Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

caseymoz

(5,763 posts)
19. Why didn't the Eocene Thermal Maximum lead to extinction then?
Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:38 AM
Jan 2013

They estimate, by the latest information I have, that the Siberian Traps Eruptions triggered the disaster by raising global temperatures five degrees Celsius.

During the Eocene Thermal Maximum, 55 million years ago, temperatures went up six degrees Celsius over 20 thousand years and remained about that high for another 100 thousand years. There was no oceanic ice for 100 thousand years.

There was also no mass extinction even on the order of the Cretaceous, much less the Permian. For life, it was a mere speed bump.

Which two hundred years in the Permian extinction are they comparing this to? Look at the two previous theories they had on the Permian extinction, and how long did they last? Did those scientists sound any less certain than the ones now with the current theory? Trends you see in the previous 200 years say nothing about trends in the next.

I'm not saying do nothing about Global Warming; I'm not saying don't take drastic measures; I'm not saying even disbelieve the theory.

I'm saying the extinction scenario they describe is hardly deductive. Paleontologists studying periods hundreds of millions of years ago, from rather scant information compared to 100 thousand years ago, may be more careful about what they say if they knew their theories would be used to debate major policies.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Powerful. Great post. byronius Jan 2013 #1
That's really interesting. Blue_In_AK Jan 2013 #2
The Permian Extinction Event is incredibly important for us to understand right now jimlup Jan 2013 #3
TBH, probably not on a Permian level. AverageJoe90 Jan 2013 #4
It did take 80,000 years. caseymoz Jan 2013 #8
CO2 injection far higher now than Permian extinction. ErikJ Jan 2013 #16
Why didn't the Eocene Thermal Maximum lead to extinction then? caseymoz Jan 2013 #19
Still most popular theory ErikJ Jan 2013 #20
Yes, but that should have caused a runaway increase to 10 degrees. caseymoz Jan 2013 #21
I think it's already too late MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #14
Aren't they already worried about methane bubbling up in Antarctica? SunSeeker Jan 2013 #5
Not just there. There are huge methane deposits all over BlueStreak Jan 2013 #7
Half reptile - half mammal. Sounds like today's Republicans. Scuba Jan 2013 #6
...after they lost the mammal half. FailureToCommunicate Jan 2013 #9
Very Interesting . I enjoyed it, and thanks for sharing. nt Speck Tater Jan 2013 #10
Lystrosaurus was not the ancestor of all mammals Scootaloo Jan 2013 #11
The Day The Earth Nearly Died - programme summary dipsydoodle Jan 2013 #12
Thanks MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #13
YW. David Attenborough ErikJ Jan 2013 #17
So what is the natural process that unwound that 10c increase? AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #15
Thank You For Sharing cantbeserious Jan 2013 #18
Important to remember that we, and all our effects on the planet- while significant- are a blip. Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #22
Human carbon dioxide emissions dwarf global volcanic carbon dioxide emissions. ErikJ Jan 2013 #23
Your last sentence is not backed up by the article you link to. Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #24
See post #16 ErikJ Jan 2013 #25
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»The Day the Earth nearly ...»Reply #19