A borehole in Antarctica produces evidence of sudden warming

From a Louisiana State University Press Release Oct 1, 2009

Algae and Pollen Grains Provide Evidence of Remarkably Warm Period in Antarctica’s History

Palynomorphs from sediment core give proof to sudden warming in mid-Miocene era

The ANDRILL drilling rig in Antarctica

For Sophie Warny, LSU assistant professor of geology and geophysics and curator at the LSU Museum of Natural Science, years of patience in analyzing Antarctic samples with low fossil recovery finally led to a scientific breakthrough. She and colleagues from around the world now have proof of a sudden, remarkably warm period in Antarctica that occurred about 15.7 million years ago and lasted for a few thousand years.

Last year, as Warny was studying samples sent to her from the latest Antarctic Geologic Drilling Program, or ANDRILL AND-2A, a multinational collaboration between the Antarctic Programs of the United States (funded by the National Science Foundation), New Zealand, Italy and Germany, one sample stood out as a complete anomaly.

Microscopic image of the algae pediastrum.

“First I thought it was a mistake, that it was a sample from another location, not Antarctica, because of the unusual abundance in microscopic fossil cysts of marine algae called dinoflagellates. But it turned out not to be a mistake, it was just an amazingly rich layer,” said Warny. “I immediately contacted my U.S. colleague, Rosemary Askin, our New Zealand colleagues, Michael Hannah and Ian Raine, and our German colleague, Barbara Mohr, to let them know about this unique sample as each of our countries had received a third of the ANDRILL samples.”

Some colleagues had noted an increase in pollen grains of woody plants in the sample immediately above, but none of the other samples had such a unique abundance in algae, which at first gave Warny some doubts about potential contamination.

“But the two scientists in charge of the drilling, David Harwood of University of Nebraska – Lincoln, and Fabio Florindo of Italy, were equally excited about the discovery,” said Warny. “They had noticed that this thin layer had a unique consistency that had been characterized by their team as a diatomite, which is a layer extremely rich in fossils of another algae called diatoms.”

All research parties involved met at the Antarctic Research Facility at Florida State University in Tallahassee. Together, they sampled the zone of interest in great detail and processed the new samples in various labs. One month later, the unusual abundance in microfossils was confirmed.

Among the 1,107 meters of sediments recovered and analyzed for microfossil content, a two-meter thick layer in the core displayed extremely rich fossil content. This is unusual because the Antarctic ice sheet was formed about 35 million years ago, and the frigid temperatures there impede the presence of woody plants and blooms of dinoflagellate algae.

“We all analyzed the new samples and saw a 2,000 fold increase in two species of fossil dinoflagellate cysts, a five-fold increase in freshwater algae and up to an 80-fold increase in terrestrial pollen,” said Warny. “Together, these shifts in the microfossil assemblages represent a relatively short period of time during which Antarctica became abruptly much warmer.”

These palynomorphs, a term used to described dust-size organic material such as pollen, spores and cysts of dinoflagellates and other algae, provide hard evidence that Antarctica underwent a brief but rapid period of warming about 15 million years before present.

LSU’s Sophie Warny and her New Zealand colleague, Mike Hannah, sampling the ANDRILL cores at the Antarctic Research Facility.

“This event will lead to a better understanding of global connections and climate forcing, in other words, it will provide a better understanding of how external factors imposed fluctuations in Earth’s climate system,” said Harwood. “The Mid-Miocene Climate Optimum has long been recognized in global proxy records outside of the Antarctic region. Direct information from a setting proximal to the dynamic Antarctic ice sheets responsible for driving many of these changes is vital to the correct calibration and interpretation of these proxy records.”

These startling results will offer new insight into Antarctica’s climatic past – insights that could potentially help climate scientists better understand the current climate change scenario.

“In the case of these results, the microfossils provide us with quantitative data of what the environment was actually like in Antarctica at the time, showing how this continent reacted when climatic conditions were warmer than they are today,” said Warny.

According to the researchers, these fossils show that land temperatures reached a January average of 10 degrees Celsius – the equivalent of approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit – and that estimated sea surface temperatures ranged between zero and 11.5 degrees Celsius. The presence of freshwater algae in the sediments suggests to researchers that an increase in meltwater and perhaps also in rainfall produced ponds and lakes adjacent to the Ross Sea during this warm period, which would obviously have resulted in some reduction in sea ice.

These findings most likely reflect a poleward shift of the jet stream in the Southern Hemisphere, which would have pushed warmer water toward the pole and allowed a few dinoflagellate species to flourish under such ice-free conditions. Researchers believe that shrub-like woody plants might also have been able to proliferate during an abrupt and brief warmer time interval.

“An understanding of this event, in the context of timing and magnitude of the change, has important implications for how the climate system operates and what the potential future response in a warmer global climate might be,” said Harwood. “A clear understanding of what has happened in the past, and the integration of these data into ice sheet and climate models, are important steps in advancing the ability of these computer models to reproduce past conditions, and with improved models be able to better predict future climate responses.”

While the results are certainly impressive, the work isn’t yet complete.

“The SMS Project Science Team is currently looking at the stratigraphic sequence and timing of climate events evident throughout the ANDRILL AND-2A drillcore, including those that enclose this event,” said Florindo. “A broader understanding of ice sheet behavior under warmer-than-present conditions will emerge.”

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
317 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Stephen Wilde
October 4, 2009 11:18 am

Interesting that they seem to accept that a poleward shift of the jets accompanies natural warming forcings and clearly in that case the jets were forced poleward to an extreme degree of many hundreds of miles.
However they seem to think that the movement of the jets led to the movement of warmer oceanic water towards the south pole whereas I would argue that a faster energy release from the oceans came first then the jets moved and then the Antarctic edge areas became warmer.
Either way it is clear that very substantial latitudinal air circulation shifts can occur wholly as a result of natural forcing which leaves the climate models out on a limb because currently they posit that the jet stream poleward movement from 1975 to 2000 was wholly or primarily anthropogenically caused. They do not yet seem to have adjusted their models to take account of the shift back equatorward since 2000. To do that they would have to reduce or eliminate the assumed effect of increased CO2 in the air. To do that would imply an acceptance that the observations of Tyndall and others in relation to CO2 in the air do not necessarily translate into a significant climate or global energy budget effect so they are in a bit of a bind.
Elsewhere I have suggested why the Arctic and Antarctic would be affected differently under global warming or cooling regimes because one is an ocean surrounded by continents and the other is a continent surrounded by oceans.
Thus during a period of global warming of the air from increased energy release by the oceans all the air circulations are pushed poleward with the mid latitude weather systems compressed into a narrower but faster moving band nearer the poles.
In the case of Antarctica the centre of the continent might even get colder because there would be reduced air flows into and out of the interior. However the edges of the ice cap could well get a lot warmer especially in the areas projecting furthest from the south pole into the warmer surrounding seas and especially the West Antarctic Peninsula which is exactly what we have seen during the recent warming spell when the Antarctic interior has been getting colder but the West Antarctic Peninsula has been getting warmer. Conventional climatology sees that as a bit of a puzzle.
Once more my general climate description fits observed events better than the current climate models.

michel
October 4, 2009 11:41 am

Guys, you are drawing totally the wrong conclusions from this. You are all so busy trying to take this in a spirit of triumphalism, to argue that this shows AGW is for the birds. That is not what is important about this. In fact, its doubtful that has any bearing on the current AGW thesis and calls for action.
But what it does show, for sure, is that the place we live on is subject to fairly sudden convulsions of climate. So it would behoove is to get ready for them. Not simply of a warming sort, or a cooling sort, but of any sort, and of dimensions which could prove seriously threatening. It may not be very likely in the next 100 years, its cause may not be at all clear. But its insurance, disaster planning if you like. We had better make sure we have an idea what to do.
I do not, for the record, think that the frantic efforts to lower CO2 emissions to 19C levels are a rational response to this, partly because of the lack of evidence that it will work, partly because warming is not the problem. The problem is, we may get climate fluctuations large enough to threaten us, and right now we have no idea what we would do about one.

RhudsonL
October 4, 2009 11:46 am

It is hard to believe this new drilling wasn’t due to the tax breaks under the Louisiana Movie project. Bruce Willis is gonna stop Mayans in 2012 from a coming through a time portal guarded by nesting penguins.

Denny
October 4, 2009 11:57 am

This shouldn’t be surprising due to “Continental Drift” the land below all that snow and ice was steaming with live millions of years ago. They have found fossilize plant life and creatures. The plates move. Scientists think at one time all of the continents were one mass. As the earth cooled, plates were established and continents started to move inducing volcano’s and earthquakes..Sudden increases do happen to sudden changes by “super Volcano’s” or the Earth being hit with Comets or large asteroids…Any of these could and most likely will happen…Again, something “beyond” Mans control!

jorgekafkazar
October 4, 2009 12:11 pm

michel (11:41:18) : “…what it does show, for sure, is that the place we live on is subject to fairly sudden convulsions of climate…”
Quick! We must do something immediately! We’ll be hip deep in pollen if we don’t act within 75.2134 fortnights. Tipping point! Tipping point! (When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.)

Michael
October 4, 2009 12:14 pm

MSM news is starting. I used to deliver the Bulletin 35 years ago.
“Singer and Avery have updated their New York Times bestseller by reorganizing the content of the original edition. It is now easier to follow the discoveries showing solar radiation to be the principal influence on global climate, while demonstrating that human-caused carbon dioxide has virtually no measurable effect whatever. It is a very readable book that avoids scientific jargon and does not drown its major points in a flood of data, yet provides 499 references for anyone desiring to find and read the facts found and explained by international researchers.”
Unstoppable Global Warming?
http://www.thebulletin.us/articles/2009/10/04/arts_culture/doc4ac851783e68d871533311.txt

October 4, 2009 12:16 pm

Michael(09:39:31) :
Most comments over at Huffington Post engage in moronic name calling, but many good posters are discussing the factual science behind the issue, and the sheeple are learning. I was surprised myself at the number of intelligent people that have infiltrated the site.
Shhhhhhhhh — you’ll spook ’em…

jeroen
October 4, 2009 12:19 pm

continetal shift?

glen martin
October 4, 2009 12:21 pm

Obviously some American city, probably one of those red-state cities like Houston with all those oil refineries, got transported back in time to the Miocene. They then proceeded to destroy themselves by radically altering the perfect climate of the Miocene.

Jimbo
October 4, 2009 12:24 pm

Maybe this is why geologists are the most sceptical group among scientists when it comes to AGW. They know the earth has seen some radical swings in C02 levels and temperatures and the earth has somehow always ‘stabilised’.

Gordon Ford
October 4, 2009 12:40 pm

“Jimbo (12:24:00) :
Maybe this is why geologists are the most sceptical group among scientists when it comes to AGW. They know the earth has seen some radical swings in C02 levels and temperatures and the earth has somehow always ’stabilised’

From a geologist. The earth has no “stable state” , Change is the norm.

Doug
October 4, 2009 12:42 pm

What would tsunami deposits look like in that environment?

Robert Kral
October 4, 2009 12:42 pm

John S: Dinoflagellates are marine organisms, for the most part, or at least aquatic, hence not wind-dispersed.

cotwome
October 4, 2009 12:47 pm

This was the Earth during the Miocene:
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/mollglobe.html
Here are maps from the past 600 million years:
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/mollglobe.html

cotwome
October 4, 2009 12:48 pm
Fred
October 4, 2009 12:49 pm

But, but, but….what about the ‘science’ wasn’t it ‘settled’ already ???…..but, but the ‘debate’, wasn’t it supposed to be over ???

Steve (Paris)
October 4, 2009 12:59 pm

jorgekafkazar (12:11:57) :
‘hip deep in pollen…”
I just woke my wife up I was laughing so loud when I read that.
I blame Fred Flintstone. He imagined autos and his imagination caused imaginary CO² which melted Antartica. Plus ça change…

wws
October 4, 2009 1:18 pm

I propose that from this day forward the result of the ANDRILL AND-2A program be known as a Gorehole.

Louis Hissink
October 4, 2009 1:37 pm

Lucy Skywalker:
““The Antarctic ice sheet was formed about 35 million years ago”…
I’m puzzled. I didn’t think the Antarctic cores went back nearly that far. Here I am looking at a graph from Vostok that goes back 450,000 years… Epica goes back 800,000 years (I thought that was considered to be a great extension).
WUWT??”
Heh heh, it get’s worse if you look at one of the old maps showing Antarctica as ice free – (the Hapgood map I think it is).
I don’t know whether most of the readers are aware of it, but the mind set that’s behind the current AGW scam were also behind a previous science hijack during the early 19th century in England. Then the Whigs were hell bent on getting the Tories out of government and only got political traction when they argued that the Old Testament was literature and not historical fact. USing that rhetorical ploy, Charles Lyell (himself a devout Methodist) then “moved” Biblical Creation backwards in time and hence expanded the geological timescale. The belief that all natural occurring radiogenic substances were formed at that time then formed the basis of modern geochronology.
For the record my position is that we don’t know the age of the earth, and the event documented in the scriptures isn’t the creation of the earth, but the start of our present “world” much like the Islamic world started around 1500 AD.
Science deals with data and no data, no science.
The warm period as documented by the palynological data is real – but the age assigned to it is a Lyellian artefact.
The earth seemed to have experienced a global catastrophe some 10,000 years ago, accompanied by a long period of atmospheric instability as suggested by the millions of petroglyphs carved into rock around the globe and described by Peratt et al in various papers linking those petroglyphs with auroral instabilities indicative an increase in the solar wind by perhaps an order of magnitude 10,000 years ago, +/_ (since we really can’t date this). Most of the petroglyphs document a phenomenon at the south pole, vis Antarctica.
Various papers listed here http://plasmascience.net/tpu/NearEarth.html under general title of Z-Pinch auroras as recorded in antiquity. A more recent paper dealing with the THEMIS mission data and data on Easter Island is published as well I see.

Michael
October 4, 2009 2:15 pm

Snow storm in Montana and Wyoming, in the Wind River Range the may 3 to 4 feet of snow. I’m speechless.
http://www.weather.com/multimedia/videoplayer.html?clip=364&collection=national&from=hp_news

the_Butcher
October 4, 2009 2:18 pm

michel (11:41:18) :
Relax, nothing is going to happen. You must be one of those who will commit suicide in 2012.

the_Butcher
October 4, 2009 2:22 pm

cotwome (12:48:58) :
Earth during the Miocene:
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~rcb7/20moll.jpg

How come the Sea levels are the same from today even though there’s almost no Ice in the antarctic? (based on that image.)

Roberto
October 4, 2009 2:30 pm

As a long-time visitor to WUWT who counts on Mr. Watts and his regular commenters to put the whole AGW in a proper scientific perspective and to remind/inform the rest of us about the science we are not being told about about Hansen and company, I have to say that I’m disappointed with this post and the comments.
You are neglecting a perfectly good scientific explanation for the sudden warming in Antarctica 16 million years ago that is consistent with AGW: time travel. In the not-so-distant future, in compliance with the provisions of the Copenhagen accord, humanity decides to deal with excess C02 by sending it back to the past. Since there were no cars (or people) in the Miocene and the ancestors of today’s mammals had a reasonably small carbon footprint, it’s the perfect place to send it.
See how easy it is when you keep an open mind?

Iren
October 4, 2009 3:02 pm

“Michael (11:09:27) :
I can’t wait to read stories about how sea life is exploding because of plankton, seaweed, and other life forms eating the elevated CO2. What a great planet we live on.”
Unfortunately, this
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/04/arctic-seas-turn-to-acid
is what you’re much more likely to see. They’re already working on the next big scare – ocean acidification from excess carbon dioxide (man made, of course).