Ancient “Hyperthermals” a Guide to Anticipated Climate Changes
Scripps researchers document the history of sudden global warming events, impacts on marine life
By Mario Aguilera, Scripps Institute News (h/t to Dr. Leif Svalgaard)
![]() |
| Sediment samples in the lab of Richard Norris obtained by the Ocean Drilling Program reveal the mark of “hyperthermals,” warming events lasting thousands of years that changed the composition of the sediment and its color. The packaged sediment sample on the left contains sediment formed in the wake of a 55-million-year-old warming event and the sample on the right is sediment from a later era after global temperatures stabilized. |
Bursts of intense global warming that have lasted tens of thousands of years have taken place more frequently throughout history than previously believe, according to evidence gathered by a team led by Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego researchers.
Richard Norris, a professor of geology at Scripps who co-authored the report, said that releases of carbon dioxide sequestered in the deep oceans were the most likely trigger of these ancient “hyperthermal” events. Most of the events raised average global temperatures between 2° and 3° Celsius (3.6 and 5.4° F), an amount comparable to current conservative estimates of how much temperatures are expected to rise in coming decades as a consequence of anthropogenic global warming. Most hyperthermals lasted about 40,000 years before temperatures returned to normal.
The study appears in the March 17 issue of the journal Nature.
“These hyperthermals seem not to have been rare events,” Norris said, “hence there are lots of ancient examples of global warming on a scale broadly like the expected future warming. We can use these events to examine the impact of global change on marine ecosystems, climate and ocean circulation.”
The hyperthermals took place roughly every 400,000 years during a warm period of Earth history that prevailed some 50 million years ago. The strongest of them coincided with an event known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, the transition between two geologic epochs in which global temperatures rose between 4° and 7° C (7.2° and 12.6° F) and needed 200,000 years to return to historical norms. The events stopped taking place around 40 million years ago, when the planet entered a cooling phase. No warming events of the magnitude of these hyperthermals have been detected in the geological record since then.
![]() |
| Richard Norris in his lab with ancient sediments obtained by the Ocean Drilling Program reveal the mark of “hyperthermals,” warming events lasting thousands of years that changed the composition of the sediment and its color. The dark color in the large sediment core sample at left depicts the onset and aftermath of a 55-million-year-old warming event when changes in ocean temperatures altered the composition of marine life. |
Phil Sexton, a former student of Norris’ now at the Open University in the United Kingdom, led the analysis of sediment cores collected off the South American coast. In the cores, evidence of the warm periods presented itself in bands of gray sediment layered within otherwise pale greenish mud. The gray sediment contained increased amounts of clay left after the calcareous shells of microscopic organisms were dissolved on the sea floor. These clay-rich intervals are consistent with ocean acidification episodes that would have been triggered by large-scale releases of carbon dioxide. Large influxes of carbon dioxide change the chemistry of seawater by producing greater amounts of carbonic acid in the oceans.
The authors concluded that a release of carbon dioxide from the deep oceans was a more likely cause of the hyperthermals than other triggering events that have been hypothesized. The regularity of the hyperthermals and relatively warm ocean temperatures of the period makes them less likely to have been caused by events such as large melt-offs of methane hydrates, terrestrial burning of peat or even proposed cometary impacts. The hyperthermals could have been set in motion by a build-up of carbon dioxide in the deep oceans caused by slowing or stopping of circulation in ocean basins that prevented carbon dioxide release.
Norris noted that the hyperthermals provide historical perspective on what Earth will experience as it continues to warm from widespread use of fossil fuels, which has increased carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere nearly 50 percent since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
Hyperthermals can help scientists produce a range of estimates for how long it will take for temperatures to fully revert to historical norms depending on how much warming human activities cause.
“In 100 to 300 years, we could produce a signal on Earth that takes tens of thousands of years to equilibrate, judging from the geologic record,” he said.
The scientists hope to better understand how fast the conditions that set off hyperthermals developed. Norris said that 50 million year old sediments in the North Sea are finely layered enough for scientists to distinguish decade-to-decade or even year-to-year changes.
Co-authors of the paper include researchers from the National Oceanography Centre Southampton at the University of Southampton in England and the Center for Marine Environmental Sciences, University of Bremen, Germany.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


It’s a wonder the greens aren’t pushing for another Azolea event (i think I have that plant name right – the one that sucks C02 from the atmosphere)
It would be helpful to have some more objective measure of temperature such as isotope ratios to draw these conclusions.
Mud color seems inadequate for more than a fairly weak and subjective inference.
“These clay-rich intervals are consistent with ocean acidification episodes that would have been triggered by large-scale releases of carbon dioxide. Large influxes of carbon dioxide change the chemistry of seawater by producing greater amounts of carbonic acid in the oceans.”
“The hyperthermals could have been set in motion by a build-up of carbon dioxide in the deep oceans caused by slowing or stopping of circulation in ocean basins that prevented carbon dioxide release.”
Always the conditional clauses. Do these scientists categorically exclude all other possible reasons?
“These clay-rich intervals are consistent with ocean acidification episodes that would have been triggered by large-scale releases of carbon dioxide. Large influxes of carbon dioxide change the chemistry of seawater by producing greater amounts of carbonic acid in the oceans.”
Logic fail.
When it warms the oceans release Co2 and get more alkaline. That raises airbourne Co2 which is then absorbed back into the ocean when it cools, making it less alkaline again.
These people are talking nonsense.
The research is interesting. Seems that they didn’t report any evidence of an impact from CO2. Yet they seemed obligated to throw in comments such as “likely” and “more likely” regarding CO2, without any evidence to back it up. Same agenda-driven drumbeat, when it appears they were just guessing.
Still no proof of whether warming caused the release of the CO2 or vice versa.
At the end of the day, however, we do know that life on Earth existed both before and after such events.
As a former Geology major, I have always said there is nothing more normal than warming that’s global. And since I learned that tidbit in Geology 101, it is safe to say that I’m one of millions and millions of former college students who are not misled by the current climate fears…
Well that’s a relief…
…climate change is normal
Now all they need is a workaround for this:
“releases of carbon dioxide sequestered in the deep oceans were the most likely trigger of these ancient “hyperthermal” events.”
“The hyperthermals could have been set in motion by a build-up of carbon dioxide in the deep oceans caused by slowing or stopping of circulation in ocean basins that prevented carbon dioxide release.”
and an explanation of how they read 5 million little lines……
“Norris said that 50 million year old sediments in the North Sea are finely layered enough for scientists to distinguish decade-to-decade or even year-to-year changes.”
Other than all that, it’s good to go…
…I’m sure their peers agree
Tallbloke has it right: CO2 rise is an effect of temperature, not a cause, as shown by high resolution ice-core data from the past several-hundred-thousand years. The intellectual dishonesty of Norris, Sexton, and all the other tax-funded shills for carbon taxation is shameful, but understandable.
Speaking of geologic scale. 55 million years?
I hope they have taken continental drift into account with their bore hole location.
I’m betting there are several meteor impacts within that time frame also, and lots of volcanoes/continental uplift ect. Heck even species would affect the chemical cocktails of mud (I’m thinking bacteria here).
Seems there would be a lot of outside influence to take into consideration. I’m sure the study would be a fascinating read.
Norris said that 50 million year old sediments in the North Sea are finely layered enough for scientists to distinguish decade-to-decade or even year-to-year changes.
Why do I suddenly have an image of a tree ring in my head? 50,000,000 and one can determine 1 from that? Do we have a 50,000,000:1 microscope? There’s much more to say about this bit of news, but I’m not buying it.
They state: “The hyperthermals took place roughly every 400,000 years during a warm period of Earth history that prevailed some 50 million years ago.”
This sounds very much like Milankovich cycles.
They state:”The events stopped taking place around 40 million years ago, when the planet entered a cooling phase. No warming events of the magnitude of these hyperthermals have been detected in the geological record since then.”
Ok. So why does ice core data show periodic fluctuations of 10 degrees over 100,000’s of years if no warming events are taking place?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/12/historical-video-perspective-our-current-unprecedented-global-warming-in-the-context-of-scale/
So basic statements would appear to be wrong.
Seems like a lot of conjecture trying to link things to CO2 when Milankovich cycles have long been accepted as a good explanation.
So.
“The hyperthermals took place roughly every 400,000 years during a warm period of Earth history that prevailed some 50 million years ago.”
Nobody knows why.
“The events stopped taking place around 40 million years ago, when the planet entered a cooling phase. ”
Nobody knows why.
“No warming events of the magnitude of these hyperthermals have been detected in the geological record since then.”
Nobody knows why.
But there are people who claim to know how and why global changes such that they can say;
“In 100 to 300 years, we could produce a signal on Earth that takes tens of thousands of years to equilibrate, judging from the geologic record”.
Using the same reasoning one can confidently say that, in 100 to 300 years, we could produce flying pigs .
Richard
warming events
“the transition between two geologic epochs in which global temperatures rose between 4° and 7° C (7.2° and 12.6° F) and needed 200,000 years to return to historical norms.”
=======================================================
Yuh huh, so temps are usually in equilibrium?
@tallbloke (March 16, 2011 at 5:01 pm)–
As I read it, it’s not self-contradictory. Large-scale releases of CO2 — posited from deep ocean, but I don’t think it matters — cause CO2 to enter the atmosphere, and equilibration causes the top layer of ocean (where the microorganisms lived) to become less alkaline. So the deep ocean, losing CO2, may become more alkaline, but the part which fostered the sediment-forming wee beasties becomes less alkaline. [I will not say more acidic.]
It’s still ridiculously speculative, but not self-contradictory.
So, essentially, Chuck Norris was born 40 million years ago.
That kind of explains everything. 0_O
So… does anyone here recall what happened 50 million years ago that put a halt to hyperthermals?
I was on vacation then so someone will have to fill me in on the details.
Ok. Let me see if I have this right. Carbon dioxide is sequestered in the deep oceans. For some reason, this CO2 is then released into the atmosphere. This abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere causes a worldwide warming event. The warming THEN causes changes to ocean chemistry and sediment coloration. Hmmm….
Well, as a chemist, if you are RELEASING large quantities of CO2 FROM the oceans I can tell you that the chemistry of the ocean has just changed. You don’t have to have a “hyperthermal” episode to make that change. This is the kind of crap being passed off as science, and people actually are awarded degrees for this.
Even use of the term “hyperthermal” for only 2 or 3 degrees of heating is ridiculous. What would they use for the 10 to 14 degrees of heating coming out of a glacial? Super-dooper extreme hyperthermal?
Grandpa always used to say, “You can send a clunk to college, and he’ll come out of it a clunk with a degree.”
What caused this CO2 release? Inquiring minds want to know.
tallbloke says:
March 16, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Logic fail. When it warms the oceans release Co2 and get more alkaline.
Logic should be applied correctly. The release does not need to have anything to do with warming oceans. See e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nyos
Mr. Norris claims: “The gray sediment contained increased amounts of clay left after the calcareous shells of microscopic organisms were dissolved on the sea floor. These clay-rich intervals are consistent with ocean acidification episodes that would have been triggered by large-scale releases of carbon dioxide. Large influxes of carbon dioxide change the chemistry of seawater by producing greater amounts of carbonic acid in the oceans.”
Could not the hiatus in the accumulation of calcium carbonate (in the form of shells of micro-organisms on the sea floor) also be explained by a temporary rise in the calcium compensation depth (i.e. depth where the rate of carbonate dissolution equals accumulation) caused by a DECLINE in dissolved CO2? I thought that the solubility of calcium carbonate increases as the concentration of dissolved CO2 (bicarbonate) decreases?
The hiatus could even be more simply explained on the supply side by a decrease in biological activity in the waters above to the point of deposition to the point where the rate of carbonate accumulation is less than the rate of dissolution for some period of time? Or, even more simply by changes in the height of the water column (and thus pressure) caused by sea level changes or vertical tectonic movements of the depositionsal surface?
Sometimes it was warmer than at other times. Therefore CO2 must have done it. There seems to be a few steps missing from the logic.
So there it is historical precedence for the large scale release of CO2 into the atmosphere causing Global warming, only diference is this time around the mechanism of release is different.
ITSS!
The authors concluded that a release of carbon dioxide from the deep oceans was a more likely cause of the hyperthermals than other triggering events that have been hypothesized. The regularity of the hyperthermals and relatively warm ocean temperatures of the period makes them less likely to have been caused by events such as large melt-offs of methane hydrates, terrestrial burning of peat or even proposed cometary impacts.
Dear Dr. Svalgaard,
Thank you for the news tip.
The article is behind one of those damnable paywalls, so I didn’t read it. Did you? If so, assuming the “episodes” are valid findings, were all the possible causes considered? For instance, what about solar variation? Can we be sure that the sun is (and has always been) unwavering in its output?
Also, should we be worried about something that apparently hasn’t happened for 40 million years? The researcher in the photograph (Dr. Norris) doesn’t look worried. What do you make of that?