• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Permian–Triassic extinction event

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
31,009
Reaction score
9,029
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
577px-Extinction_Intensity.svg.png


The world we live in is the most stable it's been in millions of years yet, the doomsters abound.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian–Triassic_extinction_event
 
I will set aside the fact that the claim the "world we live is the most stable it's been in millions of years" is complete and utter bull****.

The doomsters abound, in part, because we are currently in another extinction event. One that is caused, predominantly, by humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
 
I will set aside the fact that the claim the "world we live is the most stable it's been in millions of years" is complete and utter bull****.

The doomsters abound, in part, because we are currently in another extinction event. One that is caused, predominantly, by humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

We've got some control over this one and I rest my case.
 
Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive? - Royal ...

https://www.ras.org.uk/.../...


Did exploding stars help life on Earth to thrive?

Last Updated on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 09:
Published on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 08:30
Research by a Danish physicist suggests that the explosion of massive stars – supernovae – near the Solar System has strongly influenced the development of life. Prof. Henrik Svensmark of the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) sets out his novel work in a paper in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.
According to Henrik Svensmark, the rate of nearby supernovae strongly influenced the diversity of such marine invertebrates. Credit: NASA, ESA and AURA/CaltechWhen the most massive stars exhaust their available fuel and reach the end of their lives, they explode as supernovae, tremendously powerful explosions that are briefly brighter than an entire galaxy of normal stars. The remnants of these dramatic events also release vast numbers of high-energy charged particles known as galactic cosmic rays (GCR). If a supernova is close enough to the Solar System, the enhanced GCR levels can have a direct impact on the atmosphere of the Earth.
Prof. Svensmark looked back through 500 million years of geological and astronomical data and considered the proximity of the Sun to supernovae as it moves around our Galaxy, the Milky Way. In particular, when the Sun is passing through the spiral arms of the Milky Way, it encounters newly forming clusters of stars. These so-called open clusters, which disperse over time, have a range of ages and sizes and will have started with a small proportion of stars massive enough to explode as supernovae. From the data on open clusters, Prof. Svensmark was able to deduce how the rate at which supernovae exploded near the Solar System varied over time.
Comparing this with the geological record, he found that the changing frequency of nearby supernovae seems to have strongly shaped the conditions for life on Earth. . . .
In the new work, the diversity of life over the last 500 million years seems remarkably well explained by tectonics affecting the sea-level together with variations in the supernova rate, and virtually nothing else. To obtain this result on the variety of life, or biodiversity, he followed the changing fortunes of the best-recorded fossils. These are from invertebrate animals in the sea, such as shrimps and octopuses, or the extinct trilobites and ammonites.
They tended to be richest in their variety when continents were drifting apart and sea levels were high and less varied when the land masses gathered 250 million years ago into the supercontinent called Pangaea and the sea-level was lower. But this geophysical effect was not the whole story. When it is removed from the record of biodiversity, what remains corresponds closely to the changing rate of nearby stellar explosions, with the variety of life being greatest when supernovae are plentiful. A likely reason, according to Prof. Svensmark, is that the cold climate associated with high supernova rates brings a greater variety of habitats between polar and equatorial regions, while the associated stresses of life prevent the ecosystems becoming too set in their ways.
He also notices that most geological periods seem to begin and end with either an upturn or a downturn in the supernova rate. The changes in typical species that define a period, in the transition from one to the next, could then be the result of a major change in the astrophysical environment.
Life's prosperity, or global bioproductivity, can be tracked by the amount of carbon dioxide in the air at various times in the past as set out in the geological record. . . .
The data also support the idea of a long-term link between cosmic rays and climate, with these climatic changes underlying the biological effects. And compared with the temperature variations seen on short timescales as a consequence of the Sun's influence on the influx of cosmic rays, the heating and cooling of the Earth due to cosmic rays varying with the prevailing supernova rate have been far larger.
The director of DTU Space, Prof. Eigil Friis-Christensen, comments: "When this enquiry into effects of cosmic rays from supernova remnants began 16 years ago, we never imagined that it would lead us so deep into time, or into so many aspects of the Earth's history. The connection to evolution is a culmination of this work."
 
Last edited:
I don't suppose either you or Jack Hays would like to explain exactly how a chart on this scale is useful.

Asteroids have hit the earth before and caused mass extinction, so why the **** are you so worried about Syrian refugees?

We can still control the refugee flow.

What exactly do refugees have to do with this topic?
 
We can still control the refugee flow.

What exactly do refugees have to do with this topic?

Drawing a comparison to what you're doing.

Extinction events have occurred before, so we shouldn't be concerned with problems we cause now?
 
Drawing a comparison to what you're doing.

Extinction events have occurred before, so we shouldn't be concerned with problems we cause now?

Never said we shouldn't be concerned about anything....just not for the reasons many are doing so now. Money and Control

I don't expect you to understand.
 
I will set aside the fact that the claim the "world we live is the most stable it's been in millions of years" is complete and utter bull****.

The doomsters abound, in part, because we are currently in another extinction event. One that is caused, predominantly, by humans.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

The best survival strategy currently available for creatures and plants alive today is to either be human or to be eaten by humans.

All other things are in danger of disappearing.
 
Never said we shouldn't be concerned about anything....just not for the reasons many are doing so now. Money and Control

I don't expect you to understand.

You should try, for once, to picture things from the perspective of the person you're talking to instead of your perspective. Their arguments will make more sense to you.

Skeptics here believe that humanity's influence on climate is minimal. I think they're wrong, but I'm not baffled by their statements.

So think about this from my view. Not the view right-wing bloggers or talking heads will tell you I have, the one I actually have. Humanity's influence on climate is significant and will cause significant problems for us in the future. No, not extinction of humanity or whatever Gore-ism you're thinking of. Just worsening of a lot of the problems we already have, and in a pattern we don't really have a good method of predicting.

From that perspective, should I really handwave human impact because asteroids have a bigger one? Any major climate shift in the geological record correlates strongly with higher extinction rates, and the reasons for this should be apparent. Should I believe higher extinction rates in the past make human-caused extinction a non-issue?
 
Back
Top Bottom