No. Doggerland is not a relevant climate change lesson from a “real Atlantis.”

Guest ridicule by David Middleton

More nonsense about sea level rise…

FRONTIER RESEARCH SOCIAL SCIENCES

Lessons from a real Atlantis

17 July 2018
by Jude Gonzalez

Traces of long-forgotten human settlements claimed by the sea thousands of years ago are being uncovered by researchers along the coastlines of Europe.

The discoveries, both on land and underwater, are helping to fill in some of the blanks about Europe’s prehistory and are offering insights into how our species responded to global climate change in the past.

Around 8,500 years ago, after the end of the last ice age, global warming triggered huge rises in sea levels due to the melting of glaciers and ice sheets that had covered much of the northern hemisphere.

An area of land twice the size of the European Union was lost to the rising seas, prompting mass migration across the continents.

Much of the human experience of this cataclysm, however, has remained buried out of reach of even the most assiduous investigator, leaving a huge gap in the story of our ancestors.

But now an unprecedented alliance of geologists, archaeologists and computer scientists are moving land and sea in an attempt to uncover this forgotten past.

[…]

Horizon

This was a very interesting article about “Doggerland,” right up until it went full-stupid in the last two paragraphs:

Uncovering these stories, which are now thousands of years old, could offer some clues about what our own future holds too.

‘It is sobering to think that the rate of the rise in sea levels then was similar to that predicted for contemporary climate change,’ said Prof. Gaffney. As humans prepare for environmental impacts in the 21^st century, he says that the only place to look into the future is the past.

The research in this article was funded by the EU. If you liked this article, please consider sharing it on social media.

I did like it and I am sharing it…

‘It is sobering to think that the rate of the rise in sea levels then was similar to that predicted for contemporary climate change,’ said Prof. Gaffney.

Maybe something was lost in translation from whatever language the EU speaks.

Definition of contemporary

1 a : marked by characteristics of the present period : modern, current contemporary American literature contemporary standards
b : simultaneous
2 : happening, existing, living, or coming into being during the same period of time The book is based on contemporary accounts of the war.

Merriam-Webster

The rise in sea level, related or not to contemporary climate change, is about 3.2 mm/yr:

The average rate of sea level rise during the Atlantification of Doggerland (Holocene Transgression) was  about 11 mm/yr.

Contemporary climate change can’t drive a sustained rate of 11 mm/yr of sea level rise, largely because there was a helluva lot more ice to melt during the Holocene Transgression than there is now.

A lot more ice…

Volume estimates for the Laurentide ice sheet are 26.5 × 10⁶ km³ at maximum, 17.5 × 10⁶ km³ at 11,800 B.P., and 6 × 10⁶ km³ at 8500 B.P.

Patterson, 1972

The Laurentide ice sheet was comparable in size to the East Antarctic ice sheet; which has been stable since at least the Late Miocene.  In other words, the probability of the East Antarctic ice sheet melting is…

So… We can 86 any notion of a sustained 11/mm rise in sea level until Earth comes out of its current Ice Age climate.

Earth has generally been in an Ice Age climate since the early Oligocene:

So, the volume of ice required for a sustained 11 mm/yr rate of sea level rise is unavailable to contemporary climate change.

‘It is sobering to think that the rate of the rise in sea levels then was similar to that predicted for contemporary climate change,’ said Prof. Gaffney.

Maybe by “contemporary,” Prof. Gaffney means RCP 8.5.  That’s generally the source of catastrophic sea level rise “predictions.”

We don’t have enough ice available for 11 mm/yr… So 20 mm/yr is probably also unattainable.

Anyway, back to Doggerland…  Well, the US equivalent of Doggerland, the Gulf of Mexico…

Archaeological Resources

Archaeological Cultural Resources Program

Gulf of Mexico Archaeological Information

Why are archaeological resources a consideration in oil and gas exploration and development?

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, is Federal legislation developed to ensure that our Nation’s historical and archaeological properties are not lost through neglect or inadvertently damaged by activities permitted or funded by Federal agencies. Specifically, BOEMRE, as a Federal bureau, is required to ensure that activities it funds (e.g., environmental studies) and activities it permits, such as lease sales, the drilling of oil and gas wells, and the construction of pipelines, do not adversely affect significant archaeological sites on the Federal Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). To determine if there is a potential to affect archaeological resources on the OCS by proposed oil and gas activities, the BOEMRE Gulf of Mexico Region (GOMR) has funded archaeology studies to ascertain where on the OCS these sites are likely to occur.

Archaeological sites on the OCS are most likely to be either prehistoric Native American sites dating from the time at the end of the last Ice Age, when sea levels were about 200 feet lower then they are today, or historic shipwrecks. The oil and gas industry is required to conduct surveys of the seafloor using remote-sensing instruments before they any undertake bottom disturbing activities. These instruments usually include a magnetometer, which detects ferrous metals, a sidescan sonar, which creates a picture of the seafloor using reflected sound waves, and a subbottom profiler, which detects variations in the sediment underlying the seafloor. The data collected by these instruments are reviewed by archaeologists, who write reports on their findings for submittal to BOEMRE. BOEMRE archaeologists, in turn, use these reports to review applications from industry to drill wells or construct pipelines.

The BOEMRE has specific guidelines contained in NTL 2005-G07 for conducting remote-sensing surveys and writing reports for archaeological sites on the OCS. Pending new guidance this NTL only applies to specific areas defined as Archaeology Survey Blocks and the requirements differ depending upon whether the block has been determined to have a probability for historic shipwrecks or for submerged prehistoric sites.

As of March 2011, BOEMRE will require an assessment of the impacts of offshore oil and gas operations on a host of natural, biological, and cultural resources to ensure their protection. Bottom-disturbing operations such as well placement, anchoring, and pipelay activities can lead to damage to any resources that reside on the seabed, particularly archaeological resources such as historic shipwrecks. High-resolution surveys provide an effective tool analysts use to identify and help protect archaeological resources; however, such survey coverage was not always required and is often not available for all areas of the Gulf of Mexico. The lack of coverage has become especially problematic in deeper water where oil and gas activities are increasing and more shipwrecks are being identified.

To ensure adequate survey coverage is available for analyst review and to help with environmental reviews conducted for the agency’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, Pre-Seabed Disturbance Survey Mitigation was developed and may be imposed, as required, on industry activities. This new guidance document will augment NTL 2005-G07.

On occasion, the Gulf of Mexico Region needs more information about a particular remote-sensing target to determine if it is a significant archaeological site and will require the oil and gas industry to conduct an investigation by underwater archaeologists. These investigations involve the use of divers or remote operated vehicles (ROVs) and require that specific methodological guidelines are followed.

A major part of BSEE’s mission is protecting the environment offshore, including archaeological and cultural resources. One of the ways BSEE does this is by developing mitigation measures from consultation information as required by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and Department of the Interior Tribal Consultation Policy. These mitigation measures are developed into requirements attached to offshore energy leases, plans, and permits before they are approved. These stipulations, or conditions of approval, which generally require a Post Activity Submittal, that include surveys and videos that verify no harm came to archaeological and cultural resources.

[…]

Native American Sites

Over 10,000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, sea levels rose and coastal plains became submerged continental shelves. The inland water table also rose, and prehistoric sites where humans once lived were slowly inundated (flooded). These formerly dry sites hold information about how prehistoric Native Americans lived. Many of these sites are now located under the seafloor on the Federal OCS and have remained relatively undisturbed over the centuries while others have become eroded and scattered by tides or marine transgression. In order to identify these sites, archaeologists utilize high-resolution geophysical tools such as a sub-bottom profiler to locate and map buried river channels. Identifying the location of these channel features is critical in locating places where prehistoric Native Americans lived. It is typically near these features where campsites and other features associated with human activities may be found.

[…]

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

Archaeological resources? 

[Rant mode: on] After 30 years working the Gulf of Mexico, as nearly as I can tell, an archaeological resource is any form of anthropogenic refuse/junk on the seafloor that’s more than 50 years old.  Anthropogenic refuse/junk on the seafloor that’s less than 50 years old, is stuff we have to clean up when decommissioning infrastructure.

When siting drilling rigs, platforms, pipelines and other infrastructure in shallow water (<200′) of the Gulf of Mexico, we are actually required to stay away from the margins of any features that look like they may be buried Pleistocene river and stream channels… Because… There might be “archaeological resources” buried there.  I suppose that during the next Quaternary glacial stage, future archaeologists may go out there and explore for Clovis points when sea level falls 200′.

When filing exploration plans (POE) for shallow water leases, we even have to pay an archaeologist to write an archaeological report based on the shallow hazard data we acquired to ensure we avoid drilling near real hazards.  Back in the 1990’s I read an archaeological report for a shallow water block in West Cameron that went into great detail about how the prehistoric Native Americans probably abandoned their Gulf of Mexico settlements and moved inland in response to the Holocene Transgression, leaving archaeological resources behind, which must be preserved. [Rant mode: off]

Conclusion

Prehistoric people knew how to deal with rapid sea level rise:

Featured image from Wikipedia.