanic circulation are similar to today. It is simply more relevant.
Da Schneib
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 12, 2017
So the PETM happened when there was only around 1000 ppmv, not 2000 as previously thought. They're right, this will require some adjustments to our models, and not in a good direction. We're already nearly irrevocably headed for 500 ppmv, which means only one doubling gets us to the PETM, instead of two doublings.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"Curt Teichert was honest enough to admit that 'attempts to explain rapid climatic changes throughout the Tertiary have been 'especially vexing and unsatisfactory'.' [55] As D H Campbell wrote: 'It is difficult to imagine any possible conditions of climate in which these plants could grow so near the pole, deprived of sunlight for many months of the year.' [56] Or, as David Mech was forced to conclude, the causes behind such a radical different climate 'remain a mystery.'" [57]

(cont'd)

Geez, Chris...
That was quite the litany of comments not your own... Yet, I am assuming you agree with all you cut and copied, more or less...

Took me forever to read and really taxed my adult ADHD limits....
Thewise
4.6 / 5 (9) Oct 12, 2017
Geez Chris, where on the planet was the arctic region in those periods. Continents do moves around a bit, did you take that into account?
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
Re: "Geez Chris, where on the planet was the arctic region in those periods. Continents do moves around a bit, did you take that into account?"

It is now "only a few hundred kilometers closer to the North Pole than it was when the forests flourished" [48]

[48] "The Eocene Climate Puzzle," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop 1988:1, p27.

There is a map of Pangaea in the middle of the Eocene here:

http://www.realwo...cene.jpg

These trees and crocodiles were obviously still in the Arctic, people.
Whydening Gyre
3.9 / 5 (8) Oct 12, 2017
Geez Chris, where on the planet was the arctic region in those periods. Continents do moves around a bit, did you take that into account?

Not to mention, Earth axial wobble...
Shootist
1 / 5 (7) Oct 12, 2017
Super greenhouse events like the Roman Climate Optimum and the Medieval Climate Optimum? Those "super greenhouse" events? You know? When it was (much) warmer than it is today.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
Re: "Not to mention, Earth axial wobble..."

Again, from Dwardu Cardona's God Star ...

"I have been stressing the discoveries in the Canadian High Arctic but, if the truth is to be known, similar evidence is available from other parts of the northern hemisphere. Oswald Heer described 2,632 Arctic plant species, 1,627 of which were actually discovered by him. In his seven-volume epic on the subject, published between the years 1868 and 1883, Heer stressed the luxuriant plant life that thrived during the Tertiary in northern polar regions [which began 65 Ma ago and lasted approximately 63.2 Ma]. Among those that grew in Greenland, he noted magnolias and fig trees. [58] Similarly in Spitsbergen where he noted the Tertiary thriving of such trees as pines, firs, spruces, cypresses, elms, hazels, and even water lillies. [59] Forests which once flourished in Spitsbergen have left seams of coal from twenty-five to thirty feet thick ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... Fossil specimens of fig palms and the giant Redwood (Sequoia gigantea), which now grow in California, have been retrieved from an area stretching from the Bering Strait to north of Labrador. As D.H. Campbell admitted: 'It is difficult to imagine any possible conditions of climate in which these plants could grow so near the pole, deprived of sunlight for many months of the year.' [60] Fossil corals, which can only grow in tropical waters, were also discovered there in large formations. Corals, in fact, grew all over polar North America -- in Alaska, Canada, and even in Greenland. [61]

The same situation is evident at the opposite end of the world in the freezing regions of Antarctica. The biggest problem here is that, in past ages, Antarctica was warmer than the tropics and equatorial regions themselves by about 90 degrees Fahrenheit. [62] ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... Early in the twentieth century, E.H. Shackleton discovered seven seams of coal at about latitude 85 degrees, each of which was between three and seven feet thick, testimonials to ancient forests which once grew where now not a single tree, not even a blade of grass, can grow. [63] The coal seams that run through the Transantarctic Mountains are some of the most extensive on Earth. [64] ... In 1935, Admiral Byrd could write that: 'Here at the southernmost known mountain in the world, scarcely two hundred miles from the South Pole, was found conclusive evidence that the climate of Antarctica was once temperate or even sub-tropical.' [68]

The Eocene evidence of vast forests in the Antarctic has been attributed to a paleolatitude which was close to that of present Madagascar, while Antarctica is supposed to have still been drifting toward the pole. [69] ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... Continental drift can therefore be used to solve the mystery by those who adhere to this belief. Melvin Cook, however, is of a different opinion. According to his findings, Antarctica 'appears not to have moved appreciably in continental shift' since the continents which were once in contact with it 'left Antarctica in radial directions,' [70] thus leaving it more or less in the same locality. Besides, as we have seen, the problem also involves the Arctic regions where, even according to orthodoxy, continental drift cannot save the day. But the enigma entails more than just Earth's polar regions; it also embraces the latitudes in between. Thus, from early in the twentieth century, many paleobotanists were convinced that 'during by far the greater portion of time since the Azoic era, mild, benign climatic conditions have existed.' [71] ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"... According to Dolph Hooker:

'It is also the concensus [sic] that, astonishingly and inexplicably, such conditions were comparatively uniform over most of the Earth's surface; that temperate climate extended both north and south to within the polar circles. It is also believed that, amazingly, seasonal effects during most of geological time have been much less pronounced than they are now.' [72]

Writing in 1912, F.H. Knowlton stated that:

'Relative uniformity, mildness and comparative equability of climate, accompanied by high humidity, have prevailed over the greater part of the Earth, extending to or into polar circles, during the greater part of geologic time since at least the Middle Paleozoic. This is the regular, the ordinary, the normal condition.' [73]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

"By 1953, this belief was still in vogue as exemplified by a paper published by Edwin Colbert in which he wrote:

'So far as past climates can be interpreted from the record of fossil vertebrates, it would appear that during much of Earth history the world has enjoyed uniformly warm, equable climate over most of its surface ... the general picture of past vertebrate life is that of warmth-loving animals living over wide ranges of latitude, from the southern tips of the continental land masses through the middle latitudes to regions as far north as the Arctic Circle.' [74]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

[58][59] O. Heer, Flora Arctica Fossilis: Die Fossile Flora der Polarlander (1868) as cited by I. Velikovsky, Earth in Upheaval (N.Y., 1955), p.44.

[60] D.H Campbell, "Continental Drift and Plant distribution," Science (January 16, 1942).

[61] C.O. Dunbar, Historical Geology (1949), pp. 162, 194.

[62] I.C. Johnson, "Long term Violation of Uniformitarianism Demonstrated by Fossil Discoveries in Polar regions," Chronology & Catastrophism Workshop (1991) 2, pp. 19-20.

[63] E.H. Shackleton, The Heart of the Antarctic, II (1909), pp. 314, 316, 319, 323.

[64] S.W. Matthews, "Ice on the World," National Geographic (January 1987), p.94.

[65] E.H. Shackleton, loc. cit.

[66] S.W. Matthews, op. cit., pp. 94-95; see also T.R. Henry, the White Continent (N.Y., 1950), p.9.

[67] See, for instance, New Scientist (October 10, 1992), p.17.

[68] R.E. Byrd, "Exploring the Ice Age in Antarctica," The National Geographic Magazine (October 1935).

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Oct 12, 2017
(cont'd)

[69] I.C. Johnson, op. cit., p. 20.

[70] M.A. Cook, "Earth Tectonics Viewed from Rock Mechanics," Chronology & Catastrophism Review XIII (1991), p. 15.

[71][72] D.E. Hooker, Those Astounding Ice Ages (N.Y., 1958), p. 42.

[73] F.H. Knowlton, "Relations of Paleobotany to Geology," Smithsonian Institute Annual Report (1912), as quoted in ibid, p. 43.

[74] E.H. Colbert, "The Record of Climatic Changes as Revealed by Vertebrate Paleontology," in H. Shapley, Climatic Change (Cambridge, 1953), p. 269, as quoted in D.E. Hooker, loc. cit.

[75] Ibid, p. 44

[76] E.S. Barghoorn, "Evidence of Climatic Change in the Geologic Record of Plant Life," in H. Shapley, op. cit., p. 241, as quoted by D.E. Hooker, op. cit., p.89.

[77] B. Bell, "Solar Variation as an Explanation of Climate Change," in H. Shapley, op. cit., p. 132, as quoted by D.E. Hooker, op. cit., p. 89.
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
@Chris_Reeve.

Mate, to be frank/objective, I see that you've just engaged in the same sort of gish-gallop of 'disjoint facts' barrage which @J Doug has been engaging in at thread...

https://phys.org/...ery.html

He too presented a list of 'facts' which on their own, without proper analysis and connecting of dots in the greater temporal/geographical CONTEXT, gives GIGO....a partial picture not whole picture. Or as I just pointed out to JD the truth about the well known 'problem' with gish-galloping lists of disjoint 'facts':
Disjoint 'facts' make HALF-TRUTH. :)


To get the bigger picture, you must also consider:

- Ocean Currents (Britain has MUCH WARMER CLIMATE that its LATITUDE would normally imply, due to the WARM OCEAN CURRENT going past Britain).

- Air Currents (Atmospheric Mid-Lati/Polar vortices can cause 'stagnating regions' which can be colder/hotter depending on situation).

- And more (as alluded to by Whyde et al).

Ok? :)

Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
Herbert Dingle, Science at the Cross-Roads, p.29

"All unconsciously, scientists have allowed themselves to relapse into the mental state which science is regarded as having displaced -- that of imagining how nature ought to behave and then assuming that she does so, instead of examining nature with an open mind and then expressing her observed behaviour in rational terms."

"It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem."

- G. K. Chesterton

"It is a rare occasion when a person, even a scientist, is able to really look at a picture without forcing it into a frame of prior reference."

- Quasars, Redshifts & Controversies, Halton Arp, p.87
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (5) Oct 12, 2017
'So far as past climates can be interpreted from the record of fossil vertebrates, it would appear that during much of Earth history the world has enjoyed uniformly warm, equable climate over most of its surface ... the general picture of past vertebrate life is that of warmth-loving animals living over wide ranges of latitude, from the southern tips of the continental land masses through the middle latitudes to regions as far north as the Arctic Circle.' [74]"

That an equitable warmth permeated the majority of the globe is all well and good. But, what about light?
Could vegetation photosynthesize (and fauna have grown to the sizes found) without generous levels of light?
What it suggests to me is we have an incomplete understanding of tectonic activity (continental drift)
warmonger
4.5 / 5 (8) Oct 13, 2017
Chris, this is not a dumping ground for homeless articles. Feel free to paste a link, like a sane person. Feel free to add your commentary, like a sane person.

Only a deranged madman would post the freaking references, are you kidding me.
Ojorf
3.7 / 5 (6) Oct 13, 2017
Chris, this is not a dumping ground for homeless articles. Feel free to paste a link, like a sane person. Feel free to add your commentary, like a sane person.

Only a deranged madman would post the freaking references, are you kidding me.


THIS CHRIS!
TrollBane
4.2 / 5 (5) Oct 13, 2017
The moderators have left the building.
(It could be to have a fit of laughter at CR's balderdash without disturbing their coworkers, but that's just speculation. )
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (2) Oct 13, 2017
Re: "Chris, this is not a dumping ground for homeless articles. Feel free to paste a link, like a sane person. Feel free to add your commentary, like a sane person."

At the point where people complain about learning anomalies and questioning the reporting and motivations of researchers -- which very obviously in this case exist within this larger politicized context of climate change -- they are insulating themselves from critique.

You think that science can properly function without outsiders critiquing it?

Real critique is the only thing that keeps science on track, and the point of posting these critiques is to show just how insulated this current group of theorists and science journalists have become: You are all being invited to completely ignore former observations and even former consensus!

Real critique is so rare at this point that you don't even recognize it when you see it. Shame on you. That's not the spirit of science.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (2) Oct 13, 2017
I am perpetually amazed at how often I show people quotes which indicate an entire history of science which they are completely unaware of -- yet, the pattern is always the same: people always attack me for the sin of teaching them something new!

"We do not know beforehand where fundamental insights will arise from about our mysterious and lovely solar system. And the history of the study of our solar system shows clearly that accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong -- and that fundamental insights can arise from the most unexpected sources."

- Carl Sagan, https://www.youtu...N7iVIuhk

When you learn something new, it should not matter where you learn it from. Just because you learned it from a comment attached to an article does not somehow devalue the information: You did not know this before. You are now a bit wiser about the universe for knowing it.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (2) Oct 13, 2017
And don't ever forget this: You don't have to agree with something in order to learn from it.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (2) Oct 14, 2017
Re: "Only a deranged madman would post the freaking references, are you kidding me."

BTW: The reason I post references is (1) so that people can determine where the information comes from; but also (2) because on many former occasions, physorg commenters have demanded to see them.

Citations are always very important when the claims being made are in some manner counter to expectations or controversial.
PTTG
5 / 5 (5) Oct 14, 2017
Reeve, why not just get yourself a blog instead of spamming random comment threads?
dustywells
not rated yet Oct 14, 2017
"It is a rare occasion when a person, even a scientist, is able to really look at a picture without forcing it into a frame of prior reference."

"What it suggests to me is we have an incomplete understanding of tectonic activity (continental drift)"

Now we're getting somewhere! The current ice age began about 2.5 - 3 million years ago - co-incident with the joining of North and South America. Prior to this many million years without major glaciation. This implies that ocean currents have more influence on climate than we understand.

We tend to ignore the position of land masses and depths of ocean currents when trying to understand paleoclimate. At best, this only creates a distorted image; but more likely, it leads to trying to prove wrong-headed hypotheses.
J Doug
1 / 5 (1) Oct 15, 2017
He too presented a list of 'facts' which on their own, without proper analysis and connecting of dots in the greater temporal/geographical CONTEXT, gives GIGO....a partial picture not whole picture.


There is no way that someone as dense and unable to learn as RealityCheck has proven its self to be could ever connect any dots. By babbling this bit of irrelevant "information", such as, "Air Currents (Atmospheric Mid-Lati/Polar vortices can cause 'stagnating regions' which can be colder/hotter depending on situation)." Is the fool trying to make some sort of a case for or against higher levels of CO₂ than the scant 400 ppm level of today's atmosphere?
J Doug
1 / 5 (1) Oct 15, 2017
To get the bigger picture, you must also consider:

- Ocean Currents (Britain has MUCH WARMER CLIMATE that its LATITUDE would normally imply, due to the WARM OCEAN CURRENT going past Britain).

RealityCheck comes up with this disjointed comment above which implies that he/it, whatever, didn't even read the article.

Although focusing on a timeframe that is over 50 million years ago, Cui says the research relates directly to efforts to understand the Earth's current warming trend, and to project how human activities and other natural dynamics could impact future warming.
"The geologic past can provide a useful insight into our understanding of current and future environmental change," said Cui. "Policy makers, economists and others who study projections on temperature can utilize this information to see how ecosystems recover after rapid chan
J Doug
3 / 5 (2) Oct 15, 2017
This information below runs counter to the wild eyed, foaming at the mouth alarmist who say that the planet & humanity is doomed because of CO₂. These alarmist seem to not understand that all life on earth is dependent on CO₂.

"Similarly, we can now examine the processes behind the extraordinary greening of the Earth over recent decades as CO₂ levels have climbed. Up to 50% of vegetated land is now greener than it was 30 years ago. The increasing human-driven CO2 fertilization effect on vegetation was estimated to be the dominant driver."
https://phys.org/...bon.html
J Doug
3 / 5 (2) Oct 15, 2017
"It is the primary responsibility of a scientist to face, and resolve, discrepant observations."


This comment by Halton Arp leads to one questing the nonsense about the 97% of scientist believing that any and all climate change is the result of human activity as well as the stupid remark that alarmist like to throw out about the "debate is over".
J Doug
3 / 5 (2) Oct 15, 2017
Something to think about for those few that can do so.
"The Younger Dryas is one of the most well known examples of abrupt change. About 14,500 years ago, Earth's climate began to shift from a cold glacial world to a warmer interglacial state. Partway through this transition, temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere suddenly returned to near-glacial conditions. This near-glacial period is called the Younger Dryas, named after a flower (Dryas octopetala) that grows in cold conditions and that became common in Europe during this time. The end of the Younger Dryas, about 11,500 years ago, was particularly abrupt. In Greenland, temperatures rose 10°C (18°F) in a decade (Alley 2000(link is external)). Other proxy records, including varved lake sediments in Europe, also display these abrupt shifts."
https://www.ncdc....%20Dryas

J Doug
1 / 5 (1) Oct 15, 2017
It is beyond reason to hope that RealityCheck can ever come to understand that these proven climatic events occurred WITH OUT the influence of his devil in the sky, CO₂.

''We find that major temperature changes in the past 4,500 y occurred abruptly (within decades), and were coeval in timing with the archaeological records of settlement and abandonment of the Saqqaq, Dorset, and Norse cultures, which suggests that abrupt temperature changes profoundly impacted human civilization in the region. Temperature variations in West Greenland display an antiphased relationship to temperature changes in Ireland over centennial to millennial timescales, resembling the interannual to multidecadal temperature seesaw associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation. ''
http://www.pnas.o...abstract
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 15, 2017
@J Doug.

You remind of a toddler playing on the floor with 'disjoint' pieces of a picture puzzle which have fallen from a table out of reach. The toddler has no idea of what the 'picture' may be; nor does the toddler know what to make of each piece due to its 'disconnection' from the whole.

So the toddler blithely manipulates, sucks, chews, throws disjoint pieces willy nilly, never having even an inkling of the whole picture shown on the puzzle box lid tantalizingly out of its reach and ken on the table.

Do you even realize the reality around you now, let alone over the eras of continental plate techtonics and changes in ocean/air currents which if put together as a whole picture will give the 'trending picture' for climate evolution NOW, mate?

Probably not. You seem to enjoy shilling and spamming disjoint pieces of OLD and UNCONNECTED 'facts' which only give you half-truths if you have no clue where or how the pieces fit to make the whole picture.

Grow up, JD.. :)
J Doug
1 / 5 (1) Oct 15, 2017
The toddler has no idea of what the 'picture' may be; nor does the toddler know what to make of each piece due to its 'disconnection' from the whole.
RealityCheck has finally come to understand why he is what he is.

Instead of wasting your time on meaningless bullshit, why didn't you consider this link that I furnished you with?
"The Younger Dryas
The Younger Dryas is one of the most well known examples of abrupt change. About 14,500 years ago, Earth's climate began to shift from a cold glacial world to a warmer interglacial state."
https://www.ncdc....%20Dryas

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Oct 16, 2017
Reeve, why not just get yourself a blog instead of spamming random comment threads?
@PTTG
he has one

no one visits it unless he links it here

it's where he gets all the above gish-gallop from to copy/paste it here

RealityCheck
3 / 5 (4) 11 hours ago
@J Doug.

You're as self-aware/cogent as that toddler (or a shill/spam-bot paid by a Troll Factory). You haven't even bothered to check out past discussion threads re 'items' you keep spamming as if they are 'new arguments/facts'. Whyde has even given you clues as to the MANY cataclysmic/sudden historic/prehistoric NATURAL causes of Global Climate Changes already well recognized and included in the discussions/models for years now. You trying to pretend it's all 'new' stuff is childish (toddler-ish/bot-ish?); showing you aren't capable of being objective/holistic in considerations/discussions. Plate tectonics, volcanism, changes in ocean/air currents, asteroid impacts and changes in Earth's rotational aspect re insolation etc are already allowed for in past Natural factors; what is NOW being ADDED is HUMANITY FACTOR re CO2/other atmospheric changes that can vary NET effect of ALL the known heat/energy inputs. You're incompetent johnny-come-latest shill-spam-bot-troll, JD.
howhot3
5 / 5 (2) 8 hours ago
I want to know, is it fair play to poke the coal troll? So why is the "Young Dryas" so important to you? How do you think it's relevant to this article or even the debate on global warming? You won't answer because your just a trump coal troll with a website of useless links for cut and paste.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.