"Extreme global warming" in the ancie...

"Extreme global warming" in the ancient past

There are 47 comments on the NorCalBlogs story from Nov 11, 2010, titled "Extreme global warming" in the ancient past. In it, NorCalBlogs reports that:

Ancient global warming: but which came first, the temperature or the CO2? The image shows the the scientific drilling ship JOIDES Resolution docked in Hobart, Tasmania.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NorCalBlogs.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#1 Nov 11, 2010
Even before the resuts are in, scientists are arguing about which came first, CO2 or warming.
Why they don't simply wait and see, is the big question.
Meanwhile, the cost of finding these things out is being paid for by the taxpayer.
Easy come, easy go.
The scientific drilling ship JOIDES Resolution didn't cost pennies, that's for sure.
Paper_Masochist

Australia

#2 Nov 11, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
Even before the resuts are in, scientists are arguing about which came first, CO2 or warming.
Why they don't simply wait and see, is the big question.
Meanwhile, the cost of finding these things out is being paid for by the taxpayer.
Easy come, easy go.
The scientific drilling ship JOIDES Resolution didn't cost pennies, that's for sure.
'Scientists' aren't arguing about global warming. There's the occasional dissident and perhaps they may have some points, but still the overwhelming, and I mean that, completely overwhelming view of scientists is that it's happening.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opini...

I mean, you might as well say scientists are arguing about young Earth theory. There are scientists saying "yeah, the Earth is 6000 years old" and there is the rest of the community saying "no it isn't you idiot what is wrong with you that goes against everything you stand for as a scientist."

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#3 Nov 11, 2010
Paper_Masochist, please wear your reading glasses in future.
The article is about, "which came first, the temperature or the CO2?"
Paper_Masochist

Australia

#4 Nov 11, 2010
Ha ha, ouch. That's embarrassing.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#5 Nov 11, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
Even before the resuts are in, scientists are arguing about which came first, CO2 or warming.
If you bothered to read the article, you'd see the scientists think the CO2 increase caused the warming, and are just looking for the exact source.
“The change in carbon dioxide 40 million years ago was too large to have been the result of temperature change and associated feedbacks,” said co-lead author Peter Bijl of Utrecht University.“Such a large change in carbon dioxide certainly provides a plausible explanation for the changes in Earth’s temperature.”

...

The rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels around 40 million years ago approximately coincides with the rise of the Himalayas and may be related to the disappearance of an ocean between India and Asia as a result of plate tectonics – the large scale movements of the Earth’s rocky shell (lithosphere).

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#6 Nov 11, 2010
Good old FuG, always ready to make a positive out of a negative.
A, "plausible explanation" is not exact science.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#7 Nov 11, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
Good old FuG, always ready to make a positive out of a negative.
A, "plausible explanation" is not exact science.
Rather that than the implausible inference from Watts that temperature rose first, when there's zero evidence for that.

Your usual approach to science: quibble at the attempts to quantify probability, and then imply a totally improbable alternative explanation.

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#8 Nov 11, 2010
"The other 4200 years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data.

The 4200 years of warming make up about 5/6 of the total warming. So CO2 could have caused the last 5/6 of the warming, but could not have caused the first 1/6 of the warming."
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives...
"As far as we can tell."
"Could have."
LessHypeMoreFact

Nepean, Canada

#9 Nov 11, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
Even before the resuts are in, scientists are arguing about which came first, CO2 or warming.
Frankly it doesn't matter. If some other cause increases temperature, generally CO2 comes out of 'repositories' due to the higher temperatures and 'locks in' the change even if the original cause is stopped. If CO2 or methane is released from some other process such as eruptions of methane clathrates, the CO2 is still going to cause the temperature rise and lock in the change. It takes a long time for CO2 levels to reduce by natural processes so either way, the effect is the same. Higher GHG levels and long term changes in the global temperature.

The most significant finding is a change of about 4C to 6C for a 'doubling'. Due to the nature of the greenhouse effect, the temperature change for a 'doubling' will be about the same no matter what the 'start' and 'end' levels. In this case, the levels of about 2000 ppm rose to about 4000 ppm.

As to how this would affect the current world, they have done studies of a 4C warming..

http://www.tikkun.org/tikkunblog/wp-content/u...

A fairly clear warning that the consequences of doubling CO2 levels will cut world population by about 85%. And no escape for the thousands of years it takes to reduce CO2 levels back to pre-warming levels.
Anonymous

Louisville, KY

#10 Nov 11, 2010
THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY WAS FALLING AAAAAUUUAAAA what a load

Since: Jun 08

Conder, Australia

#11 Nov 11, 2010
Humans have been through various dramatic climate changes throughout history.

We survived and i can only assume we will survive again.

To do any real action in slowing down CO2 emmissions would involve seriously depopulating the earth.

In other words, the masses will have to die so that a few can live on.

Even then it's no gaurantee that the climate won't change anyway.

Ahhhh, the conundrum of it all..........

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#12 Nov 12, 2010
LessFactMoreHype wrote:
Frankly it doesn't matter.
Do you have any news on forty spelt with a U in it yet, Mr Undoubtably Spelt Fourty?

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#13 Nov 12, 2010
Rex the Australian wrote:
Humans have been through various dramatic climate changes throughout history.
We survived and i can only assume we will survive again.
To do any real action in slowing down CO2 emmissions would involve seriously depopulating the earth.
In other words, the masses will have to die so that a few can live on.
Even then it's no gaurantee that the climate won't change anyway.
Ahhhh, the conundrum of it all..........
I'm not suggesting it's a good idea, but instead of killing off, "the masses," birth control might be a less drastic alternative?

Since: Jun 09

Australia

#14 Nov 12, 2010
anyone who went to school learnt in grade one that 'naughty forty lost its u' anyone saying different is uncomprehendably idiotic

“Happy, warm and comfortable”

Since: Oct 10

Mountain retreat, SE Spain

#15 Nov 12, 2010
Proud World Patriot wrote:
anyone who went to school learnt in grade one that 'naughty forty lost its u' anyone saying different is uncomprehendably idiotic
You're absolutely right, but google asked me, "Did you mean: incomprehensibly?"

Since: Jun 08

Conder, Australia

#16 Nov 12, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not suggesting it's a good idea, but instead of killing off, "the masses," birth control might be a less drastic alternative?
They have tried but "religion" always stands in the way of common sense.

When i say "religion" i also mean cultural values as both follow the same strict guidance laws.

Virus's were an efficient way of curbing the worlds population over the centuries but modern medicine has slowed that dramatically.

One truth people don't want to accept is that the more earth's population rises, the more food, fuel and animal resources will diminish....forever.

You can have a full plate and it looks good.

It might even look good with the last piece of food scrap on it.

But once that attraction (food) is gone, it means nothing.

It's forgotten.

It's dead.

Extinct.

Goodbye tomorrow, i'll never know what you may have brought me.

Some hard decisions are going to be made in the future.

You can take that to the bank.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#17 Nov 12, 2010
Earthling-1 wrote:
"The other 4200 years of warming could in fact have been caused by CO2, as far as we can tell from this ice core data.
The 4200 years of warming make up about 5/6 of the total warming. So CO2 could have caused the last 5/6 of the warming, but could not have caused the first 1/6 of the warming."
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives...
"As far as we can tell."
"Could have."
That quote is about warming following the end of an ice age- nothing to do with this article.

Even there, the fact is that we can't explain what happened in the past without CO2 causing warming.

"As far as we can tell" and "could have" are the *essence* of science.

We don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing

If you want bold statements of certainty, look to religion or political ideology.
Paper_Masochist

Australia

#18 Nov 12, 2010
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
That quote is about warming following the end of an ice age- nothing to do with this article.
Even there, the fact is that we can't explain what happened in the past without CO2 causing warming.
"As far as we can tell" and "could have" are the *essence* of science.
We don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing
If you want bold statements of certainty, look to religion or political ideology.
Yes... we can? According to current data we've had plenty of ice ages and mini ice ages and it's easily explained (and supported) by the distance the Earth is to the sun. Our rotation upon the Earth's axis causes seasons, but our orbit around the sun causes stronger, world wide seasons. These are exacerbated by the melting of ice causing CO2 in our atmosphere making problems worse.

Let's be serious here, there's a problem with MAN MADE CO2, it's not like carbon dioxide levels just spontaneously appear in our atmosphere and cause problems.

Since: Apr 08

"the green troll"

#19 Nov 12, 2010
Paper_Masochist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes... we can? According to current data we've had plenty of ice ages and mini ice ages and it's easily explained (and supported) by the distance the Earth is to the sun. Our rotation upon the Earth's axis causes seasons, but our orbit around the sun causes stronger, world wide seasons. These are exacerbated by the melting of ice causing CO2 in our atmosphere making problems worse.
Let's be serious here, there's a problem with MAN MADE CO2, it's not like carbon dioxide levels just spontaneously appear in our atmosphere and cause problems.
Don't forget about volcanic activity: a cause of rises in CO2 levels in geological history.

This episode is probably explained by similar unusual geological activity putting more CO2 into the atmosphere (or taking less out maybe).
Paper_Masochist

Australia

#20 Nov 12, 2010
Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget about volcanic activity: a cause of rises in CO2 levels in geological history.
This episode is probably explained by similar unusual geological activity putting more CO2 into the atmosphere (or taking less out maybe).
CO2 levels emitted by volcanoes actually aren't as big as the media leads you to believe. Despite the CO2 they do release volcanic eruptions end up having a cooling effect overall thanks to the haze effect.

http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_wor...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Oceanography Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Scientists Beg for Climate Action (Dec '07) Dec '16 Patriot 1,864
Lost in the sea Sep '16 clement 1
News The world's clouds are in different places than... (Jul '16) Jul '16 Too Easy 14
News Sea level rise: It's worse than we thought (Jul '09) Jul '16 litesong 3,768
News With La Nina around the corner, dry weather in ... (Jun '16) Jun '16 Kev 1
News new Scientists find minivan-sized sponge, world... (May '16) May '16 Jack 8
News As Canada probes Haida Gwaii ocean fertilizing,... (Apr '16) Apr '16 lotsa fish poop p... 1
More from around the web