Major tectonic collisions near the equator have caused three ice ages in the last 540 million years

Image: Christine Daniloff/MIT
Over the last 540 million years, the Earth has weathered three major ice ages — periods during which global temperatures plummeted, producing extensive ice sheets and glaciers that have stretched beyond the polar caps.
Now scientists at MIT, the University of California at Santa Barbara, and the University of California at Berkeley have identified the likely trigger for these ice ages.
In a study published in Science, the team reports that each of the last three major ice ages were preceded by tropical “arc-continent collisions” — tectonic pileups that occurred near the Earth’s equator, in which oceanic plates rode up over continental plates, exposing tens of thousands of kilometers of oceanic rock to a tropical environment.
The scientists say that the heat and humidity of the tropics likely triggered a chemical reaction between the rocks and the atmosphere. Specifically, the rocks’ calcium and magnesium reacted with atmospheric carbon dioxide, pulling the gas out of the atmosphere and permanently sequestering it in the form of carbonates such as limestone.
Over time, the researchers say, this weathering process, occurring over millions of square kilometers, could pull enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to cool temperatures globally and ultimately set off an ice age.
“We think that arc-continent collisions at low latitudes are the trigger for global cooling,” says Oliver Jagoutz, an associate professor in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences. “This could occur over 1-5 million square kilometers, which sounds like a lot. But in reality, it’s a very thin strip of Earth, sitting in the right location, that can change the global climate.”
Jagoutz’ co-authors are Francis Macdonald and Lorraine Lisiecki of UC Santa Barbara, and Nicholas Swanson-Hysell and Yuem Park of UC Berkeley.
A tropical trigger
When an oceanic plate pushes up against a continental plate, the collision typically creates a mountain range of newly exposed rock. The fault zone along which the oceanic and continental plates collide is called a “suture.” Today, certain mountain ranges such as the Himalayas contain sutures that have migrated from their original collision points, as continents have shifted over millenia.
In 2016, Jagoutz and his colleagues retraced the movements of two sutures that today make up the Himalayas. They found that both sutures stemmed from the same tectonic migration. Eighty million years ago, as the supercontinent known as Gondwana moved north, part of the landmass was crushed against Eurasia, exposing a long line of oceanic rock and creating the first suture; 50 million years ago, another collision between the supercontinents created a second suture.
The team found that both collisions occurred in tropical zones near the equator, and both preceded global atmospheric cooling events by several million years — which is nearly instantaneous on a geologic timescale. After looking into the rates at which exposed oceanic rock, also known as ophiolites, could react with carbon dioxide in the tropics, the researchers concluded that, given their location and magnitude, both sutures could have indeed sequestered enough carbon dioxide to cool the atmosphere and trigger both ice ages.
Interestingly, they found that this process was likely responsible for ending both ice ages as well. Over millions of years, the oceanic rock that was available to react with the atmosphere eventually eroded away, replaced with new rock that took up far less carbon dioxide.
“We showed that this process can start and end glaciation,” Jagoutz says. “Then we wondered, how often does that work? If our hypothesis is correct, we should find that for every time there’s a cooling event, there are a lot of sutures in the tropics.”
Exposing Earth’s sutures
The researchers looked to see whether ice ages even further back in Earth’s history were associated with similar arc-continent collisions in the tropics. They performed an extensive literature search to compile the locations of all the major suture zones on Earth today, and then used a computer simulation of plate tectonics to reconstruct the movement of these suture zones, and the Earth’s continental and oceanic plates, back through time. In this way, they were able to pinpoint approximately where and when each suture originally formed, and how long each suture stretched.
They identified three periods over the last 540 million years in which major sutures, of about 10,000 kilometers in length, were formed in the tropics. Each of these periods coincided with each of three major, well-known ice ages, in the Late Ordovician (455 to 440 million years ago), the Permo-Carboniferous (335 to 280 million years ago), and the Cenozoic (35 million years ago to present day). Importantly, they found there were no ice ages or glaciation events during periods when major suture zones formed outside of the tropics.
“We found that every time there was a peak in the suture zone in the tropics, there was a glaciation event,” Jagoutz says. “So every time you get, say, 10,000 kilometers of sutures in the tropics, you get an ice age.”
He notes that a major suture zone, spanning about 10,000 kilometers, is still active today in Indonesia, and is possibly responsible for the Earth’s current glacial period and the appearance of extensive ice sheets at the poles.
This tropical zone includes some of the largest ophiolite bodies in the world and is currently one of the most efficient regions on Earth for absorbing and sequestering carbon dioxide. As global temperatures are climbing as a result of human-derived carbon dioxide, some scientists have proposed grinding up vast quantities of ophiolites and spreading the minerals throughout the equatorial belt, in an effort to speed up this natural cooling process.
But Jagoutz says the act of grinding up and transporting these materials could produce additional, unintended carbon emissions. And it’s unclear whether such measures could make any significant impact within our lifetimes.
“It’s a challenge to make this process work on human timescales,” Jagoutz says. “The Earth does this in a slow, geological process that has nothing to do with what we do to the Earth today. And it will neither harm us, nor save us.”
###
Source: Eurekalert h/t to Dennis Wingo.
I see….so we’re in danger of CO2 getting too low
Well we were at 280ppm when burning fossil fuels saved the day albeit temporarily. Below 200ppm photosynthesis gets patchy to say the least. The plants you like to eat evolved when atmospheric CO2 was around 1500-2000ppm when the Earth was having a fantastic time!
So what happened to the Milankovic cycles?
If both correct it follows that the Milankovic cycles caused enhanced tectonic activity in tropics, which is very unlikely. During last million or so years there vere about 10 ice ages but they are taking about three coincidences in the last 500 million years. Forget it.
Milankovic cycles are not traceable back 300-400 Myr. Also such cycles primarily change insolation received in polar regions. And if such polar regions have limited ability for outside energy to enter (as the Arctic region today), then they can begin to ice, raise ice albedo, perhaps increase cloud cover, and cool the globe. Such past cycles did not induce glaciation in the southern polar regions as for the Arctic because conditions are not favorable.
Don’t you require a continent somewhere near one of the poles to trigger a glacial event?
Such a bunch of bullshit
Yep, my BS antennae are twitching like crazy here. Just another piece of research seeking the “CO2 level defines the climate” meme.
Mine too.
Moi aussi…
No, it isn’t seeking it, it is assuming that reducing atmospheric CO2 concentration will result in lower atmospheric temperatures.
“… this … process, …, could pull enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to cool temperatures globally and ultimately set off an ice age.”
Almost any GEO-Engineering attempt to “Cool” the climate over the course of a single lifespan would far more than likely result in triggering a Deep Ice Age as cooling like that would be far too fast for the Earths natural comtrol mechanisms to counter.
Just leave it alone and It will come home wagging it’s tail behind it
This is part of why we are currently in an Ice Age.
An Ice Age is not in distant past, it’s occurring now, and your Ice Age is probably one or the most coldest periods in Earth’s history.
I think of like this, during our Ice Age CO2, levels came close to being unable to sustain plant life, so unless you have periods of no plant life, it’s not going to colder than what it has been in last million years.
So we have low levels of CO2, and 400 ppm is still low, and during glacial periods CO2 levels dropped to around 180 ppm.
And 180 ppm is like humans breathing on Mt Everest- or knocking on death’s door [though some people have the genetics and are acclimated to survive it better].
Anyhow, it has long been accepted that weathering due to mountain building that has caused our present low levels of CO2.
But we in an Ice Age [again, long known] so entering Ice Age is not possible, though entering and a glacial period which is a common/normal part of your Ice Age, is possible.
Thank you for putting this in perspective.
Any person who simply examines the available data (ignoring hypotheses about why), can see that we are currently in one of those ice ages.
Note: By available data, I mean the fossil record, and the 5.5 million year ocean sediment record, and the 1 million year ice cores.
This is so bad, it’s an insult to Bull.[[Language. Mod]. to call it Bull.[again.Mod]. : /
Is this from the creative writing dept.?
Lol!!
Could not have put it more accurately or concisely!
They got it backwards.
Co2 follows warming … so the record shows; AGW logic says that this Co2 causes the warming.
Tectonic plates movement precedes ice, so by the same AGW logic, it must be the ice/glacial that causes the tectonic plates to have moved.
DonM, the text says
“the rocks’ calcium and magnesium reacted with atmospheric carbon dioxide, pulling the gas out of the atmosphere and permanently sequestering it in the form of carbonates such as limestone.”
But maybe YOU’VE got it right, it could be
– ice ages with miles thick glaciers further subduction, incl. sutura
AND
– lesser out gassing CO2 from cooling oceans
leading them to their misunderstanding / false conclusion that
” … calcium and magnesium reacted with atmospheric carbon dioxide, pulling the gas out of the atmosphere and permanently sequestering it in the form of carbonates such as limestone.”
_______________________________________________
Think your Skepsis is appropriate.
Agree its nonsense. According to them land rising out of the ocean (due to tectonics) absorbs CO2 direct from the atmosphere and grows (sequesters) carbonates (limestone). So land exposed to the weather grows!! (Thats why the hills get taller and dont erode!!) This magic process would occur on current exposed land just as much as historic land. Strange we dont observe the current mountains sequestering CO2 and growing limestones (which have always formed under the oceans by the way!) before our eyes.
Hadnt noticed it was April 1st already! This paper must be on the shortlist for ‘Junk theory of the year’ award!
soliloquies, bobn?
Yeah – were there any eye witnesses? Not to be too critical but it seems fashionable to discuss with certainty any theory that can’t be negated by objective measurement and then just expect us all to swallow it.
The ice core data shows temperature changes leading CO2 changes on shorter timescales. A more logical conclusion is that SO2 from large volcanoes dropped temperatures causing the ice ages referenced by this article.
Correlation CO2 vs Temps, geological timescale? Zero.
http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg
John Doran.
B.S. more co2 propaganda
It’s very pseudoscientific. That’s what the P stands for today. Remember, Hawking said that Philosophy’s dead.
This is assuming of course that the sensitivity of declining CO2 is the driver in creating ice ages, and not that CO2 reduction in the atmosphere is because of ice ages. It would appear that the latter is the actual scenario, especially in our most recent ice age climate the last 2.6 million years.
Exactly,
Cold oceans can contain more CO2 than warm oceans
I’ve never understood how cooling temperatures could result in massive amounts of ice forming on land.
Why wouldn’t the ice caps extend from the poles, with the ocean freezing in place? Why would the water vaporize first, especially when vaporization requires more heat?
Cooling mostly in the North, evaporation in the Tropics = lots of accumulating snow in the North…(which turns to ice by compression).
Grant trolling.
Yeah, I agree unfortunately. I was playing golf with a full professor about 12 years ago and he told me putting any reference to potential global warming impact GREATLY increased the chances of funding and/or publication. I am a geologist, and he was a biology professor at a large university. I debated with him a bit on the ethics of that, since in my view the bigger picture was that it was potentially ruinous to science and science education/communication to the public. He said it was debatable, and on top of that he had kids to put through college, a mortgage, retirement, etc. etc. to consider … yada yada yada … and that is just the way the world’s “PC” is right now. Unfortunately, I think we were both right.
Correlation does not imply causation. This concept has become alien to scientists, especially those who are driven by grant greed and tenure aspirations.
The entire “scientific establishment” has become corrupted.
During the Permian in the Palaeozic Era CO2 concentrations hovered around 210 PPM; yet, it was 10 Deg. warmer.
Very elaborate bull shit!
As Goethe observed:
…some scientists will worship error if it affords them a living.
No quotation marks because it is from memory.
“Thus I saw that most men only care for science so far as they get a living by it, and that they worship even error when it affords them a subsistence.”
– Johann Wolfgang
“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
Check!
hmmm I must read more of that guy
From the article: “… could pull enough carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere to cool temperatures globally and ultimately set off an ice age”
Imagine if we could measure the energy CO2 is reflecting back to the surface. If we could measure it, then we could model it.
We’re told that the energy reflected from CO2 back to the surface is enough to control Ice Ages, and CO2 continues to keep the surface about 60F warmer than it would be without it, AND WE CAN”T MEASURE IT??? If we can’t measure it, how do we know it exists?
When I walk into the shade on a sunny day I can feel an immediate difference. Why can’t I feel the same thing when I walk into the shade from all the CO2?
Thomas,
We can and do directly measure thermal radiation from the atmosphere directed downwards.
It is at a completely different wavelength to incoming solar radiation so we know that it is
caused by the greenhouse effect. And this can be easily modeled using the known radiative
equations for the gases in the atmosphere.
Well yes, BUT …
For almost 30 years the “Baseline Surface Radiation Network” first proposed in 1990 by the World Climate Research Program, has been monitoring and gathering this data.
Here: https://bsrn.awi.de/
Note that in the project background they make the following comment:
“While a small change in irradiance at the Earth’s surface may cause a profound change in climate, the existing radiometric network is not capable of arriving at the required accuracy for climate research. In fact our present understanding of the radiation distribution both – horizontally and vertically – is not sufficient to understand the present climate. The simulation of the past and future climate changes, which would be induced by the change in radiation, is even more uncertain. ”
So yes we can and do measure down welling long wave radiation at the surface of the earth but any potential signal from anthropogenic co2 has yet to be seen since it would be (and is) swamped out by natural variation.
Agreed!
I see a lot of chowder, but I can’t see a clam anywhere.
The fallacies of combining the words “correlation” and “causation” come to mind.
File this study with the “White American colonialists caused global cooling” study.
Right! They must have moved the continents around! Lol!
john March 15, 2019 at 9:12 am
Right! They must have moved the continents around! Lol!
Why is that funny john? Did you not know that all of the ships bumping against the east coast of North America push the continent to the west?
If you think too hard it will start to make sense .
michael
Amen.
“The Cenozoic [ice age] (35 million years ago to present day).” Do not dare to make it more pleasant.
“…they were able to pinpoint approximately where and when each suture originally formed, and how long each suture stretched.”
Two words that do not work together: pinpoint approximately. Estimate approximately or even locate approximately. But Pinpoint doesn’t work.
Journalistic newspeak used to inject extreme confidence into tenuous claims.
Good catch.
People always generally do things like that.
“People always generally do things like that.”
LOL!
This “research” was brought to you by: confirmation bias, cherry-picking, and the mistaken notion that “correlation” (on a scale of multi-million years) equals causation.
They ran a model, so it must be so…
I actually do not have a problem with the belief that a lot of CO2 was captured…just hat it made much of a difference. Continents moving into each other could have effected rain patterns, ocean currents, volcanism, etc.
If I see proof that CO2 dropped and then temperature followed – that is a good chunk of evidence. When I see temperatures falling, and then CO2 dropping – well then they got cause and effect backwards.
Facts, models, cause, effect. It’s all too sciency to keep it straight. There was nothing about that stuff on the grant application thingy.
If there’s anything wrong with the grant application it was the office workers who are at fault. The faculty is too busy to deal with that stuff. (Speaking here from personal observations.)
Continents moving into each other could have effected rain patterns, ocean currents, volcanism, etc.
No, they couldn’t have effected them.
They might have affected them though.
It’s quite possible for continental drift to effect changes in rain, currents, etc.
Cooling begins, the oceans follow and start cooling, colder ocean waters can hold and begin to sequester more CO2, CO2 begins to fall…CO2 sequestration follows the onset of Cooling
“Continents moving into each other could have effected rain patterns, ocean currents, volcanism, etc.”
yup hand waving outperforms models AGAIN!
oh wait
a model explains something with numbers in a traceable way.
hand waving… ‘it could have been x!” says ” could do better if I tried to explain it,
but I wont even try to put numbers on it, therefore I win!”
I would have to go back and research but I thought; 1) that at least some ice ages occurred pretty quickly, like over decades, and 2) that CO2 was pretty high during some of the ice ages. I may be wrong, but if I am correct then this study doesn’t seem correct.
“CO2 was pretty high during some of the ice ages. ”
Yea but those Ice Ages don’t count…./sarc
I would consider the formation of the Southern Ocean, with clear circulation around Antarctica, and the closing of the Panama seaway to have had rather more influence on the current glacial epoch than CO2 levels.
This is exactly the way I learned about the onset of the current ice age (starting some 3 million years ago). When the Isthmus of Panama silted over the flow of warm water from the Pacific to the Atlantic was cut off.
I imagine these rent seekers thought … “Now how might we get the magic CO2 golden goose mixed in with accepted ideas on plate tectonics? Just let your imaginations run wild guys.” The reality of evidence, however, shows that CO2 and temperature have been anti-correlated as often as they have been correlated throughout the history of major ice ages.
http://edberry.com/SiteDocs/2010/10/EarthHistory1.jpg
OMG, Gaia is undergoing surgery :
Types of nonabsorbable sutures :
Nylon. A natural monofilament suture.
Polypropylene (Prolene). A synthetic monofilament suture.
Silk. A braided natural suture.
Polyester (Ethibond). A braided synthetic suture.
Now added – plate tectonic sutures. (Big patient, non ambulent)
It is well known that without anaesthetics, NOx for example, sutures cause circulation collapse, shock and temperature trauma.
Looks like this was very painfull! Better not tell the striking kids anything about this.
https://youtu.be/ZgpHAiPuaF8
https://youtu.be/ZgpHAiPuaF8
It is not man who decides about the weather…
The causality problem. It cooled and there was less CO2. Which caused which? or were both the consequence of some other cause.
Any explanation of the Ice Ages needs to account for their 150 Myr periodicity. Three ice ages and a cool period all at 150 Myr interval. If that is left to chance I won’t believe the explanation.
Javier, you’re a name I stop at when I’ve no time and blitz a WUWT thread.
Good to see you here.
For obvious reasons…you inform.
So carry on, What’s up with this 150 Myr interval?
My guess…Something to do with the Galaxy’s spiral arms and the separate rotations in relation to the orbital plain along with the corresponding impact of cosmic ray activity?
To my knowledge there are essentially five explanations to Ice Ages that are considered by scientists. Two are endogenous and three exogenous.
Endogenous:
1. Tectonic causes
2. Greenhouse gases causes
Exogenous:
3. Changes in the Sun
4. Changes in the orbit of the Earth
5. Changes in the galactic environment of the Solar System
The articled presented in this post is just a not particularly convincing combination of 1 and 2.
The thing is that the dating of ice ages is quite good. And it is:
~450 Ma Andean-Saharan (Late Ordovician)
~300 Ma Karoo (Late Carboniferous)
~0 Ma Late Cenozoic
And there is a cool period in Jurassic-Early Cretaceous at ~150 Ma
I don’t believe in coincidences. It is clear that tectonics affects hugely the severity of an ice age. Formation of supercontinents favors strong cooling while rifting apart favors warming, but it is hard to imagine a 150 Myr tectonic cycle, although not impossible.
A 150 Myr GHG cycle is unthinkable unless driven by tectonics, that’s why there are attempts to link both.
A 150 Myr cycle in the Sun is unsupported by plasma physics. But who knows. It is unsupported by the main sequence, though.
A 150 Myr orbital cycle is possible but absolutely unknown. We are very uncertain about how the orbits evolve over such long times.
A 150 Myr galactic environment is easier to imagine but absolutely unsupported by evidence despite Nir Shaviv. We don’t know where the galactic arms were 150 Myr ago.
So in essence we have no idea of what causes ice ages. The title of this post is incorrect. There are no findings on what caused the ice ages, just proposals based on thinks that happened at the right time and could have affected climate. If they are ingenious, by the right people, and according to the scientific fashion of the moment (now CO2) they get well published and amply disseminated by the media. But that doesn’t mean that they have solved anything. In most cases they introduce more doubts than solve.
Turn Shaviv’s argument around – the planet is actually a galactic “arm” sensor.
Still the “arms are likely stellar density waves where the occupants change all the time.
Shaviv also got the 30Myr bobbing galactic shock wave motion right.
Interesting process though
This is a hypothesis that has made the rounds several times. There are two major problems with it.
1. There has been several other tropical mountain-building episodes without causing ice-ages. For examply why did the Variscan orogeny cause an Ice Age, but not the Caledonian?
2. As Retallack pointed out many years ago, mountain-building causes a shift from chemical weathering to mechanical weathering, as proved by the Bengal fan in the case of Himalaya.