Our future on Earth may also be our past. In a study published Monday (Dec. 10, 2018) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers show that humans are reversing a long-term cooling trend tracing back at least 50 million years. And it's taken just two centuries.
By 2030, Earth's climate is expected to resemble that of the mid-Pliocene, going back more than 3 million years in geologic time. Without reductions in our greenhouse gas emissions, our climates by 2150 could compare to the warm and mostly ice-free Eocene, an epoch that characterized the globe 50 million years ago.
"If we think about the future in terms of the past, where we are going is uncharted territory for human society," says the study's lead author, Kevin Burke, who conducted the work while a graduate student in the lab of paleoecologist John "Jack" Williams, professor of geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "We are moving toward very dramatic changes over an extremely rapid time frame, reversing a planetary cooling trend in a matter of centuries."
All of the species on Earth today had an ancestor that survived the Eocene and the Pliocene, but whether humans and the flora and fauna we are familiar with can adapt to these rapid changes remains to be seen. The accelerated rate of change appears to be faster than anything life on the planet has experienced before.
The new study builds upon work Williams and colleagues first published in 2007, which compared future climate projections to historical climate data from the early 20th century. The new study relies on extensive data about climate conditions to probe much deeper in Earth's geologic past and expand those comparisons.
"We can use the past as a yardstick to understand the future, which is so different from anything we have experienced in our lifetimes," says Williams. "People have a hard time projecting what the world will be like five or 10 years from now. This is a tool for predicting that—how we head down those paths, and using deep geologic analogs from Earth's history to think about changes in time."
During the Eocene, Earth's continents were packed more closely together and global temperatures averaged 23.4 degrees Fahrenheit (13 degrees Celsius) warmer than they are today. Dinosaurs had recently gone extinct and the first mammals, like ancestral whales and horses, were spreading across the globe. The Arctic was occupied by swampy forests like those found today in the southern U.S.
In the Pliocene, North and South America joined tectonically, the climate was arid, land bridges allowed animals to spread across continents and the Himalayas formed. Temperatures were between 3.2 and 6.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.8 to 3.6 degrees Celsius) warmer than they are today.
For the study, Burke and Williams—along with colleagues at the University of Bristol, Columbia University, University of Leeds, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Center for Atmospheric Research—examined the similarities between future climate projections as set forth by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report and several periods of geologic history.
These included the Early Eocene, the mid-Pliocene, the Last Interglacial (129 to 116 thousand years ago), the mid-Holocene (6,000 years ago), the pre-industrial era (before A.D. 1850) and the early 20th century.
They used Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5), which represents a future climate scenario in which we do not mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, and RCP4.5, a scenario in which we moderately reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and climate simulations using three different but well-established models: the Hadley Centre Coupled Model version 3, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE2-R and the Community Climate System Model.
While not without their flaws, each of these models represents the best available data and state-of-the-art techniques.
Under both scenarios and across each model, compared to previous eras, the Earth's climate most closely resembled the mid-Pliocene by 2030 (under RCP8.5) or 2040 (under RCP4.5). Under the greenhouse gas stabilization scenario of RCP4.5, the climate then stabilizes at mid-Pliocene-like conditions, but under the higher greenhouse gas emissions of RCP8.5, the climate continues to warm until it begins to resemble the Eocene in 2100, achieving Eocene-like conditions more broadly by 2150.
The models showed these deep-geological climates emerging first from the center of continents and then expanding outward over time. Temperatures rise, precipitation increases, ice caps melt and climates become temperate near the Earth's poles.
"Madison (Wisconsin) warms up more than Seattle (Washington) does, even though they're at the same latitude," Williams explains. "When you read that the world is expected to warm by 3 degrees Celsius this century, in Madison we should expect to roughly double the global average."
The study also showed that under RCP8.5, "novel" climates emerge across nearly 9 percent of the planet. These are conditions that do not have known geologic or historical precedent and they concentrate in eastern and southeastern Asia, northern Australia and the coastal Americas.
"Based on observational data, we are tracking on the high end of the emissions scenarios, but it's too soon to tell," says Burke. "We may be somewhere between RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, though if we increase our climate mitigation efforts—like switching to renewable energy—we could find ourselves closer to the low end."
About a decade ago, Swedish scientist Johan Rockström and colleagues introduced the idea of "safe operating space," referring to the climate conditions under which modern agricultural societies developed. By comparing to the deep past, Williams and Burke say, we are able to better understand the planetary boundaries and thresholds that delineate this space.
"The further we move from the Holocene, the greater the potential that we move out of safe operating space," says Williams, a faculty affiliate with the UW-Madison Nelson Institute Center for Climatic Research. "In the roughly 20 to 25 years I have been working in the field, we have gone from expecting climate change to happen, to detecting the effects, and now, we are seeing that it's causing harm. People are dying, property is being damaged, we're seeing intensified fires and intensified storms that can be attributed to climate change. There is more energy in the climate system, leading to more intense events."
In their paper, the researchers try to strike a balance between alarm and optimism. On the one hand, Earth is headed into the unknown in our children's and grandchildren's lifetimes. On the other, life has long proven to be resilient. And, Williams says, in many places we are moving away from fossil fuels toward more sustainable and carbon-free energy sources. But more needs to be done.
"We've seen big things happen in Earth's history—new species evolved, life persists and species survive. But many species will be lost, and we live on this planet," says Williams. "These are things to be concerned about, so this work points us to how we can use our history and Earth's history to understand changes today and how we can best adapt."
Explore further:
National parks bear the brunt of climate change
More information:
K. D. Burke el al., "Pliocene and Eocene provide best analogs for near-future climates," PNAS (2018). www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1809600115

aksdad
2 / 5 (16) Dec 10, 2018Utter and complete nonsense with no basis in science. There are no climate proxy records going back 50 million years with enough resolution to make that claim. Nor is there an accurate measure of how much humans may be "warming" the planet, if at all. Climate proxies are, at best, imprecise. The only thing that can be derived from them is (very) long-term cooling or warming trends, not absolute temperatures.
This is another in a long line of wildly speculative claims from alarmists, framed to appear scientific, based on nothing more than unverified assumptions about prehistoric temperatures and computer-generated climate models that are completely useless at predicting future temperatures. Unfortunately these untested hypotheses get repeated so often they transmogrify into received wisdom in the minds of the gullible, and even other scientists.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (15) Dec 10, 2018I mean, just sayin'.
MR166
2.8 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2018I mean, just sayin'.
antigoracle
1.9 / 5 (14) Dec 10, 2018The Da Snob jackass brays again.
IPCC officials admit mistake over melting Himalayan glaciers
https://www.thegu...-mistake
Yet it was published in the IPCC report.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2018Human and geological history tells us that it is always best to proceed on the side of caution, in spite of what the Climatolologists claim to know that any Global Warming is all the fault of humans, with only a short spurt from exploding volcanoes and other natural eruptions.
ClimatoLOLogists have a very heavy stake in this blame-game, since it is governments who are responsible for the making of new taxes to increase the wealth of the Climate Change aristocracy.
Therefore it is imperative to convince all governments to force their populations (of the western world) to drastically contribute their hard-earned money to the pockets/check and savings accounts of those scientists/politicians who bring the doom-and-gloom news to the public, in order to frighten them with the coming death of the planet - however untrue. Follow the money.
That doesn't alleviate the responsibility of humans to recycle and not pollute our waterways and atmosphere, of course.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018That's all?
Pitiful.
howhot3
3.9 / 5 (15) Dec 10, 2018szore88
2.1 / 5 (15) Dec 10, 2018Da Schneib
4.1 / 5 (9) Dec 10, 2018howhot3
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018howhot3
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2018Officer goon; "we need to protect our coal interests"
Goon with boy goon; "anything to get rid of the human peasants"
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2018Resorting to nasty name-calling is typical of your bloviated cult of anti-human global warming/global cooling/global warming repetitious mantra that touts a huge 2 - 7 degree F. rise as the end of the world.
I have asked you before what do you intend to do with half of the 6 billion humans on Earth who continue to exhale CO2 gas from their bodies. You never provide an answer. So I will ask you again. What would you do to stop all of those humans from exhaling a GHG?
ddaye
5 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018guptm
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2018howhot3
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018As far as you being a goon, you're a trump supporter so you are what you are (gooney to the goon goon).
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/meoghHDnPCg/WfvBwls_AZI/AAAAAAAAL2o/jIrqEH2XWy0PrInB958UxlOsNEKslnT-ACLcBGAs/s1600/A1.jpg
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 10, 2018However, humans and other animals have changed in form from CO2 breathing unicellular life forms, into Oxygen breathers; whereas plants have remained CO2 breathers and O2 exhalers/emitters.
Thus, it is the fault of Evolution that has caused humans/animals to exhale CO2 and not the fault of humans and animals, per se.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2018So let us make the land masses of the whole Earth green again. The greenery could even absorb the CO2 from the oceans to save the sea life. Problem almost solved.
Then there is the conundrum of how to keep warm in winter and have electricity to run your appliances without using fossil fuels. Solar is no good at night, unless batteries are vastly improved. Wind power kills birds and may have undetermined consequences - unless way offshore.
So how to avoid using fossil fuels for warmth, appliances and travel?
howhot3
5 / 5 (6) Dec 10, 2018With regard to clean energy use you're an idiot if you don't pursue that model of energy production.
snoosebaum
4 / 5 (5) Dec 10, 2018Shootist
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2018Call me when the coast of Greenland is warm enough for barley for at least 400 years.
philstacy9
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2018Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2018So either you are living in the tropics, or you keep your house/apartment cold to avoid using a fossil fuel and you pile your bed with extra blankets to keep warm, is that right?
You are afraid to turn the light switch to ON because that will start the electricity flowing to your lamps, which comes directly from the grid, which is powered by a plant that burns a fossil fuel, is that right?
You drive an electric car with a solar panel on the roof, but on cloudy days, you have to drive up to a station to charge your batteries. And where does that power come from to charge your car batteries? Why, from the grid, of course, which is powered by a plant that burns a fossil fuel, is that right?
And for entertainment, you don't watch the telly, because that requires electricity from the grid, which is powered by a plant that burns a fossil fuel, isn't that right, howhot?
And when you want to cook breakfast, lunch or dinner, you light a candle, isn't that right, howhot?
Joker23
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2018sparcboy
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2018Case in point: 'Electrogeochemistry' captures carbon, produces fuel, offsets ocean acidification - June 25, 2018, University of California - Santa Cruz
Key to speeding up carbon sequestration discovered
Chemists demonstrate sustainable approach to carbon dioxide capture from air – TechXplore - September 20, 2018 by Dawn Levy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
CO2 being an issue is officially over:
"How to suck carbon dioxide from the sky for fuels and more"
All on phys.org.
sparcboy
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2018MR166
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2018Humans cannot even govern themselves with out creating wars. Yea, right, we can govern the climate without creating a huge disaster.
Anonym518498
Dec 12, 2018howhot3
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 12, 2018Yeah, yeah. More climate denier goonery. You bunch of pug-nosed climate deniers... acting all so holier-than-thou Climate change is going to get your gooney kids first, so you might as well go ahead and have that vasectomy you always wanted. You know, do the kids a favor and leave the world in a better place than you received it.
hermes_the_goat
not rated yet Dec 13, 2018Ultron
1 / 5 (2) Dec 18, 2018Sea level rise for last 100 years was approximately 30 cm
See level rise for last 20 000 years was approximately 120 meters (all of it without any real participation of humans, but humans survived it without any major problem)
source:
https://en.wikipe...vel_rise
SURFIN85
not rated yet Dec 29, 2018Sure, you can call the scenarios themselves alarmist- but in what sense is this process moral? And if there is no essential climate that need be preserved, is it not morally equivalent that, one day you wake up in a burning oven, everything around you dying, and I take some benefit for myself- what moral claims can you make against me? Can we seriously believe that we are entitled to change the climate to the detriment of the future generations- our children or grandchildren, and expect them to accept this as ethically sound? For me it is abhorrent, even devious.I see this as theft and vandalism, pure and simple. It matters not the degree of responsibility. No one with character or honor would act with such impudence. Our forebears might have had the excuse of ignorance, we do not.