6 mysterious structures hidden beneath the Greenland ice sheet

[admin]

The Greenland ice sheet, nearly 2 miles thick in places, hides a landscape of canyons, mountains, fjords and gem-like lakes.

6 mysterious structures hidden beneath the Greenland ice sheet : Read more

 

[Broadlands]

"Such a forest could only grow in largely ice-free conditions, suggesting that parts of Greenland's ice sheet may be younger than researchers previously believed."

This implies that significant warming and melting can take place without human-added CO2 affecting the land-plants. The same thing happened in the late Eocene when CO2 was more than double what it is today. Plant life on land was lush.

 

[Roj5]

"Such a forest could only grow in largely ice-free conditions, suggesting that parts of Greenland's ice sheet may be younger than researchers previously believed."

This implies that significant warming and melting can take place without human-added CO2 affecting the land-plants. The same thing happened in the late Eocene when CO2 was more than double what it is today. Plant life on land was lush.

The glaciation periods follow a reasonably predictable cycle but I am sure that ice encroachment would not be uniform in that we are having high temperatures at the moment within the Arctic circle and at times below average temperatures in parts of Europe.

I wish I had the ability and time to try to understand the Milankovitch cycles other than generic copy pastes which is all I can do.

This is touching a little on the book, Finger Prints of the Gods (I think it was) which although an interesting read, was a little too out there for me to take on board.

 

[Broadlands]

Yes, glaciations follow reasonably predictable cycles. Climatologist Dr. Reid Bryson (deceased)...commented on that.

Climatologist, Dr. REID BRYSON was asked (back in 1976):

“How soon will we find ourselves in the next ice age?" One hundred years from now, or 9,000 years from now?” BRYSON replied: “The odds are very small for 100 years and approach a certainty for 9,000 years. There is, to put it another way, just the barest hint of a possibility that we could start a transition into a glacial epoch during the next century. The difference between the climate we have now and the climate we'll have as we enter a new ice age will be so small here in North America that, for the most part, you won't even notice the change.”

 

[Roj5]

I am referring to historical rather than future... I don't want to turn this into a debate on where we are[n't] going.

Greenland allowing a forest at the centre point of some glaciation retreats/ advances cannot be ruled out on face value, but our understanding on this area and information is currently minimal.

I would love some funding, a few million should suffice to investigate 'A Greenland forest was able to grow following a meteor impact removing all ice in the immediate area as the planet was leaving a glaciation period.'
Far fetched I admit, but currently it is a possibility, albeit very unlikely.

This article has popped up recently too...

When Greenland was green: rapid global warming 55 million years ago shows us what the future may hold

Greenland’s conditions were once similar to those of a greenhouse. Volcanoes swelled the land, constricted seaways and gigatonnes of greenhouse gases were released into the atmosphere.

theconversation.com

I do not think I have stated my personal opinion on Climate Change although my position/ posts would strongly suggest where I am.

On Greenland and this article... I do not have any position for/ against how this 'forest' was in existence, perhaps the cycle is every 50 million years there is a cycle that glaciation is massively reduced that we need to identify; perhaps unknown events we have recorded can be attached to why the forest grew... I do know that people like me with general rather than in-depth knowledge can apply this information incorrectly to justify our position... I look forward to further releases about this event and new information before I make an attempt at an educated reply.

I also look forward to how the for/ against position in the world reacts to this question-

'There is reliable evidence there was a forest on Greenland at roughly its geographical location of today in recent history - Can it be said beyond doubt that we are in a previously unknown Earth cycle that by co-incidence is recordable as we became industrialised.'

 

[Broadlands]

The important historical point to be made is the fact that there have been times in the geological past when CO2 was much higher than it is now and the biosphere was not severely impacted. In fact, life thrived under warmer conditions during the Tertiary and life in the oceans was not subjected to "acidification"...even though the pH was lower. Viking artifacts are being found where summer melting has exposed them. NASA satellites are showing us that today is getting greener as CO2 has risen.

 

[Roj5]

In fact, life thrived under warmer conditions during the Tertiary and life in the oceans was not subjected to "acidification"...even though the pH was lower.

Not sure what point you are considering as the period you refer to is around 64 million years in duration.

An interesting time and one after the KT boundary which allowed the rise of the mammals as predators were vastly reduced... We had the rise of plants which flowered which I guess in turn had a burst of insects...

What we essentially see over a 65 million year period is plants flourish, insect populations grow in line with the evolutionary requirements of plants... Mammals evolve to occupy the grassland areas and the environment settles with CO2 levels falling from 400ppm (When there was limited life) to a settled 200ppm-300ppm level.
In fact, the 200ppm-300ppm has been constant for over 800 million years.

Would you also agree that CO2 levels were around 310ppm in the 1960s and recorded at nearly 410ppm now?

Based on the numbers only, there has to be a concern...

At one point we had 400ppm CO2 which contributed to the evolution of plants, insects and mammals.
Today we have 400ppm with removal of plats, reduction of insects and mammals nearing extinction.

 

[Broadlands]

No, I don't agree that there is any concern. As mentioned earlier CO2 was well above 700 ppm in the late Eocene and life was thriving. The polar ice sheets began forming when CO2 started to drop below that value. This is all described in a 2009 paper in NATURE.

Nature 461, 1110-1113 (22 October 2009)
Atmospheric carbon dioxide through the Eocene–Oligocene climate transition
Paul N. Pearson, Gavin L. Foster, Bridget S. Wade

There is a big difference between being considered endangered and extinction. The number of species (with scientific taxonomic names) that have actually gone extinct is less than 200 and new species are being found every year. That extreme view is bogus.

 

[Roj5]

No, I don't agree that there is any concern. As mentioned earlier CO2 was well above 700 ppm in the late Eocene and life was thriving. The polar ice sheets began forming when CO2 started to drop below that value.

You didnt say which point in a 64 million year period you were referring to.

You didnt respond to-
"Would you also agree that CO2 levels were around 310ppm in the 1960s and recorded at nearly 410ppm now? "

Do you agree that farming and construction is removing forest areas and grass land areas whereas the period you refer to was the expansion of these areas (dependent on the temperature at the time).

I think this linbk is the same magazine you refer to and is 10 years more current-

Humans are driving one million species to extinction

Landmark United Nations-backed report finds that agriculture is one of the biggest threats to Earth’s ecosystems.

www.nature.com

 

[Broadlands]

It doesn't matter what period of time. It's the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere that counts. Yes, I agree that CO2 was ~30 ppm above pre-industrial in 1960 and is ~410 ppm now. It will keep rising and could be about 500 ppm by 2050 because we cannot lower CO2 fuel emissions fast enough to keep it from rising. When it reaches 500 ppm it will still be lower than it was in the late Eocene when the climate was mild and the biosphere flourished.

Of course, an increasing population has put pressure on agricultural land because of biofuel ethanol, solar panel farms, and new construction for people to live in.

Humans have always driven species to extinction...the Dodo and the passenger pigeon. Natural extinctions have taken place for millions of years.

I'm unclear what you are driving at in this discussion.