6 ms·

This research is obviously bullocks, there were several periods in Earth's history that were a lot warmer than in the current age by a lot more than 6 degrees a

by vivekd 10y ago

This research is obviously bullocks, there were several periods in Earth's history that were a lot warmer than in the current age by a lot more than 6 degrees and oxygen production didn't stop. For example, temperatures during the Paleocene–Eocene thermal mamimum were 8 degrees warmer than today and by all apperences there was enough oxygen to support the diverse fauna that existed then. Similarly the Jurassic era had 5 times the CO2 of today's earth and much higher temperatures but also enough oxygen to support a variety of dinosaurs and other fauna 1. 1. http://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-dioxide.html http://www.livescience.com/44330-jurassic-dinosaur-carbon-di...

knieveltech 10y ago
You're assuming a lot here. The entire planetary biome was vastly different during the periods you mention. Your assertion hinges on the assumption that either phytoplankton were the primary source of atmospheric oxygen during these periods, or that modern phytoplankton can in fact withstand these changes in temperature and continue to make oxygen. Neither assumption seems to be well founded.
- vivekd 10y ago
  Of course Phytoplankton was always the biggest contributor to oxygen. Jurrasic was the age when flowering plants were first coming into being, to suggest that these plants could compete with plankton in oxygen production in any meaningful way seems absurd. And more importantly what plankton we are taking about here isn't for me to address, it's something that would have been addressed in the paper were it worth anything. Are we talking about diatoms, cyanobacteria and dinoflagellates? The biggest contributor to oxygen would be cyanobacteria, to think they can survive these billions of years and all these mass extinctions and temperature fluctuations and then stop working because of a 6 degree increase is also nonsensical.
lostmsu 10y ago
I'd like to add, that judging by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_oxygen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_oxygen , the atmosphere has ~2000 years worth of oxygen. So no suffocation even if all production halts right now.

by vivekd 10y ago

knieveltech 10y ago

You're assuming a lot here. The entire planetary biome was vastly different during the periods you mention. Your assertion hinges on the assumption that either phytoplankton were the primary source of atmospheric oxygen during these periods, or that modern phytoplankton can in fact withstand these changes in temperature and continue to make oxygen. Neither assumption seems to be well founded.

vivekd 10y ago
Of course Phytoplankton was always the biggest contributor to oxygen. Jurrasic was the age when flowering plants were first coming into being, to suggest that these plants could compete with plankton in oxygen production in any meaningful way seems absurd. And more importantly what plankton we are taking about here isn't for me to address, it's something that would have been addressed in the paper were it worth anything. Are we talking about diatoms, cyanobacteria and dinoflagellates? The biggest contributor to oxygen would be cyanobacteria, to think they can survive these billions of years and all these mass extinctions and temperature fluctuations and then stop working because of a 6 degree increase is also nonsensical.

lostmsu 10y ago

I'd like to add, that judging by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_oxygen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_history_of_oxygen , the atmosphere has ~2000 years worth of oxygen. So no suffocation even if all production halts right now.