5 ms·
> My favourite example: for the first 60M years of trees existing, there were no organisms to digest the wood of dead trees. They just sat there or maybe burned
by thombat 5y ago
> My favourite example: for the first 60M years of trees existing, there were no organisms to digest the wood of dead trees. They just sat there or maybe burned. This is where 95% of the coal comes from.
Intuitively that seems almost unbelievable, given how quickly microbes evolve to exploit potential food sources, including novel types of plastics. And Wikipedia says of it: "However, a 2016 study largely refuted this idea, finding extensive evidence of lignin degradation during the Carboniferous, and that shifts in lignin abundance had no impact on coal formation. They suggested that climatic and tectonic factors were a more plausible explanation."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal#Formation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal#Formation
- jacquesm 5y agoIf you already have a large variety of microbes capable of digesting a lot of different stuff then that gives a good starting point. Back then that may not have been the case.
- rlpb 5y agoThen publish a paper and cite it from the Wikipedia page? I find it astonishing that you seem to be arguing against the current body of documented research into the topic and without citation. Do you not think that the existing literature has already considered your revelation? What does the existing literature have to say about it? Edit: I mean, what I see here is: <parent> Here's the existing body of research on this topic. <jacquesm> I disagree. How does this add to the discussion?
- jacquesm 5y agoI think you misread my comment.
- Talanes 5y agoIt's a single study, which is still only presented as a counterpoint to the "nothing could digest lignin yet" hypothesis in the Wikipedia article that the parent linked. That HARDLY counts as "the existing body of research on this topic." What are YOU adding to the conversation? At least the gp comment was engaging with the intuitive reasoning line of the topic, you're just aggressively nitpicking people over your own misreadings.
- dghughes 5y agoSimilar to Chernobyl now some areas have very little leaf litter or wood decaying. Even 32 years later some areas have not recovered.