The Appalachian mountains are seldom mentioned among the world's great mountain ranges. Consisting mostly of low gentle ridges, when compared with the snow-capped peaks of the Himalaya, Andes, or Alps many would hesitate to call them mountains at all. But they are a large and ancient range, stretching over 1500 miles along the eastern portion of North America. The time of their formation has been dated back to the Paleozoic, with major uprisings occurring 650 million years ago. Then, about 460 million years ago, during the Ordovician period, they were the site of one of the most violent volcanic outbursts in Earth's history. New research reveals that, following that bout of vulcanism, weathering of Appalachian rock may have triggered one of Earth's major ice ages—a relatively brief frigid period that ultimately killed two-thirds of all species on the planet.
One of the things that has been obscured by all the hand wringing and arm waiving about global warming is the existence of a threat to our planet that is very real and could arise suddenly. That threat is from non-planetary bodies within the solar system: asteroids, comets and other celestial wanderers. While the world's politicians and tree-hugging blowhards rail about the damage climate change might cause, a symposium was held in San Francisco to address a problem that actually could end life on Earth.
The supporters of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) claim that they have science on their side. Time and again we are told that the debate is over, the science is settled and consensus among the world's scientists reached. If that is true, why are so many scientists coming forward to oppose and denounce the climate alarmist's theory? To understand the true nature of the climate change debate it is necessary to understand what a scientific theory is and how to judge a theory's validity.
Two of the terms bandied about by global warming alarmists are “unprecedented” and “irreversible.” It is troubling that scientists, who should know better, persist in using these terms even though the history of our planet clearly shows that neither term is accurate. Proof of this inaccuracy is obvious if we look back over the history of Earth—the Phanerozoic Eon in particular—taking the “Grand View” of historical climate change.
Bleached and dying coral reefs are often held up as proof that global warming is laying waste to Earth's ecosystems. Now come reports that a number of reefs around the world are being brought back from the dead by dedicated oceanographers and conservationists. “The results are more than just promising; they are beautiful,” says Baruch Rinkevich, a marine biologist at the National Institute of Oceanography in Haifa, Israel. But how can these reefs recover in the face on ongoing global warming? Either global warming has reversed course or the bleaching of reefs wasn't due to global warming in the first place.
When it comes to climate, the early Paleogene period (~65-34 mya), at the start of the Cenozoic Era, had one of the most Eden like climates of the Phanerozoic Eon. As the Cenozoic progressed a cooling trend set in leading up to the formation of permanent ice caps and the Pleistocene Ice Age we are still experiencing. But before the world started to ice up our planet underwent one of the most dramatic bouts of global warming known to science—the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum or PETM. Recently, global warming activists have tried to liken human CO2 emissions to the cause of the PETM, 55 million years ago. Is it true, that our actions may trigger a sudden sharp rise in global temperature?
Among the many catastrophes that are to befall our world due to global warming, the imminent demise of coral reefs is one of the worst. According to climate change proponents, as waters warm the ocean's reefs will bleach out and die, leaving the seas aquatic deserts, devoid of life. Now comes news that scientists have discovered live, healthy corals on reefs already as hot as the oceans are supposed to get 100 years from now, according to IPCC predictions. Looks like the corals didn't read the IPCC reports.
The current hot phrase bandied about by talking heads and parotted by news pundits is “tipping point.” We are told that the climate may be near a tipping point, if it has not crossed one already, and that can't be good. But what is a tipping point, where do they come from and how can we identify one when we see it?
At the beginning of chapter one of The Resilient Earth, we opened with a quote from Meg Urry: “Nature is what it is.” It seems that this statement has troubled one of our readers, who has written us criticizing our “total disdain for species.” While Professor Urry's statement was not specifically referring to the inevitable extinction of all species, that is a scientific truth that we put forth in the book. It seems that this nugget of scientific knowledge doesn't set well with the green crowd.
A spectacular warehouse fire stopped traffic and drew a crowd of onlookers in Auckland, New Zealand, last Saturday night, but the interesting thing is that many people were convinced the fire was caused by a meteorite. The blaze broke out in a warehouse on the intersection of Ponsonby Road and McKelvie Street in Auckland sometime around 10:00pm. A number of people reported seeing what may have been a meteorite from various parts of the upper North Island streaking across the sky just after 10:00.
It was announced at the end of October that Walter Alvarez won the Vetlesen Prize—geology's closest equivalent to a Noble Prize. Alvarez, along with his father, Nobel Prize wining physicist Luis Alvarez, proposed the Chicxulub impact, now enshrined in textbooks and the public mind as the “asteroid that killed the dinosaurs.” The prize was not for finding evidence of that event, which marked the end of the Cretaceous period, but for the larger impact of that discovery on geology as a science.
It has always amazed me that many who call themselves ecologists or eco-friendly harbor such animosity for humankind all the while bestowing upon humanity powers of destruction far beyond our actual capabilities. Those who value the well being of animals, fish and even plants above their fellow homo sapiens are legion: Green Peace, fruitarians, Peta, militant vegetarians and the human extinction movement to name a few.