From the University of Leicester press office: An ancient Earth like ours
Geologists reconstruct the Earth’s climate belts between 460 and 445 million years ago
An international team of scientists including Mark Williams and Jan Zalasiewicz of the Geology Department of the University of Leicester, and led by Dr. Thijs Vandenbroucke, formerly of Leicester and now at the University of Lille 1 (France), has reconstructed the Earth’s climate belts of the late Ordovician Period, between 460 and 445 million years ago.
The findings have been published online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA – and show that these ancient climate belts were surprisingly like those of the present.
The researchers state: “The world of the ancient past had been thought by scientists to differ from ours in many respects, including having carbon dioxide levels much higher – over twenty times as high – than those of the present. However, it is very hard to deduce carbon dioxide levels with any accuracy from such ancient rocks, and it was known that there was a paradox, for the late Ordovician was known to include a brief, intense glaciation – something difficult to envisage in a world with high levels of greenhouse gases. “
The team of scientists looked at the global distribution of common, but mysterious fossils called chitinozoans – probably the egg-cases of extinct planktonic animals – before and during this Ordovician glaciation. They found a pattern that revealed the position of ancient climate belts, including such features as the polar front, which separates cold polar waters from more temperate ones at lower latitudes. The position of these climate belts changed as the Earth entered the Ordovician glaciation – but in a pattern very similar to that which happened in oceans much more recently, as they adjusted to the glacial and interglacial phases of our current (and ongoing) Ice Age.
This ‘modern-looking’ pattern suggests that those ancient carbon dioxide levels could not have been as high as previously thought, but were more modest, at about five times current levels (they would have had to be somewhat higher than today’s, because the sun in those far-off times shone less brightly).
“These ancient, but modern-looking oceans emphasise the stability of Earth’s atmosphere and climate through deep time – and show the current man-made rise in greenhouse gas levels to be an even more striking phenomenon than was thought,” the researchers conclude.
Reference: Vandenbroucke, T.R.A., Armstrong, H.A., Williams, M., Paris, F., Zalasiewicz, J.A., Sabbe, K., Nolvak, J., Challands, T.J., Verniers, J. & Servais, T. 2010. Polar front shift and atmospheric CO2 during the glacial maximum of the Early Paleozoic Icehouse. PNAS doi/10.1073/pnas.1003220107.
Contacts: (Mark Williams and Jan Zalasiewicz at the Department of Geology, University of Leicester: Respectively tel. 0116 252 3642 and 0116 2523928, and e-mails mri@le.ac.uk and jaz1@le.ac.uk).
The position of these climate belts changed as the Earth entered the Ordovician glaciation – but in a pattern very similar to that which happened in oceans much more recently, as they adjusted to the glacial and interglacial phases of our current (and ongoing) Ice Age.
This is interesting as it is the same phenomenon as Stephen Wilde’s observation about the equatorward displacement of the jet streams position.
A “Goredician” glaciation coming?
Enneagram,
would you please refrain from derogatory comments at the end of your posts?
please and thanks
“I’d love to have a look at the raw statistical data and do a full statistical analysis. ”
James, the graphic is from http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html
Temperature after C.R. Scotese http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm
CO2 after R.A. Berner, 2001 (GEOCARB III) http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Geocarb_III-Berner.pdf
Have a happy.
“The position of these climate belts changed as the Earth entered the Ordovician glaciation – but in a pattern very similar to that which happened in oceans much more recently, as they adjusted to the glacial and interglacial phases of our current (and ongoing) Ice Age.”
Well of course. As I keep saying the latitudinal movement of the air circulation systems provides the mechanism for the variable speed of the hydrological cycle which regulates tropospheric temperatures whether during or between ice ages regardless of whatever disuptive events are thrown at the system. Otherwise the oceans could never have remained liquid.
Climate change in any given location on the Earth’s surface is simply a reflection of the changing position of that location in relation to the air circulations above or near it.
The flexibility of the hydrological cycle and the phase changes of water simply will not allow a change to the temperature equilibrium set by the pressure and density differentials between oceans, air and space and not therefore set by the greenhouse effect.
A change in the strength of the greenhouse effect simply involves a miniscule change in the speed of the hydrological cycle and a miniscule latitudinal shift in the air circulation patterns.
” James says:
August 10, 2010 at 8:29 am
If anyone can find a statistically significant correlation on that graph between CO2 and Average temperature, then be my guest.
There is not a single direct correlation over the past 500 million years directly linking the two imho. ”
When I look at the chart it appears to me that every time you have a spike in CO2 you see a decrease in temp. that’s the only correlation I can come up with.
Oh, and note that persistent topping out of temperatures at 22C.
That is a consequence of evaporation at that temperaure (and therefore the speed of the hydrological cycle) always being fast enough to remove any further or extra energy thrown at the system.
That temperature of 22C is pressure and density dependant and therefore an illustration of the power of the phase changes of water and not CO2 or GHG dependent.
Once one knows what is happening the evidence is everywhere but it has been ignored in favour of the simplistic CO2 theory of AGW.
Excellent suggestion by Pamela Gray: Funding sources should be disclosed.
I like that.
This seems the end of the Anglocinian period as transpires from the decaying of scientist-mamals. 🙂
The chart does not show the error envelope of estimated atmospheric CO2 contents. The current preferred estimate is the Geocarb series – I think Geocarb III may be the most recent – which estimates fairly high levels of CO2 in the early Phanerozoic. Other estimates are lower. The black curve in the chart is the Geocarb mean estimate. See http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/Geocarb_III-Berner.pdf for the most recent revision. The fact remains that there is no evidence of any strong correlation between CO2 levels and estimated global temperature over geological time spans.
Well you can see just by eye; without any computation necessary that the Earth Temperature exactly matches the logarithm (base 2) of the CO2 level; thereby proving Schneider’s Law which is taught to every climate science student in the very first lecture.
It always helps to have data to back up your claims
I particularly like that period from 600 myr ago for the next 125 m yrs where the Temperature stays absolutely fixed at about 22 deg C.
You might have some difficulty finding a book of log tables to base 2; but if you can find one; then you can look up the ranges of values for CO2 ratios where the log base 2 doesn’t change at all with the argument which is why the Temperature doesn’t change for that range of CO2 ratios.
But watch out; by 2100 per the IPCC the earth Temperature is finally going to break through that 22 deg C ;”do not exceed” ceiling that it has been stuck below for 600 million years. That will be something to watch; and I plan on staying around to see that historic event.
Somehow that reminds me of the late Soviet Union, where there was that annoying and stupid tradition of referencing the “decisive role of the Party” everywhere where it was possible or even impossible. So you had a decisive role of the Party in opening a new factory, a decisive role of the Party in paving another road in the town et cetera ad infinitum.
People even coined a humorous short poem about this. “Uzhla zima, nastalo leto – spasibo Partii za eto!” (“Winter has passed and summer has come – all thanks to the Party!”).
But I wonder… Why this research made me remember this? Ah, never mind.
I forgot to mention:- Notice how we are currently enjoying the lowest CO2 levels that this planet has ever had; well at least in the last 600 myr; and before that who cares what it was.
It is not hard to see how there was intense glaciation at the South Pole between 460 Mya to 430 Mya and then from 360 Mya to 290 Mya.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/images/figure05_10.jpg
CO2 at 4,500 ppm (4 doublings or +12.0C less about -2.0C for the cooler Sun) and there shouldn’t have been glaciers then? I don’t know, put 5 continents on top of the South Pole and I think there is going to glaciers there (especially if the CO2 sensitivity is lower than 3.0C per doubling).
Basically we have to rewrite all of history just to conform with this theory.
pour the bottle of beer into your pool, and try to find it 😀
Interesting conclusion. Make sure the research grant money continues to flow.
As an afterthought. These guys de-facto claim that current scientific methods for extraction of CO2 archeological record are off the target by the power of 4? In other words, that we can throw the entire CO2 archeological record out of the window? Because this seems to be the direct conclusion from their paper.
steveta_uk says: > latitude says: “> You couldn’t even find 0.038% of anything.”
My house is approx 250 cubic metres. Therefore 0.038% of my house of approx 95 litres. 95 Litres is approx 180 bottles of beer. I’m sure I could find 180 bottles of beer.
Then you couldn’t find your house.
My dumb question of the day, “Was the sun really 1/5th as energetic 450 My ago, or is that crass supposition to support their claims?”
My understanding is the sun’s output stabilized much before that.
Robert says:
August 10, 2010 at 9:51 am
“Enneagram,
would you please refrain from derogatory comments at the end of your posts?
please and thanks.”
I thought Enneagram’s previous comment was more sarcasm than derogatory.
George E. Smith says:
August 10, 2010 at 10:46 am ” That will be something to watch; and I plan on staying around to see that historic event”
Could you reveal your forecast for those of us who won’t be here then?
Argh, what I hate about graphs like the one from the article is that they give the impression that there is a linear relationship between CO2 concentration and warming caused by the greenhouse effect. While this article certainly spikes the idee fixe of the CAGW crowd that atmospheric CO2 is the primary driver of terrestrial temperature, it doesn’t really disprove that CO2 GH effect is not a component of terrestrial temperature because (as George E Smith noted while I was dealing with life instead of writing this post) the relationship is logarithmic not linear. Nor does it prove that a CO2 driven GH Effect is not the primary driver of the current warming trend, although it does cast doubt on the concept. This article will help in the millimeter by millimeter movement of the scientific portion of the CAGW crowd towards the denialist position that human CO2 emissions may not be the primary driver of the current (500 year) warming trend.
Pamela Gray says: “…Currently, we must pay in order to read most research articles… The tax paying citizen is being forced to accept and even pay for a horse without being given the chance to look at its teeth before forking over money….”
The teeth are located at the front ends of horses, Pamela. Post-modern climate science has very few horse front ends.
Bill Illis says:
August 10, 2010 at 10:59 am
…Basically we have to rewrite all of history just to conform with this theory.
Don’t put ideas into their heads!!!
How much faster did the Earth rotate on axis 450 million years ago? Faster rotation rate will always lead to more rapid heat transfer between the low lats and poles, yielding a more uniform global temperature.
I about fell out of my chair on that last quote!
Could somebody please tell me…how such horrific and juvenile circular reasoning, could pass the Peer Review process?????
Oh yeah….I forgot….
Might as well change the name to Political Review process.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA