It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mastodon Bones Reveal Ancient Warmer Eearth

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 11:09 PM
link   
This is an interesting find, ATS. It seems that researchers have found that 120,000 years ago the Earth was as warm as it is today; many animals flourished at this time including the Mastodon. Apparently, scientists are using a technique to read Mastodon tusk rings like tree rings to gather information concerning their fate.



Evidence left behind by mastodons, mammoths, giant sloths and huge bison — along with insects, plants, pollen and other animals — offers a glimpse at how ancient animal adapted to climate change.

Among their findings: The warmer weather allowed forests to reach about 2,500 feet farther up the mountainside than today's tree line, which is about 11,500 feet above sea level at the Snowmass site. Forests also may have been denser, and smaller trees and grasslands might have been more widespread amid drier conditions.

A team of 47 scientists has been studying material unearthed four years ago near Snowmass, a town just outside Aspen, when a bulldozer was enlarging a reservoir. The researchers published their first big batch of data in the journal Quaternary Research in November.


The animals back then didn't burn fossil fuels but the Earth still warmed. That being said, I've heard in other climate debate threads that a warming Earth is a natural occurrence and that all of the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together. Now, while that may be the case, I do still believe that man is accelerating this warming. I wonder what the Mastodon bones will tell us?

news.yahoo.com...




posted on Nov, 27 2014 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

The animals back then didn't burn fossil fuels but the Earth still warmed.
So that means that adding "fossil" CO2 to the atmosphere doesn't do anything?



I've heard in other climate debate threads that a warming Earth is a natural occurrence and that all of the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together.
Do you just believe everything you hear or do you examine the claims presented?


edit on 11/27/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 04:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
The answer to your first question appears to be in the OP.

Now, while that may be the case, I do still believe that man is accelerating this warming.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 04:45 AM
link   
Interesting thread!

I support the fact that there has been pole shifts in cyclical increments of approx 3600 years.Velikovsky highlighted His finds in His books and they confirm this.

The mastadon and mammoth went extinct in the previous pole shifts when Siberia went from near tropics to where it resides today...this would have occurred in a matter of minutes/hours and this is why they have been found perfectly preserved,with TROPICAL plants in their digestive system and mouths!

Of coarse this is not accepted by mainstream, as it is built on a pack of lies (mostly) this is why Velikovsky was shunned i.e. it would expose the lie/s and indeed that we are in the early stages of pole shift as we speak..this will occur when planet x rounds the Sun on it's way out!!

I also doubt the chronology of how strata layers are determined! because a pole shift is not taken into account.What we would find is that many layers were deposited in an abrupt period (not over many years) and indeed mountains were made in a day.

This is upon us now,here is a site that will see you good: poleshift.ning.com...






posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 04:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

The animals back then didn't burn fossil fuels but the Earth still warmed.
So that means that adding "fossil" CO2 to the atmosphere doesn't do anything?



I've heard in other climate debate threads that a warming Earth is a natural occurrence and that all of the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together.
Do you just believe everything you hear or do you examine the claims presented?



Volcanoes can spew more output in a day than humans would in a year..the Co2 emission theories are a farce, as any decent researcher should know! It is not a good thing that we are releasing Co2 in large amounts and destroying this planet..but..it is having no effect on the scale it is claimed.

The dramatic heating is occurring due to the wobble that the planet has taken on (due to magnetic repulsion) which in turn is effecting our core,which in turn is effecting the volcanoes and also the melting permafrost is releasing methane (as well as breaches in the tectonic plates releasing methane) as you say all planets are heating in the SS,as they are all effected by planet x's influence.






posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 05:01 AM
link   
www.skepticalscience.com...


When CO2 levels were higher in the past, solar levels were also lower. The combined effect of sun and CO2 matches well with climate.When CO2 levels were higher in the past, solar levels were also lower. The combined effect of sun and CO2 matches well with climate.





The last time CO2 was similar to current levels was around 3 million years ago, during the Pliocene. Back then, CO2 levels remained at around 365 to 410 ppm for thousands of years. Arctic temperatures were 11 to 16°C warmer (Csank 2011). Global temperatures over this period is estimated to be 3 to 4°C warmer than pre-industrial temperatures. Sea levels were around 25 metres higher than current sea level



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: EndOfDays77

Volcanoes can spew more output in a day than humans would in a year..the Co2 emission theories are a farce, as any decent researcher should know!
As a decent researcher, can you provide your source(s) for this information? How much CO2 can a volcano spew? How much CO2 is produced by burning fossil fuels on an annual basis?


The dramatic heating is occurring due to the wobble that the planet has taken on
Wobble? Wouldn't a wobble be discernible? Wouldn't astronomers notice that the stars were in the wrong places? Wouldn't the Sun be rising at the wrong place and time?


as you say all planets are heating in the SS,as they are all effected by planet x's influence.
No, I did not say all planets in the Solar System are heating. Can you explain how a very small and distant hypothetical planet would cause the Earth to warm?

edit on 11/28/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

The animals back then didn't burn fossil fuels but the Earth still warmed.
So that means that adding "fossil" CO2 to the atmosphere doesn't do anything?



I've heard in other climate debate threads that a warming Earth is a natural occurrence and that all of the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together.
Do you just believe everything you hear or do you examine the claims presented?



No, Phage. As noted by Butcher Guy I already said in the OP that while I do believe that "warming" does occur naturally, I also believe that MAN is speeding up this process with all of the fossil fuel burning, chemical run-off, and destruction of rainforests.

I was merely trying to remain non-biased by pointing out different viewpoints. Do I believe the environmental snowball has started to roll downhill?.....Yes
edit on 28-11-2014 by lostbook because: word add



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

I know you said that.
Do you believe that all of the planets of the inner Solar System are warming?



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook
This is an interesting find, ATS. It seems that researchers have found that 120,000 years ago the Earth was as warm as it is today


Yes, overall the the Eemian Interglacial - ~120kya - saw temperatures at least as warm as today, although with milder N Hemisphere winters resulting in the Greenland ice sheet being almost non-existent and sea levels consequently higher.

However this has no bearing on CO2 since CO2 levels are not the only thing affecting global temperature (despite what some AGW deniers very erroneously seem to think scientists think!). Currently the Earth is (or should be) cooling slightly as axial tilt declines, for example (but not enough to take us out of what appears to be quite a long lasting Interglacial - something we didnt know in the 1970s btw).

The complexity of the Milankovitch cycles mean every Interglacial is different.
edit on 28-11-2014 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

I know you said that.
Do you believe that all of the planets of the inner Solar System are warming?


Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact. I said that I heard in other climate debate threads the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together.

All I know is what I see here on Earth, and it seems that things are definitely changing. It seems like every other year that we break the record for the warmest year on record. More heat=more evaporation and more water in the atmosphere=stronger storms and a food shortage. As a scientist what is your opinion?



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact.
That is why I asked.


I'm not a scientist (though I have had a lifetime interest in science). My opinion is that global temperatures are rising rapidly and than human influences (mainly the release of fossil carbon) are the primary cause.
edit on 11/28/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact.
That is why I asked.


I'm not a scientist (though I have had a lifetime interest in science). My opinion is that global temperatures are rising rapidly and than human influences (mainly the release of fossil carbon) are the primary cause.


Hm.m.m.m....Well, you should be scientist. All of your scientific viewpoints have been on point. I do agree with your summation(s).



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact.
That is why I asked.


I don't know what the answer is......We could stop our dependence on fossil fuels-cold turkey as what should be done but that would send the world into an economic downturn and everything would spiral into chaos. The other option leads us to eventual destruction by the environment. Either way-we're screwed........
edit on 28-11-2014 by lostbook because: word add



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact.
That is why I asked.

Hm.m.m.m....Well, you should be scientist. All of your scientific viewpoints have been on point. I do agree with your summation(s).


I don't know what the answer is......We could stop our dependence on fossil fuels-cold turkey as what should be done but that would send the world into an economic downturn and everything would spiral into chaos. The other option leads us to eventual destruction by the environment. Either way-we're screwed........



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

I am reading your news source link right now,

I believe that the 'findings' of a warmer Earth is a faulty extrapolation...
the scientific projections apply only to that particular area of land near Snowmass Colorado...
not the whole Planet

there could have been unique elements at work there in Colorado some 120mya...
it was a generally closed eco-system

nowhere else have there been Mastadon Tusks been analysed like tree rings to determine an extreme, hyper growth rate in the bones or tusks from the 'norm'.... the widespread populations are too small to make that research result work.

sure, the valley there might have had ideal conditions where the 'tree line' might have been 1,500 feet higher than at present ( the report omits even the idea that continental and regional uplift exists as a force in mountain building)---
we do not know the unique conditions that made that possible--- perhaps there was a permanent temperature inversion above Snowmass Colorado which acted like a lid on a pot or a glass lens over a bowl & caused all lifeforms in that ecosphere to be more robust than anywhere else on the planet...

I don't buy into the theory that the whole planet was warmer than even our localized hotspots of today

the whole article reeks more of fanciful speculation than od scientific inquiry... a
'Valley that time forgot" theme , reads better than dry statistics


edit on th30141720947028172014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

edit on th30141720968228212014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: lostbook

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: lostbook

I know you said that.
Do you believe that all of the planets of the inner Solar System are warming?


Honestly, I don't know if that is correct or not. I never stated that as a fact. I said that I heard in other climate debate threads the planets of the inner Solar system are warming together.

All I know is what I see here on Earth, and it seems that things are definitely changing. It seems like every other year that we break the record for the warmest year on record. More heat=more evaporation and more water in the atmosphere=stronger storms and a food shortage. As a scientist what is your opinion?

Be very careful of regurgitating opinion here on ATS. Some people take it as fact if more than 2 say the same thing especially when it matches their existing belief.

The solar system warming theory only holds if you cherry pick data. I'm sorry but I can't provide the details i'm not anal enough to record everything I read !. If I read and cross reference original sourced material to answer the question in my head that's good enough for me.

Things are changing climatically BUT the anti-gw crew will state that is normal. Which on the face of it could be true.....until we dig into the data. Unfortunately climate science is not as simple as a+b= c which , dare I say, is as complex as some people understand.

The climate is a very complex mix of multiple triggers and reactions some of which work against each other....thank God! since this allows considerable changes to occur and re-balance without triggering a step change in climate. Again this re-balancing effect is beyond the understanding of a+b=c!

However, out of all this complexity some very very basic facts emerge and I'm sorry to say we are screwed. Although here in Scotland we will fare quite well. God help the large land masses (US,Russia, Asia, Australia) and thank God I live in a high rocky northern country never more than 50miles from the sea.



posted on Nov, 28 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
The planet was at least 2 degrees warmer during The Eemian period[115-130,000 years ago]. And things seem fine now, so you know, sure it will all work out lol. Unless of course Co2 will prevent the planet from cooling down again, then were probably boned.

Should also be noted sea levels were several meters higher then than they are now, which kinda sucks as it suggests that will happen again without fail.
edit on 28-11-2014 by Dabrazzo because: (no reason given)


Pretty cool though, this corroborates what scientists drilling ice cores in Greenland have known for a while.
edit on 28-11-2014 by Dabrazzo because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2014 @ 12:30 AM
link   
My problem is i study palaeoclimatology out where i live and the Eemian period brings out a good point.

I see a lot of AGW BS that claims that warming would be a disaster.

But if you study the Eemian period you find that global warming is not that bad.

The Eemian was a period of the Green Sahara



posted on Nov, 29 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ANNED
Were there a lot of coastal cities at the time? How many humans were there?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join