Weird science: Tectonics in the tropics trigger Earth’s ice ages, study finds

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

Collisions of landmasses triggered ice ages.
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.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
148 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Clyde Spencer
March 15, 2019 2:22 pm

“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.”

OK, if the atmospheric CO2 was geologically sequestered, where did the replenishment come from to end the glaciations? This detail is overlooked!

Fred Souder
March 15, 2019 2:23 pm

Let me get this straight.
During the ice-ages, there were large tropical regions of oceanic/continental convergence, leading to regions of oceanic crust exposed, adjacent to large mountainous regions. The mountainous regions would have accumulated significant amounts of tropical ice, which would then increase earth’s albedo. The tropics normally receive the bulk of Earth’s direct insolation (sunlight). The mountains would then have large ice fields in these areas that would have reflected this insolation back into space. Therefore we can conclude that this tectonic activity in the tropics resulted in the initiation of past ice-ages because… Carbon Dioxide!
Did I get that about right? Just trying to make sure I’ve got a good handle on the science.

H.R.
Reply to  Fred Souder
March 15, 2019 3:38 pm

Fred: “Did I get that about right?”

Almost. I think wooly mammoth farts or T-Rex belches were involved somewhere. Something to do with the tippy-dippy continental plates upsetting their tummies… up and down, up and down, up and down. It’s like sea sickness except the period between waves and troughs is a tad longer.

I’ll have to go check the footnotes in the paper.

Robert W. Turner
March 15, 2019 2:25 pm

The CO2 climate cult strikes again. Their mechanism is only off by a few million years, or is it 10 million years, or eh 20 million years, and completely ignores the fact that temperatures decreased before CO2 levels.

Sceptical lefty
March 15, 2019 2:38 pm

HMM … continents wandering about for no particular reason — riding over and subducting as whimsy takes them. Makes perfect sense to me. I can’t imagine that solar fluctuations would have any effect on climate at all.

WXcycles
March 15, 2019 4:51 pm

Earthy ‘science’ finally Jumps-the-Shark.

WXcycles
March 15, 2019 4:55 pm

” … 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. … ”

This is right up there with the dumbest things that have ever been penned, a contender for the 2019 Darwin Awards.

Clyde Spencer
March 15, 2019 5:03 pm

What happens to the Trade Winds and energy distribution when mountains rise up in the tropics?

Philip Mulholland
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
March 16, 2019 3:30 am

“What happens to the Trade Winds and energy distribution when mountains rise up in the tropics?”

My thoughts entirely.
Pesky mountains getting in the way of the wind, collecting all that white snow, altering the tropical albedo, reducing energy collection, replacing a previous warm tropical ocean with newly formed ice-filled mountains.
That can’t be it. Can it?

JBom
March 15, 2019 5:32 pm

Just Bullshit Seeking Money … from NSF!

Oh! They … “The Fabled Scientists” should nominate a High School Child to “LEAD” the war effort against the … dreaded … vile … Caucasian Hordes … The Capitalists … THE WHITE PEOPLE!

Ha ha ! 😀

Rod Evans
March 15, 2019 6:06 pm

The take away from this study is, never let scientific facts get in the way of your imagination.
I guess the guiding principle here was, CO2 is responsible for dramatic climate change now what mechanism can we deploy to make it seem plausible?
I suppose the fact CO2 reacts to temperature change but has no significant impact on it, was ignored for the purpose of this research.

ferd berple
March 15, 2019 6:47 pm

https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2013/07/08/ancient-rocks-modern-purpose/

Kelemen and his partner geochemist Juerg Matter (a Lamont adjunct, now based at the University of Southampton) have found that many carbonate veins here actually formed during human time, and that the process is ongoing and fast. “It happens about 100,000 times faster than we thought,” said Kelemen. They also found that the reactions take place much deeper underground than previously thought, well below the surface where CO2 travels in groundwater through cracks.

Kelemen and Matter estimate that each cubic kilometer of peridotite naturally absorbs on average a ton of atmospheric carbon each year–up to 100,000 tons annually in the region. In places, the reaction has completely run its course; the rocks are fractured down to the tiniest pore spaces and filled with carbonate, creating entire mountains of the stuff. Theoretically, they say, there is enough peridotite in Oman and the neighboring United Arab Emirates to absorb 33 trillion tons of CO2—1,000 years of human output, if present-day emission rates remained unchanged.

Dr. Strangelove
March 15, 2019 10:59 pm

Scotese reconstruction tells a different story
comment image

In Cambrian, CO2 went up from 5000 ppm to 7000 and back to 5000 while temperature remained flat. In Silurian, the ice age ended when CO2 dropped from 4500 to 3000 ppm. In Cretaceous, warm climate persisted when CO2 dropped from 2000 to below 1000 ppm. Correlation is not causation but even the correlation is poor.

GregK
March 15, 2019 11:15 pm

And what of the other ice ages ?
Pongola 2.9 – 2.8Gya
Huronian 2.4 – 2.1Gya
Sturtian 715- 680Mya
Marinoan 650 -635Mya

Then a couple of little but probably intense glaciations during the Ediacaran…
Gaskiers glaciation 580Mya
Baykonurian glaciation 547Mya

There’s probably a few others
Are these all a result of continental collisions near the equator ?

Not likely.
It’s a simplistic proposition, perhaps a factor, but ignores the wide range of other factors that lead to an ice age
[http://theconversation.com/ice-ages-have-been-linked-to-the-earths-wobbly-orbit-but-when-is-the-next-one-70069]. It also assumes that CO2 is the main driver of climate.

Others possible factors include Milankovitch cycles, the solar system’s position within the galaxy’s spiral arm, continental arrangement, continental collision or break up, ocean currents and even [dare I say it] atmospheric composition.

Basically nobody knows

Reply to  GregK
March 17, 2019 6:55 pm

GregK, over very long time scales, earth’s axial tilt variability, orbital obliquity variability, distance of moon from earth (closer going back in time), length of day (decreasing backward in time), solar energy output (generally decreasing backward in time) might also be factors. We don’t know how the axis of Venus completely flipped over. We can’t assume that earth’s axis has always been close to what it has been in the last few million years, and continental drift might even have an influence on axial tilt.

James Roberts
March 16, 2019 1:44 am

From the third paragraph: “… exposing tens of thousands of kilometers of oceanic rock to a tropical environment.”

Were those “… kilometers of rock” a meter wide? A millimeter wide?

Was this metric intended to be linear? If so, someone please explain, as I am now about 60 years from having studied basic math and basic geometry.

Should I even bother to read the rest of this article?

March 16, 2019 4:29 am

Javier

and fair proxy evidence that two of them might have had quite low CO2 levels.

Henry says

Nobody denies the correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and heat/cold.

If it gets cold, CO2 goes down in the atmosphere as it dissolves in the oceans:
[I am assuming pH does not change]

CO2 (g) + 2H2O (l) + coldness = > H3O+ + HCO3-
{this is the net result reaction}

If it gets warmer, the reaction goes the other way:

HCO3- + heat = > CO2 (g) + OH- {remember there are giga tons of carbonates and bi-carbonates dissolved in the oceans]

Hence, as I think Ian Wilson correctly reported, there is a lag time of about 800 (?) years on average before increased warmth on earth shows up as increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

To give you some clues as on how you can see that CO2 is also cooling the atmosphere:

1) we can identify and quantify CO2 presence on other planets by measuring the deflections by CO2 of sunlight in the UV range.
2) we can see the deflections caused by CO2 in the 1-2 um range. Follow the green line fig. 6 bottom and see how it returns to us, picked up via the moon, in fig 7.
3) I know that CO2 has big absoprtion between 4 and 5 um because we used to measure CO2 in nitrogen at 4.6 um.

So, to sum it up, we know that CO2 has absorption in the 14-15 um range causing some warming (by re-radiating earthshine) but as shown and proved above it also has a number of absorptions in the 0-5 um range causing cooling (by re-radiating sunshine). This cooling happens at all levels where the sunshine hits on the carbon dioxide same as the earthshine. The way from the bottom to the top is the same as from top to the bottom. So, my question is: how much cooling and how much warming is caused by the CO2? How was the experiment done to determine this and where are the test results?

{Arrhenius and Tyndall only saw half of what was happening as they performed closed box experiments. I hope you see now why their science was not complete?

Anyway, I therefore did some emprrical experiements to find there is no warming caused by more CO2. Click on my name to read my report on that.

Reply to  henryp
March 16, 2019 4:41 am

at my point 2)

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/disksite/library/turnbull06a.pdf

Sorry, you need this paper to show the deflections of CO2 in the 1-2 um. Try and understand the paper, as it provces conclsusively that CO2 is also cooling the atmosphere by deflecting certain sunlight away to space.

March 16, 2019 4:40 am

at my point 2)

http://astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/disksite/library/turnbull06a.pdf

Sorry, you need this paper to show the deflections of CO2 in the 1-2 um. Try and understand the paper, as it provces conclsusively that CO2 is also cooling the atmosphere by deflecting certain sunlight away to space.

Dr. Strangelove
Reply to  henryp
March 16, 2019 8:32 pm

Reflection by clouds, aerosols and atmospheric gases is 77 W/m^2. Water vapor is the main reflecting gas. Greenhouse effect is 324 W/m^2 and water vapor is also the main greenhouse gas. So greenhouse gases have net warming effect.
comment image

Reply to  Dr. Strangelove
March 17, 2019 5:35 am

Dr. Strangelove

I have shown or tried to show that CO2 has a number of absorptions in the 0-5 um range where the sun emits. This means that CO2 deflects certain sunlight away from us causing cooling. There is only one absorption 14-15 um where the earth emits and it is in fact low energy radiation, being trapped on earth, [I think] much lower than all the radiation 0-5 um back radiated to space by the CO2. Note that water vapor also emits in that very same range. Looking for someone or something to blame, they falsely accused CO2 on which all life depends. How ironic is that? They complain about 0.01% CO2? It is evil?
So the net effect of more CO2 is zero at best and probably some cooling.
I have done empirrical tests to find that globally, minimum temperatures are dropping which is not in line with AGW theory. What my results mean: there is no man made global warming. Click on my name to read my final report on that.

The whole AGW theory is a hoax / lie perpetuated, perhaps, by the coming new world order?
Read:
http://breadonthewater.co.za/henrys-climate/

Coach Springer
March 16, 2019 6:16 am

“Each of these periods coincided ..” Coincidence is not causation. Especially when it’s + or – a million years.

March 16, 2019 12:10 pm

Carbon Dioxide conducts temperatures on both hot and cold air on the planet. This causes an averaging out of temperatures at the pole and at the equator and all points in between.
Rising temperatures release huge amounts of weight in the form of ice melting. The liquid water distributes.
The release of the weight will cause geological change. It may be in the form of earthquakes, volcanoes, and sudden changes in temperature all over the globe.
Thus Siberia went from semi-tropical to arctic over night.
There is nothing new. It will happen again in various areas of the Earth.
Continents float on a molten lava mass. With the release of that ice weight a lot of changes will occur.
The most dramatic is likely to be a release of pressure caused by super volcanoes. That in itself is worse than any hydrogen bomb.
It has all ready happened locally in Washington State at St. Helens.
It is likely to happen soon at Yellowstone.
Volcanoes long dormant all over the planet are starting to wake up.
Again it is possible the release of weight on the continents may have something to do with that. We simply do not really know.
Our scientists are afraid to take a stand because their livelyhood does depend on what they say.

Reply to  David J Webb Sr.
March 16, 2019 1:40 pm

David CO2 has nothing to do with it. There is no mass. See my comments directed earlier to Javier.

Hocus Locus
March 17, 2019 1:44 am

Richard Dawkins pointed out (Ancestor’s Tale) that when following the direct ancestral route, changes are so gradual that no ‘speciation’ — in the sense we use it today to identify branches — is possible. So it follows that we can trace our collective guilt back from internal combustion, to coal burning, to slash and burn agriculture and forest burning to create prairies, taming of fire and on back beyond hominids to the detestable act of respiration and gutsy methane production.

And beyond. The pseudoscience of Anthroapology is morphing into Apology for Life itself. Also known as bad religion. They’re getting a head start on the next campaign, apologizing for geology.

Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus moleculo.
The mountains are in labor, a ridiculous molecule is the result.

March 17, 2019 4:07 am

This the recent second CO2-tectonic paper here. Very odd the discussion, as if the only planet known to support life was lifeless geology and of course a closed system immune from GCR’s.

Vernadsky hypothesized the granite continents are from living processes – no granite has been found off planet.

And moonquakes cannot be explained by tectonics there.

Does anyone have access to :
Rosing, M., Bird, D., Sleep, N., Glassley, W., Albarede, F. “The Rise of Continents—an Essay on the Geological Consequences of Photosynthesis,” Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology; Vol. 232, p. 99, 2006.

March 17, 2019 7:12 am

It looks most of us here are agreed now that CO2 is not a factor in the warming of earth?
Yes?
Thanks.

Moving on then to rising H2O (g) as one of the main reasons. I can imagine that some of you would think that this must be it. However, the problem I have with this is that H2O (g) is also linked with cloud formation. My observations in this regard are:

1) cloudy day [in summer South Africa} Tmax can drop by as much as 8 degrees C
2) cloudy night [in winter South Africa] Tmin can rise by as much as 5 degrees C

So which one is more? I would say more H2O (g) also means more cloud and that means less energy IYOB.

It is a puzzle?

So what determines cloud formation? It is mostly the reactions TOA. At the moment we have lower magnetic field strengths on the sun
1) meaning more of the most energetic particles being released to hit earth
2) meaning more ozone, N-oxides and peroxides formed TOA
3) meaning less uv heat penetrating the atmosphere to heat the top layers of the oceans
4) meaning less clouds being formed.

It would seem to me now that the extra H2O (g) that we have in the atmosphere is slightly delaying the general cooling process that IMHO has already started [looking at global minimum temperatures]

Be happy. Cooler is not nicer.