From the University of Chicago and the “I didn’t know Jaws lived near the North Pole ” department:
Shark teeth analysis provides detailed new look at Arctic climate change
A new study shows that some shark species may be able to cope with the falling salinity of Arctic waters that may come with rising temperatures.
The Arctic today is best known for its tundra and polar bear population, but it wasn’t always like that. Roughly 53 to 38 million years ago during what is known as the Eocene epoch, the Arctic was more similar to a huge temperate forest with brackish water, home to a variety of animal life, including ancestors of tapirs, hippo-like creatures, crocodiles and giant tortoises. Much of what is known about the region during this period comes from well-documented terrestrial deposits. Marine records have been harder to come by.
A new study of shark teeth taken from a coastal Arctic Ocean site has expanded the understanding of Eocene marine life. Leading the study was Sora Kim, the T.C. Chamberlin Postdoctoral Fellow in Geophysical Sciences at the University of Chicago, in coordination with Jaelyn Eberle at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and their three co-authors. Their findings were published online June 30 by the journal Geology.
The Arctic is of special interest today because it is increasing in temperature at twice the global rate. According to Kim, past climate change in the Arctic can serve as a proxy to better understand our current climate change and aid future predictions. The Eocene epoch, she said, is like a “deep-time analogue for what’s going to happen if we don’t curb CO2 emissions today, and potentially what a runaway greenhouse effect looks like.”
 |
||||
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
  IMAGE: Sora Kim has analyzed oxygen 18 and oxygen 16—two isotopes of the oxygen atom that contain only slight subatomic variations — of fossil and modern sharks teeth for insights into…
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
||||
Before this study, marine records primarily came from deep-sea cores pulled from a central Arctic Ocean site, the Lomonosov Ridge. Kim and Eberle studied shark teeth from a new coastal site on Banks Island. This allowed them to better understand the changes in ocean water salinity across a broader geographic area during a time of elevated global temperatures. Shark teeth are one of the few available vertebrate marine fossils for this time period. They preserve well and are incredibly abundant.
To arrive at their results, Kim isolated and measured the mass ratio of oxygen isotopes 18 to 16 found in the prepared enameloid (somewhat different from human tooth enamel) of the shark teeth. Sharks constantly exchange water with their environment, so the isotopic oxygen ratio found in the teeth is directly regulated by water temperature and salinity. With assumptions made about temperatures, the group was able to focus on extrapolating salinity levels of the water.
The results were surprising. “The numbers I got back were really weird,” Kim said. “They looked like fresh water.” The sand tiger sharks she was studying are part of a group called lamniform sharks, which prefer to stay in areas of high salinity.
“As more freshwater flows into the Arctic Ocean due to global warming, I think we are going to see it become more brackish,” said Eberle, associate professor of geological sciences at CU-Boulder. “Maybe the fossil record can shed some light on how the groups of sharks that are with us today may fare in a warming world.”
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 IMAGE: Both graceful and docile, this modern sandtiger shark swims through a school of round scad fish in the coastal waters off North Carolina. Modern sand tigers prefer waters of high…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Because the teeth are 40 to 50 million years old, many tests were run to eliminate any possible contaminates, but the results were still the same. These findings suggest that sharks may be able to cope with rises in temperature and the subsequent decrease of water salinity. It has long been known that sharks are hardy creatures. They have fossil records dating back some 400 million years, surviving multiple mass extinctions, and have shown great ecological plasticity thus far.
Additionally, these results provide supporting evidence for the idea that the Arctic Ocean was most likely isolated from global waters.
“Through an analysis of fossil sand tiger shark teeth from the western Arctic Ocean, this study offers new evidence for a less salty Arctic Ocean during an ancient ‘greenhouse period,'” said Yusheng (Chris) Liu, program director in the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s Division of Earth Sciences, which co-funded the research with NSF’s Division of Polar Programs. “The results also confirm that the Arctic Ocean was isolated during that long-ago time.”
While Kim has hopes to expand her research both geographically and in geologic time in an effort to better understand the ecology and evolution of sharks, she remarked that “working with fossils is tricky because you have to work within the localities that are preserved. “You can’t always design the perfect experiment.”
So sharks are adaptable !
We should care about this, for what reason ??
How does Dr Kim plan to make money, out of her earth shattering discovery ??
And Google is NOT anyone’s friend. Their plan is to take over control of EVERYTHING.
These statements don’t seem to be logical; phrase 1: “A new study shows that some shark species may be able to cope with the falling salinity of Arctic waters that may come with rising temperatures.” and
phrase 2: ““As more freshwater flows into the Arctic Ocean due to global warming, I think we are going to see it become more brackish,”” Perhaps I am missing something…a) how does adding more fresh water “increase salinity”? b) if I remember correctly “brackish” water is saltier than fresh water but not as salty as sea water, so phrase 2 contradicts phrase 1 as well as contradicting itself (phrase 2)
[Fixed. ~ mod.]
Mods,
Please correct the error in the subtitle… [done, thanks. ~ mod.]
“””””…..Admad says:
July 9, 2014 at 1:42 pm
“As more freshwater flows into the Arctic Ocean due to global warming, I think we are going to see it become more brackish,” said Eberle, associate professor of geological sciences at CU-Boulder.
WTF? Fresh water making the ocean more brackish? And this guy is a perfesser?……”””””
Um Admad;
Fresh water is “fresh” , and sea water is “salty”. Mix both of them and you get “brackish”.
Mix a lot of them both, and you get a lot more “brackish.”
How much is twice as much as zero?
The globe hasn’t been warming for over a decade, but that’s an average. It’s possible all the warming is in the Arctic, but then that would mean the rest of the world is cooling (because it’s an average).
So she’s proved that one of the oldest, most widespread and successful species on Earth can adapt to changing climate.
I’m impressed.
No, they’re not your friend. Especially if they don’t like your politics — http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/america-filmmakers-demand-know-why-717081
The “Daily mean temperatures for the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel, plotted with daily climate values calculated from the period 1958-2002” is still below average. Just like last year.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
Yes they certainly “prefer to stay in areas of high salinity”, that’s why they stay away from freshwater.
With this last ability, is it any surprise that they will somehow make it through. Oh, I forgot their preferences.
How did sharks survive the last glaciation, a time of rapid climate change? Salinity went way down I think.
Ecoloons are interested only in Eco-lunacy and Eco-Funding. Everything else is a construct or subterfuge.
I say stick with studying the fishes of the sea and leave runaway alone.
I keep reading comments about the Sand Shark. I suppose we should care about the Sand Shark, but I am much more interested in what is to become of the Land Shark if the planet warms a 1/2 degree or so.
There is so much conjecture in this paper that it should not even be looked at as any for of scientific fact.. When will these warmists learn?
Hmmmn.
“The Arctic is of special interest today because it is increasing in temperature at twice the global rate.”
In the past 12 summers since 2003 (between days 150 and 250 of the year), the “Arctic ” summer time temperatures determined by DMI at 80 north latitude, has included only 16 weekly periods since 2002 when the Arctic daily average temperature has exceeded the “average” summertime temperatures for that date. In every other week than those, the Arctic summertime temperatures have been below the official “average” for that date.
Thus, by measurement, even that sentence is dead wrong.
Rough Math: Day 250 – day 150 = 100 days per year when the Arctic temperature is above 0.0 C.
12 years (2014 – 2002) x 100 days/year = 1200 days.
16 weeks x 7 days/week when temps are “above average” = 112 days ;
More than 90% of the summertime days the past 12 years, temperatures were “below average” in the Arctic at 80 north.
Not a lot of data for such broad conclusions.
“I’ll see your 1 tree in Yamal and raise you two bore sites in the Arctic.”
Did I miss something? Cores from some ridge area and then cores from the second area where she was working? Two locations to make pronouncements about the whole Arctic area?
H.R. says:
July 9, 2014 at 5:02 pm
Correct me if wrong, but didn’t Gavin claim that he could gin up a statistically significant Global Average Surface Temperature record from as few as 50 sites, ie one per 10.2 million square kilometers? That would mean one or two stations for the entire Arctic Ocean (14.06 million km²). And at most one for all of Canada (9,984,670 km²).
I have to wonder about the intellectual ability of scientists like Kim who make oxymoronic statements such the one stating that this gives us a picture of what “runaway global warming” will be like. It has clearly never happened – life on earth has not ended – thus an intellectually failed statement.
time to move the goal posts again:
10 July: Sydney Morning Herald: Reuters: Global warming requires more frequent rethink of ‘normal’ weather, WMO says
The baseline for “normal” weather used by everyone from farmers to governments to plan ahead needs to be updated more frequently to account for the big shifts caused by global warming, the UN’s World Meteorological Organisation said on Wednesday.
The WMO’s Commission for Climatology believes rising temperatures and more heatwaves and heavy rains mean the existing baseline, based on the climate averages of 1961-90, is out of date as a guide, the WMO said in a statement.
“For water resources, agriculture and energy, the old averages no longer reflect the current realities,” Omar Baddour, head of the data management applications at the WMO, told Reuters…
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/global-warming-requires-more-frequent-rethink-of-normal-weather-wmo-says-20140710-zt20z.html
double-barrel-named women come out with both barrels blazing:
9 July: Christian Broadcasting Network: Paul Strand: Worried Moms: Global Warming Endangers Our Kids
Moms who are hot to stop global warming came with their kids to ask Congress Wednesday to get behind whatever measures are needed to fight climate change.
They held a “play-in” instead of a sit-in because most kids won’t sit still for a sit-in…
As San Jose, California, mom Linda Hutchins-Knowles put it, “I’m worried that it’s not going to be sustainable for human life.”
Gretchen Dahlkemper-Alfonso, national field manager of the Moms Clean Air Force, helped organize this event…
But William Yeatman, with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, argues not everyone agrees climate change will be horrific.
“A lot of what you’ll hear and certainly today were along the alarmist line,” he told CBN News. “But is there a consensus at to whether or not global warming is the end-all threat facing mankind? There is no such consensus.”
Hutchins-Knowles disagrees. And as a Quaker and environmentalist, she believes it’s a godly duty to fight climate change.
“I believe that God has gifted us to be stewards of the planet,” she said. “And it’s our responsibility – a sacred duty – to protect what God’s created.”
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., came to the event located a few hundred feet from the U.S. Senate, saying she was there as a lawmaker, but also concerned grandmother and mom…
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2014/July/Worried-Moms-Global-Warming-Endangers-Our-Kids/
According to Kim, past climate change in the Arctic can serve as a proxy to better understand our current climate change and aid future predictions. The Eocene epoch, she said, is like a “deep-time analogue for what’s going to happen if we don’t curb CO2 emissions today, and potentially what a runaway greenhouse effect looks like.”
If there was no runaway greenhouse effect during the Eocene epoch, what makes her think there will be one now? And if it was warmer during the Eocene epoch, what makes her think CO2 has anything to do with the current warmth? Like, couldn’t the current warmth have been caused by the same variables that made the Eocene epoch warm?
warmist MSM already debunking their own recent headline!
9 July: WaPo: Gail Sullivan: No, climate change is not driving redheads to extinction
So what did these “experts” have to say? Actually it was two experts — one who refused to give his name and another of uncertain expertise…
Who is this (“expert of uncertain expertise”) Alistair Moffat anyway?
ScotlandsDNA is one of those Web sites that claims to trace your ancestry if you send them a DNA sample. On the site, he lists his credentials: MA (Hons), M.Phil, Cert.Ed. but doesn’t say anything about a background in genetics. Nevertheless, he writes books on the subject, including “The British: A Genetic Journey” and “The Scots: A Genetic Journey.” You can find out about his other writing, mostly histories of Scotland, on his Web site.
Among his claims to fame: In 2012, he told BBC radio he’d discovered Eve’s (as in Adam and Eve) “grandson” and direct descendants of the Queen of Sheba. Some geneticists were skeptical.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/09/no-climate-change-is-not-driving-redheads-to-extinction/
pat says:
July 9, 2014 at 5:44 pm
There’s the PR problem in a nutshell. Apparently, some people have been convinced that a degree or two of warming will make the planet unfit for human life. I suppose the idea of runaway global warming has not been banished entirely from the popular imagination. Recall that the alarmist imagery in the mass media about CAGW has been quite striking and powerful, and will not be easily purged, imo, especially among the great masses of people who do not presume to question authority on matters of science.
We know very little about the Oceans and the Oceans floor, for example:
“Buried under thick ice and frigid water, volcanic explosions are shaking the Arctic Ocean floor at depths previously thought impossible, according to a new study.”
“Powerful eruptions sent a plume of carbon dioxide, helium, and liquid lava up into the Arctic waters.”
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080626-arctic-volcano.html
Don K:
Thanks for the link to Scotese’s Paleomap Project.
The maps of past climate and geology put the present in perspective.