From the UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA:
Paleoclimate researchers find connection between carbon cycles, climate trends
Carbon cycling research can help scientists predict global warming and cooling trends
COLUMBIA, Mo. – Making predictions about climate variability often means looking to the past to find trends. Now paleoclimate researchers from the University of Missouri have found clues in exposed bedrock alongside an Alabama highway that could help forecast climate variability. In their study, the researchers verified evidence suggesting carbon dioxide decreased significantly at the end of the Ordovician Period, 450 million years ago, preceding an ice age and eventual mass extinction. These results will help climatologists better predict future environmental changes.
![A comparison of δ13Ccarb trends and the GICE from Iowa (Ludvigson et al., 2000), Missouri (Metzger and Fike, 2013), Oklahoma (Young et al., 2005), Alabama (this study), West Virginia (Young et al., 2005), and Pennsylvania (Patzkowsky et al., 1997) [note: carbon isotopic trends from Iowa, Missouri, and Alabama are plotted on the same vertical scale while δ13Ccarb trends from Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania are plotted on a different vertical scale]. The Deicke and Millbrig K-bentonite beds are identified in the sections from Iowa (Ludvigson et al., 2000), West Virginia (Sell et al., 2015), and Pennsylvania (Sell et al., 2015) and tentatively identified in the Oklahoma section (Bergström et al., 2010). A map of the eastern United States indicates study locations and lithofacies distribution during deposition of the Deicke and Millbrig K-bentonites (modified from Holmden et al., 1998 and Panchuk et al., 2006). Red dashed lines indicate boundaries between the three aquafacies identified by Holmden et al. (1998). Bulk carbonate δ13Ccarb values for the Midcontinent aquafacies, Taconic aquafacies, and Southern aquafacies range from -2‰ to + 1.5‰, 0‰ to + 3‰, and 0‰ to + 3‰ respectively (Holmden et al., 1998 and Panchuk et al., 2006). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/figure7.png?quality=75)
“Climate is not a simple science; many small factors determine what exactly leads to global warming and cooling trends,” MacLeod said. “By understanding the deep past, we have better information about historic trends that lead to better predictions. Understanding carbon cycles adds value to our knowledge base of climate change.”
During the Late Ordovician period, most of North America was covered in a shallow tropical sea. What is now Alabama was on the margin of that sea where local environmental effects likely did significantly impact carbon cycling. Page Quinton, a doctoral student in MU’s geological sciences program, led a field research team in northeastern Alabama that collected rock samples from rock formations exposed when workers cut highways through hills in the region. Using the samples, Quinton analyzed them for chemical clues that can be related to CO2 levels at specific time periods.
“After examining rocks 450 million years old or older, we believe the drop was caused by a massive burial of organic carbon during the time period,” Quinton said. “We’re trying to determine whether or not there was an increase in plant productivity, or huge algae blooms in the ocean, that died and fell to the sea floor, basically burying CO2. This burial, coupled with the mountain building event that created the Appalachian Mountains, could have contributed to the resulting ice age.”
A drop in CO2 due to the burial of organic carbon in the Late Ordovician is the exact opposite of what is happening now as massive amounts of CO2 are being released; yet, understanding how the historic events occurred can help with future models and predictions, Macleod said.
###
The study “Carbon Cycling across the Southern Margin of Laurentia during the Late Ordovician,” recently was published in Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaepoecology.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018215004563
Abstract
The Guttenberg Isotope Carbon Excursion (GICE), a positive carbon isotope excursion that occurs near the base of the Katian Stage, is thought to be a global event possibly related to Late Ordovician cooling. Documenting how much regional and global variability exists in carbon isotopic trends prior to and during the GICE is a critical aspect in understanding the implications of the excursion for interpreting changes in the global carbon cycle, paleoclimate, and chemostratigraphic correlation during the Ordovician. To investigate carbon isotopic trends along the southern margin of the Laurentian carbonate platform during the Late Ordovician, we measured bulk carbonate δ13Ccarb and δ18Ocarbas well as organic carbon δ13Corg values from four locations in Alabama. These sections are excellent study sites because they are well exposed, contain the regionally well-correlated Deicke and Millbrig K-bentonites, and are in a region where δ13C trends have not been studied.
Full paper: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031018215004563/pdfft?md5=c327a0e7bbfb57b6da08f34570359bd7&pid=1-s2.0-S0031018215004563-main.pdf
Carbonate δ13Ccarb results from one section (i.e. Fort Payne) in northeastern Alabama record a 1.5‰ positive excursion above the Millbrig K-bentonite. We interpret the 1.5‰ positive excursion as a primary feature and identify it as the GICE. The characteristic GICE excursion is absent in the other study sections and we attribute this absence to the presence of unconformities (either non-depositional or erosional) in these sections. We find neither evidence for sea level control on δ13C trends nor conclusive evidence for δ13CDIC gradients along the southeast margin of Laurentia’s epeiric sea. Combined with the proximity to the Iapetus Ocean, these results suggest that carbon isotopic trends in Alabama are a reliable proxy for open ocean conditions. Therefore, despite the absence of GICE excursion in all but one of our study sections, increasing δ13C values in Alabama prior to the GICE provides evidence for a steady 13C enrichment of the global surficial carbon reservoir consistent with a drawdown of atmospheric CO2 during the early Late Ordovician
The work was supported in part by NSF grants (1323444, 1324577 and 1324954). The content is the solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies.
Fun fact:
It appears Anthony ain’t got that much game.
Cus “Anthonysgotgame” only managed to come in second, about 5 minutes ago at Santa Anita.
Oh well, it still paid $ 6.00 to place.
Should have had the exacta box with “Temps-A-Risin”
Could “they” be Chasing Imaginary CO2 – with Numbers such as …1323444, 1324577 and 1324954 ?
I read WUWT with great interest. It gives me “hope” and we all must have hope or should surely be “all at sea”.
I’ve just read umpteen “replies” on this thread alone and what strikes me is that many of us really detest certain “expressions” which are used and abused by the CAGW alarmists.
I read the mountain of bunkum, false facts, twisted beliefs, and flagrant nonsense mainly coming from the so-called universities and it just gets my goat.
They misuse our language in so many perverse ways and it’s all done in order to feed the so-called main-stream-media with “headline nonsense” and to keep the big grant money coming to those “scholars” who have sold out to the EPA – bigtime.
So … here goes … and this is just a short list.
biodiversity – there is no such thing.
PS: LMofBr warned us all about this one some years ago: he saw it coming and was spot on, as usual.
carbon pollution
(when actually suggesting unproven carbon-dioxide pollution)
this is probably the most irritating violation of the lot !
Carbon-dioxide is not a pollutant: it never was.
We know all about it and Viv Forbes (Australia) can explain it in depth.
carbon footprint – there is no such thing .
climate change – there is no such thing.
One might aswell say “time change” !
Time, just like patterns of climate, cannot be altered by anyone.
A better expression to use would simply be … “climate”.
tipping point (used as a scare tactic with CO2) – there is no such thing.
world leaders – there is only one world and no-one is its’ leader. A better expression would be “heads of state”.
third-world country(s) – so, where exactly is the first world ? A better expression would be “poor country(s)”.
global temperature – there is no such thing: it is a meaningless statistic.
global warming – it simply isn’t warming at all.
greens – “green-pretenders” may be a better expression.
fossil fuels – Who uses fossils as fuel ?
If one really means … “coal” or … “oil” or … “wood” it would surely make sense to say; coal, oil, wood.
If we are indeed to break through to the general public we cannot do it by “science” alone.
We need the help of PLAIN LANGUAGE, language which is EASY to understand.
We need Josh and his cartoons – brilliant of course, and we need that hard hitting, myth-busting film (can’t wait for it) but here on this website blog and HOPEFULLY relayed eventually across to all the other sites, we could make a start right here and now to construct a list of “good to use” words.
Finally, I should be pleased if the words at the TOP of the website were as follows:-
“The world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate”.
Thank you to AW for another very revealing and interesting article.
I rather fancy that this “reply” will go via the moderation desk: I do hope so.
Regards,
WL
Warren L,
Good deconstruction of the Orwell-style language being used.
Couldn’t agree more! There can be no real debate when language is debased.
“In their study, the researchers verified evidence suggesting carbon dioxide decreased significantly at the end of the Ordovician Period, 450 million years ago, preceding an ice age and eventual mass extinction.”
Proxy data doesn’t suggest this at all and changing positioning of the continents brought cooling before CO2 levels dropped significantly.
From here over 2 years ago and shows the temperature falling before the CO2 levels do.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/co2_temperature_historical.png
A significant fall in CO2 never cause an ice age and especially when CO2 levels are still very high. Global temperatures fall and rise and CO2 responds to the changes in biodiversity it causes and solubility equilibrium between the oceans. These are greatly affected by continental land masses movement over the planets surface, when especially continents cover either or both poles leading to ice ages independent of the CO2 atmospheric content. These change the albedo of the planet significantly and energy distribution around the planet with changing ocean circulation configurations.
When I first started to read this post, and about the growth of plant life that eventually sequesters carbon by locking it up as what we now call fossil fuel reserves a silly thought came into my mind.
Is it possible , I wondered, that the world could run out of carbon dioxide , replenished only by occasional volcanic activity , and belatedly by relatively feeble human activities.
The end game , quite literally , would be a CO2 level to low to sustain plant life and as that withers so do we (“all flesh is grass ” and so on ) .
Your plot above shows a discontinuous but definite drop in CO2 from the halcyon days of the Cambrian era. Bit worrying that.
Hi Mike Waite.
Regarding your worrying – I’ve been pondering this point for a while.
Hope I’m wrong about this,
Best, Allan
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/14/matt-ridley-fossil-fuels-will-save-the-world-really/#comment-1883937
WHL
I have no time to run the numbers, but I do not think we have millions of years left for carbon-based life on Earth.
Over time, CO2 is ~permanently sequestered in carbonate rocks, so concentrations get lower and lower. During an Ice Age, atmospheric CO2 concentrations drop to very low levels due to solution in cold oceans, etc. Below a certain atmospheric CO2 concentration, terrestrial photosynthesis slows and shuts down. I suppose life in the oceans can carry on but terrestrial life is done.
So when will this happen – in the next Ice Age a few thousands years hence, or the one after that ~100,000 years later, or the one after that?
In geologic time, we are talking the blink of an eye before terrestrial life on Earth ceases due to CO2 starvation.
________________________
I wrote the following on this subject, posted on Icecap.us:
On Climate Science, Global Cooling, Ice Ages and Geo-Engineering:
[excerpt]
Furthermore, increased atmospheric CO2 from whatever cause is clearly beneficial to humanity and the environment. Earth’s atmosphere is clearly CO2 deficient and continues to decline over geological time. In fact, atmospheric CO2 at this time is too low, dangerously low for the longer term survival of carbon-based life on Earth.
More Ice Ages, which are inevitable unless geo-engineering can prevent them, will cause atmospheric CO2 concentrations on Earth to decline to the point where photosynthesis slows and ultimately ceases. This would devastate the descendants of most current [terrestrial] life on Earth, which is carbon-based and to which, I suggest, we have a significant moral obligation.
Atmospheric and dissolved oceanic CO2 is the feedstock for all carbon-based life on Earth. More CO2 is better. Within reasonable limits, a lot more CO2 is a lot better.
As a devoted fan of carbon-based life on Earth, I feel it is my duty to advocate on our behalf. To be clear, I am not prejudiced against non-carbon-based life forms, but I really do not know any of them well enough to form an opinion. They could be very nice. 🙂
Yes Mike I was writing that too in comment around 10 months ago. CO2 is sequestrated and is continually getting low. Biosphere is dependent on amount of CO2 produced by volcanism. But normally biosphere is pure consumer of CO2 until it starve itself to death.
I share you concern, the ocean easily takes carbon, but is reluctant to give it the atmosphere. We know about the huge relative carbon amounts in the atmosphere previously, but it seem from billions of years ago levels have always been in a decline. What could cause carbon amounts to be greatly restored from the oceans again naturally? The only thing I can think off are huge super volcanoes on a level never seen before, especially during humans presence on Earth. Almost tropical oceans like all over the planet would contribute a bit too.
Agree Matt G.
CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales.
A few more thoughts below: Climate heresy now, but conventional wisdom in 10-20 years..
Regards, Allan 🙂
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/13/presentation-of-evidence-suggesting-temperature-drives-atmospheric-co2-more-than-co2-drives-temperature/
Observations and Conclusions:
1. Temperature, among other factors, drives atmospheric CO2 much more than CO2 drives temperature. The rate of change dCO2/dt is closely correlated with temperature and thus atmospheric CO2 LAGS temperature by ~9 months in the modern data record
2. CO2 also lags temperature by ~~800 years in the ice core record, on a longer time scale.
3. Atmospheric CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales.
4. CO2 is the feedstock for carbon-based life on Earth, and Earth’s atmosphere and oceans are clearly CO2-deficient. CO2 abatement and sequestration schemes are nonsense.
5. Based on the evidence, Earth’s climate is insensitive to increased atmospheric CO2 – there is no global warming crisis.
6. Recent global warming was natural and irregularly cyclical – the next climate phase following the ~20 year pause will probably be global cooling, starting by ~2020 or sooner.
7. Adaptation is clearly the best approach to deal with the moderate global warming and cooling experienced in recent centuries.
8. Cool and cold weather kills many more people than warm or hot weather, even in warm climates. There are about 100,000 Excess Winter Deaths every year in the USA and about 10,000 in Canada.
9. Green energy schemes have needlessly driven up energy costs, reduced electrical grid reliability and contributed to increased winter mortality, which especially targets the elderly and the poor.
10. Cheap, abundant, reliable energy is the lifeblood of modern society. When politicians fool with energy systems, real people suffer and die. That is the tragic legacy of false global warming alarmism.
Allan MacRae, Calgary, June 12, 2015
Dear Allan,
Ten excellent points. With you all the way. Marvelous stuff !
Latest score …
Heretics United – ONE
Methane Dodgers – NIL
Regards and thanks,
WL
Thank you Warren for your kind comments.
Above are the Observations and Conclusions for my full paper, located at the above wattsup address. The readers’ comments are generally worthwhile.
I wrote the paper that proves point 1 above in 2008 and it is located at
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/CO2vsTMacRae.pdf
and the Excel spreadsheet at
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/CO2vsTMacRaeFig5b.xls
Later work by Salby and Humlum et al draws similar conclusions, although I allow that there are other possible drivers of atmospheric CO2 as well as temperature.
I said the new CO2 satellite data will help sort this question, and that is already becoming apparent.
Regards, Allan
Did it occur that we should forbid anybody from engaging in manipulation of the climate until there is an actual consensus of engineers that this will work and result in a predictable out come?
Ummm.. so that’s about half a billion years ago. Basic chemistry and physics probably remain the same, but carbon based life forms almost certainly do not. Nor does their effect on the environment.
ummmm…’Probably’?? Physics and chemistry have been the same since a few micro-seconds after the Big Bang.
Anyone seen this paper by Esper?
https://www.blogs.uni-mainz.de/fb09climatology/files/2012/03/Esper_2015_Geochron.pdf
from Conclusions:
“As a consequence, earlier warm periods during the late 14th and 15th centuries appear warmer, though not statistically significant, compared to the late 20th century.”
Well the Ordovician Earth was probably as different from Earth Today and Pluto is to Earth Today.
After all, there is no geologic evidence of plant-life on land. Evidence does not occur until the Silurian Period!
Did the “intrepid environmental researchers” fail to notice that the limestone sample they had taken from the road-cuts were Silurian and not Ordovician!
That is the problem with “Earth Science” majors from the 1970s and on respective to Geology Majors; Geology Majors know how to identify the rocks at road-cuts in their correct Geologic Period, whereas “Earth Science” Majors are all confused and befuddled even by the gasoline and oil stains on the road-cut outcrops!
Ha ha
No. Spores clearly on land middle Ordovician. By late Ordovician (what we are talking about) green stuff was crawling up the banks of the freshwater riparian corridors. Arthropods had crawled out to start chewing on the green stuff on land by the Silurian.
I seem to have lost a post.
“Post” HERE IT IS! 😉
They found the actual post but your comment made me laugh.
And now for the battle of the century – the underdog – Carbon Dioxide, will face off with the mighty tag team of Solar radiance, Cosmic Rays, Magnetic effects, Pacific and Atlantic oscillations and even (gasp) volcanoes to see who is the champion at changing the temperature of planet Earth. Round after round of head to head battle to see who will control the economy of the Earth in the near future. (Long term – mother nature will decide for political justifications, the judges will still be biased towards the contender) Imagine – after 4 billion years of being the supreme master of all life on Earth, the Sun is in danger of losing it’s title to the mighty little CO2 molecule. Look at the stats. CO2 molecules vs the Mighty Sun which outweighs the molecules by huge orders of magnitude. Stay Tuned – the decision will be made in December. Place your bets now. 😉
anyone else note this?
The work was supported in part by NSF grants (1323444, 1324577 and 1324954). The content is the solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies.
hmm?
I dont remember seeing that before???
because its honest and doesnt reach the :correct: conclusions?
Plants die if co2 levels drop to aroun 175 ppmv, I’ve read. The IPCC would like to halve the present – 400 ppmv to 200 ppmv. How would you like it if they decided to cut the oxygen you breathe by 1/2? Oxygen is to man as CO2 is to plants. No plants (near extinction from lack of air to breathe) means – eventually – no humans or plants. Now we know that there are folks who would love to reduce the population of the planet – by any means necessary. What about this scenario? They cut plant life to near extinction, resulting in a global famine. Until the chaos is over, the very wealthy – and the government leaders will all survive in controlled atmospheres and they would emerge afterwards to fix things – presumably burning more fuel to increase CO2 and plant life. So, in order to cure mother “Gaia” of humans, they will use a form of “chemotherapy” to rid the Earth of it’s cancerous humans? Does anybody doubt that there are people in the background who are actively working on such a scenario? (Madness has many forms, I’ve been told)
Good guess Pat,
This post is from 2012 – I made similar earlier posts in 2009.
Regards, Allan
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/24/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-53/#comment-1017397
Instead of arguing about the science of global warming, we should just listen to what these enviro radicals are actually SAYING and DOING.
Maybe they know their global warming science is bogus, but it suits their purpose to use global warming hysteria as a smokescreen to mask their true intentions.
The radical warmists have done everything in their power to starve the world of fossil fuel energy that is required for continued global prosperity.
They have squandered a trillion dollars of scarce global resources on catastrophic humanmade global warming (CAGW) nonsense.
Investing these squandered resources in clean drinking water and sanitation alone would have saved the ~50 million kids who died from drinking contaminated water in the past 25+ years of CAGW hysteria.
Intelligent use of these scarce global resources could have easily saved as many people as were killed in the atrocities of Hitler, Stalin, or Mao.
50 million people died in Hitler’s WW2. Josef Stalin killed another 50 million of his own people in internal purges. Leftist hero Mao gets the prize, killing as many as 80 million Chinese during his Great Leap Backward.
The radical environmental movement has done equally well, rivaling Mao for fatalities caused by the banning of DDT and the misallocation of scarce global resources on the fraud of catastrophic humanmade global warming.
Since many of these enviro radicals are latter-day Malthusians, Club of Rome types, etc., it is reasonable to assume that THIS WAS THEIR INTENTION.
Is this too radical a proposal? Well, NO it is not: In addition to what the radical enviros DO, let’s EXAMINE what they SAY (h/t to Wayne):
”My three goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with its full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
David Foreman,
co-founder of Earth First!
”A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
Ted Turner,
Founder of CNN and major UN donor
”The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.”
Jeremy Rifkin,
Greenhouse Crisis Foundation
”Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies,
Author: “Population Bomb”, “Ecoscience”
”The big threat to the planet is people: there are too many, doing too well economically and burning too much oil.”
Sir James Lovelock,
BBC Interview
”We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination… So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts… Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
Stephen Schneider,
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
Lead author of many IPCC reports
”Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.”
Sir John Houghton,
First chairman of the IPCC
”It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
Paul Watson,
Co-founder of Greenpeace
”Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
David Brower,
First Executive Director of the Sierra Club
”We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”
Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
”No matter if the science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment
”The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe.”
Emeritus Professor Daniel Botkin
”Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong,
Founder of the UN Environmental Program
”A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-Development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation.”
Paul Ehrlich,
Professor of Population Studies,
Author: “Population Bomb”, “Ecoscience”
”
If I were reincarnated I would wish to return to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh,
husband of Queen Elizabeth II,
Patron of the Patron of the World Wildlife Foundation
”The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization we have in the US. We have to stop these third World countries right where they are.”
Michael Oppenheimer
Environmental Defense Fund
”Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
Professor Maurice King
”Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.”
Maurice Strong,
Rio Earth Summit
”Complex technology of any sort is an assault on the human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.”
Amory Lovins,
Rocky Mountain Institute
”I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. it played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
John Davis,
Editor of Earth First! Journal
**********************************
Excerpts above from
http://www.green-agenda.com/
My opinion: The mistake most scientists make regarding glacial and interglacial age drivers is not focusing on:
1. the winds driven by the Coriolis affect and changes to those winds due to atmospheric/oceanic teleconnections,
2. continental positioning and drift that allows or not the piling up of warm waters,
3. ENSO equatorial Solar recharge/discharge mechanisms and imbalances, and
4. Milankovitch cycles whereby Solar inclination changes from one hemisphere to the other in the equatorial band.
Drought versus moisture, CO2 ups and downs, and albedo changes due to dust, ice and snow coverage all follow and are symptoms, not causes.
If there is a mechanism we know that changes weather patterns (IE: ENSO), we should look to that same mechanism impinged upon by orbital changes to explain glacial and interglacial ages.
To boil it down and speak to engineers in the audience, I think all this boils down to changes in short term fluid/gas teleconnected mechanics, and long term changes in orbital mechanics impinging on the short term fluid/gas teleconnected mechanics, on a globe that changes its solid and liquid surface shape, under an ever warming star.
Correction: “…under a relatively steady star.”
One problem that every paleoclimatologist seems to forget, but which can be documented with reasonable clarity even from an extremely poor record is this: that high greenhouse gases and hot climates correlate with soils across the globe being universally too poor for an advanced civilisation. Today, such soils prevail only in Australia and a few parts of Africa, but before the Oligocene a very limited paleopedological record – which I must emphasise is limited precisely because exceedingly little soil formation was happening – suggests that these low-fertility soils prevailed over the globe.
As Gordon Orians and Antoni Milewski (whom I had to inform of the basic results of limited paleopedogical records in Eurasia and the Americas) demonstrate in their 2007 ‘Ecology of Australia: the Effects of Nutrient-Poor soils and Intense Fires’, the effect of having such soils is profound and would have been multiply so on a larger scale before the Oligocene. Most importantly, the heterotrophic biomass under such soils is much smaller in total size and much slower-metabolising and growing, so that protein is exceedingly limited. These limitations – though I have not read up on how strong the relationships between metabolism and encephalisation are – would not allow the development of animals nearly so large-brained as modern humans: there just did not exist the energy to run such brains as Richard Lynn shows to have evolved in Eurasia since humans moved from the poor (though less poor than Australia) soils of Africa to the exceedingly fertile (in geological terms) soils of Asia in and north of the Himalayas.
in fact, homiothermy evolved 200,000,000 years before the Oligocene under the influence of the previous ice age in the Carboniferous around 280,000,000 years ago. However, as the climate warmed and soils deteriorated (so much so that even the less fertile soil types of present-day Eurasia and the Americas are virtually unrepresented in the Mesozoic and early Tertiary paleopedological record) warm-blooded animals became at an intense disadvantage because of their high energy requirements versus very low nutrient availability. This effect was multiplied by exceedingly high wet-bulb temperatures (up to 40 degrees Celsius wet-bulb in the Mesozoic as against no more than 30 degrees in the Quaternary) which would have required even higher energy consumption to remain endothermic. Consequently, the Mesozoic was dominated by exceedingly low-energy reptiles, with mammals remaining entirely heterothermic and very small. Once the “Great Enrichment” began as the Alps, Andes and Himalayas formed and absorbed carbon dioxide to cool the climate, these limitations except in Australia were completely removed. Although extremes of eutrophy as seen in the Southern Cone can limit encephalisation by selecting severely against sociality, there result of these vastly improved soils has been increased brain sizes. This has been most concentrated in two lineages that have managed to avoid the “desocialisation” (change from cooperative to solitary societies) normally found when a taxon moves from poor to rich soils: humans and toothed whales.
Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
–
I’m not convinced from what is presented here, but note that it is saying a drop in CO2 precedes mass extinction. By implication, CO2 is good. Well, of course CO2 is good. It is one of the absolutely essential ingredients of life!