Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumPermian Extinction Data Shows Sea Surface Temps May Have Reached 104F Or Higher - Live Science
EDIT
he researchers analyzed strange eel-like creatures known as conodonts, which are known mainly by their elaborate mouthparts. The fossils came from the Nanpanjiang Basin in south China, helping reconstruct what temperatures were like around the equator at the end-Permian. Different groups of conodonts shed light on what temperatures were at different depths. For instance, one group, Neospathodus, lived down about 230 feet (70 meters) deep, while others, such as Pachycladina, Parachirognathus and Platyvillosus lived near the surface.
"We had to go through several tons of rock to look at tiny conodont fossils," Wignall said. "People always thought the end-Permian extinctions were related to temperature increases, but they never measured the temperature then in much detail before, since it involves a lot of hard work looking at these microfossils."
The fruits of this labor? "We've got a case of extreme global warming, the most extreme ever seen in the last 600 million years," Wignall said. "We think the main reason for the dead zone after the end-Permian is a very hot planet, particularly in equatorial parts of the world." [The Harshest Environments on Earth]
The upper part of the ocean may have reached about 100 degrees F (38 degrees C), and sea-surface temperatures may have exceeded 104 degrees F (40 degrees C). For comparison, today's average annual sea-surface temperatures around the equator are 77 to 86 degrees F (25 to 30 degrees C). "Photosynthesis starts to shut down at about 35 degrees C [95 degrees F], and plants often start dying at temperatures above 40 degrees C [104 degrees F]," Wignall said. "This would explain why there's not much fossil record of plants at the end-Permian for instance, there are no peat swamps forming, no coal-forming whatsoever. This was a huge, devastating extinction."
EDIT
http://www.livescience.com/24091-extreme-global-warming-mass-extinction.html
Ian David
(69,059 posts)hunter
(38,310 posts)Or a clam bake...
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)hatrack
(59,583 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Still, though, better to be safe than sorry in another millenium or so.
That's why we need to act now.
Systematic Chaos
(8,601 posts)We don't need 104 degrees to do it when 90-95 will work just fine.
Oh, and "another millennium" my sweet flowery butt.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)And, I'd like to point out that the Permian extinction, as bad as it was, played out over some centuries, not just a few years.
So, if a somewhat comparable scenario were to start, in another century or two, we likely wouldn't see the full effects for some time, so that's what I meant by a millenium.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Not extinction-level fucked, but certainly dieoff-level fucked. Six degrees is well within the realm of possibility by the end of this century. It's all well and good saying that the Permian extinction unfolded over centuries, but it's not a useful comparison if our temperature gets to the same point in a single century.
The problem is that food crops will start dying off well before that point is reached, as temperatures cross the 40° C threshold in more places, more often, for longer periods of time.
I'm frankly unsure that our current global civilization could withstand a 3° F rise given the drop in food production and the increase in refugees flooding out of hard-hit areas. And if we hit 3°, then 6° is pretty well "baked in the cake", if you'll pardon the expression, due to melting permafrost and the increased release of oceanic methane hydrates.