Print 58 comment(s) - last by PaterPelligrin.. on Sep 2 at 3:41 PM

  (Source: Travelvivi)
But scientists say it did not contribute to global warming today

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) scientist, along with his team, recently used radiocarbon dating to trace carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere from the deep ocean at the end of the last ice age.

Radiocarbon dating employs the use of radioisotope carbon-14 to figure out the age of ancient and prehistoric carbonaceous materials. This process can be used on materials as old as 62,000 years old. 

Tom Guilderson, a scientist at the LLNL's Center for Accelerator Mass Spectrometry and an author of the study, found that an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentrations corresponded with a decreased amount of carbon-14 relative to carbon-12 in the atmosphere. 

"This suggests that there was a release of very 'old' or low 14/12CO2 from the deep ocean to the atmosphere during the end of the last ice age," said Guilderson. He noted that CO2 release may increase the rate at which ice melts after an ice age. 

Ocean circulation regulates radiocarbon in the atmosphere, and in turn, this regulates the sequestration of carbon dioxide in the deep ocean by atmosphere-ocean carbon exchange. Around 110,000 to 10,000 years ago when the last ice age occurred, lower atmospheric carbon dioxide levels coincided with increased atmospheric radiocarbon concentrations, which have been "credited to great storage of CO2 in a poorly ventilated abyssal ocean." The circulation of the ocean was drastically different back then, and Guilderson admits that he and his team do not fully understand the manner in which carbon was stored in deep ocean at that time. 

The team dated two sediment cores from the subtropic South Pacific near New Zealand and the sub-Antarctic to be approximately 13,000 and 19,000 years old. Guilderson was able to determine when the large CO2 release occurred using the carbon-14 in the cores. Also, he was able to determine the ocean pathway by which it escaped. 

"In this case, the absence of a signal is telling us something important," said Guilderson. "Deeper waters substantially depleted in carbon-14 were drawn to the upper layers and this is the main source of the CO2 during deglaciation. Data suggests that the upwelling of this water occurred in the Southern Ocean, near Antarctica. In our cores off New Zealand, which lie in the path of waters which 'turn over' in the Southern Ocean, we don't find anomalously low carbon-14/12 ratios.

"This implies that either water which upwelled in the Southern Ocean, after 16,500 years ago, had a vigorous exchange with the atmosphere, allowing its 14C-clock to be reset, or the circulation was significantly different than what the current paradigm is. If the paradigm is wrong, then during the glacial and deglaciation, the North Pacific is much more important than we give it credit for."

This carbon dioxide release sped up the melting, but when asked about CO2's contribution to

global warming today, Guilderson said this release of CO2 from the last ice age "is not relevant." But he did mention that he has used radiocarbon dating on CO2 in the atmosphere today, and that isotopic signature shows that use of fossil fuels is what is causing global warming. 

The study was published in the August 26 edition of Nature

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/30/2010 10:50:23 AM , Rating: 1
in order to implement socialist global governance and spread wealth to poor countries

You couldn't invent stuff like this. Are you a liberal troll trying to make AGW-deniers look stupid? Because you just confirm every dismissive liberal caricature of dumb-f**k, Fox drones when you come out with garbage like that. There may be intelligent rebuttals to the AGW hypothesis, but claiming it's a global socialist conspiracy to give away money to poor 3rd-world countries isn't it.

RE: Slow news day
By mdogs444 on 8/30/2010 11:03:08 AM , Rating: 2
You couldn't invent stuff like this.

You're right, I couldn't.
There may be intelligent rebuttals to the AGW hypothesis, but claiming it's a global socialist conspiracy to give away money to poor 3rd-world countries isn't it.

You may just want to look up and read the proposed Copenhagen treaties. Because that's EXACTLY what they are designed to do...

1. Create a global governance scheme to oversee every countries energy use and control it

2. Create huge tax schemes on the "rich"/"developed" nations - excluding China and India - and take that tax money and give it away to 3rd world and developing countries to the tune of $100B/yr

3. Redistribution of wealth (taxing rich, subsidizing poor) by force is just that, Socialist.

So where have I gone wrong?

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/30/2010 11:21:29 AM , Rating: 2
So where have I gone wrong?

You go wrong when you claim that the reason for the very existence of the AGW hypothesis is to carry out this secret socialist agenda.

Look, it's possible to have an intelligent discussion about global warming, but to dismiss it all from the get-go because you think it's nothing but a socialist conspiracy to destroy America, that opens you up to no end of ridicule.

It's even less convincing than the claim that almost every climate scientist in the world is in league to dupe the public.

Once you go conspiracy, the only people who are going to take you seriously are other conspiracy nutters - everybody is just going to shake their heads and look for saner company.

RE: Slow news day
By mdogs444 on 8/30/2010 11:27:02 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry Pater -

But when the "solution" to every problem that the left encounters starts with the word "Tax" or "Control" - then I have no interest in believing whatever they claim the problem to be.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/30/2010 2:26:37 PM , Rating: 2
when the "solution" to every problem that the left encounters starts with the word "Tax" or "Control" - then I have no interest in believing whatever they claim the problem to be.

Just assuming for a moment that the global warming people are correct, how would no-tax (utilize no financial resources) and no-control (do nothing) bring about a solution?

RE: Slow news day
By mdogs444 on 8/30/2010 3:01:30 PM , Rating: 2
Ok...lets ASSUME that its real. And that the people pushing the agenda truly believed in it, right?

If so, then Al Gore himself would be conserving energy, not flying all over the earth using 20x as much energy as an average family of 4 and telling everyone else to conserve. He wouldn't be buying me expensive coast line property while telling everyone else the coasts are going to disappear. Pelosi would not be flying home on a 747 every weekend with 3-4 people. And the liberal politicians wouldn't be flying entire groups of staffers to Copenhagen for the meetings when they don't even have a say in whats going on. Hell, even Mayor Michael Bloomberg who is making Taxi companies buy hybrids, banning certain types of bags, and taxing everything in sight for the sake of a "cleaner planet" got busted because he rides around in a full sized 15MPG Tahoe fleet of several vehicles, which idle for hours while he sits in meetings and blowing smoke up peoples asses for publicity.

Its a tax and control scheme - being pushed by those who are in control, to gain even more control, and get more money to spend on what they see is the perfect world for everyone else to have it live by.

Now, if it was TRULY an emergency based on facts, then people would be inclined to do things on their own. If oil was REALLY running out, the price would be double or triple what it really is based on a limited amount of supply and ever increasing demand, and alternatives would be cheaper or competitively priced without any subsidies based on competition and supply/demand. If the pollution was REALLY that bad, then people in these communities would be revolting themselves...we wouldn't need mobs from the SEIU to be protesting in our neighborhoods while none of them even live there.

The problem is - that people aren't buying the doomsday hysteria after the scientists are caught lying and pushing knowingly false extremist positions on purpose, the politicians are caught in corrupt profiteering schemes, and that the unions stand to benefit from government contracts for the "green" agenda.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/30/2010 4:22:34 PM , Rating: 3
So Al's a self-aggrandizing hypocrite. Could be he's just taking advantage of the AGW thing to advance his own agenda, that doesn't discredit the science behind global warming. If you want, ditto for Nancy Pelosi.

Its a tax and control scheme - being pushed by those who are in control

It's the rich who are in control, and by and large these people aren't into destroying capitalism and giving away money to Africans just to advance socialist agendas - and please note that I am not referring to humanitarian's who disperse their own money like Gates and Buffett.

Now, if it was TRULY an emergency based on facts, then people would be inclined to do things on their own.

The devil of AGW - if it is correct - is that the damage is to come. People are simply not capable of altering their behavior because of some future, hypothetical threat. Even if AGW were to become incontrovertible, and the damage visible, I fully expect that the vast majority of people will stubbornly resist making any changes whatsoever in their daily lives.

I have no idea whether or not the oil supply is diminishing - there seems to be some controversy on that point. Certainly it's true that we have virtually inexhaustible supplies of cheap coal. But price really isn't the issue here. The question is should we be relying on these carbon-intensive, and polluting resources for our energy needs. Even if AGW is wrong, there are plently of good reasons to move to cleaner energy.

If it is agreed that we should be encouraging alternative energy sources, it's hard to see how that could happen without some kind of price-control coercion.

And about pollution: the reason pollution in our cities is a lot better than it was 20-30 years ago is because the government has coerced industry to clean up it's act - something that never would have happened had corporations been allowed to always chose what was best for their bottom line. Think of how Detroit fought against catalytic converters, coal-fired power plants against laws requiring them to scrub sulfur dioxide from coal exhaust. Are you old enough to remember when the Love River caught fire? The idea that industry will always act in the public good is naive. I've read several articles lately on deteriorating water quality in the US and how industry is fighting tooth and nail to escape EPA control. Governments do have a legitimate right to set social policy.

The problem is - that people aren't buying the doomsday hysteria after the scientists are caught lying and pushing knowingly false extremist positions on purpose, the politicians are caught in corrupt profiteering schemes, and that the unions stand to benefit from government contracts for the "green" agenda.

Yah, that is a problem, and I think it'll take a huge AGW-related catastrophe before people even begin to take global warming seriously. So no catastrophe, nothing for the AGW-deniers to worry about.

However, most of the money pouring into the AGW debate is coming from vested interests intent on protecting their profits. Yesterday, I read an interesting article about the oil-wealth Koch brothers (3rd richest individuals in the States). Not only are they the biggest contributors to the Tea Party movement, they've devoted millions to fighting AGW. Ditto with all the oil and coal companies. The truth is there is serious money on both sides of the issue.

RE: Slow news day
By Ammohunt on 8/30/2010 2:52:14 PM , Rating: 2
Actually he is spot on about AGW being a Socialist movement becasue the only solution they have proposed to stop AGW is to ban Capitalism outright in Rich Western countries not the massive polluting developing countries just now going through industrialization. This implies class distinction i.e. Rich developed countires can afford to pollute less so that poor developing countires can pollute more; classic socialist constructs. Couple that with the fact that there is no other way to sell Socialism to thinking individuals without creating some type of crysis that affects everyone. Historically (Silent Spring then Acid Rain etc..)this is what it always has been about, a means to destroy the EVIL corporations! Europeans have always been the most gullable and swallow the propaganda they see on their state run media outlets like so many cheap sleeping pills.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/30/2010 3:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
Just curious. Who exactly are these socialist conspirators who thought up the AGW hoax in order to "ban capitalism outright in rich western countries"? Are these the same Commies who are putting fluoride into our drinking water to pollute our precious bodily fluids.

RE: Slow news day
By mdogs444 on 8/30/2010 3:32:14 PM , Rating: 2
You really need to read up on the subject if you have this many questions. I'll give you a hint - it was started by the United Nations in 1988 with the nudge from a European politician who publicly stated that we needed a way to make the UN the new global government of all countries.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 8/31/2010 1:12:06 AM , Rating: 2
And this is what passes for intelligent dialogue in the United States: two camps convinced that the other side is stupid and evil.

The left thinks conservatives are all small-town, know-nothing racists, who barely made it out of high school, have never been more than 20 miles from where they were born, and haven't a thought in their heads that wasn't put there by Fox News. For a conservative, if it wasn't invented in America and isn't written in English, it can't be trusted. Liberals see simple-minded, mean-spirited dupes who have been completely hoodwinked by the rich into supporting policies that benefit only the rich. It sees Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin as just another iteration of Jim Bakker and Tammy Faye. It sees a crowd of mindless and scared sheep just one rabble rouser away from picking up their torches and marching off to burn the heathens and the commies to the ground. Most of all, it sees people too dumb to know what's good for them. Liberals think that if a conservative would just read the right books and watch The Daily Show he'd come round to the liberal point of view.

The right thinks liberals are all closet-commies who want to destroy capitalism and give away all our wealth to the undeserving poor. It sees people who hate god and hate America. It sees people who want government to control everything. Conservatives think liberals don't want to have to work for a living, that they want to sit around all day in coffee shops sipping espresso, reading the New York Times, and telling each other how much better life would be if they only lived in Paris. They see a vast conspiracy of European socialists - Jews, yes we know they're all Jews, or even worse French! - who created the World Bank and the UN to subvert freedom-loving, god-fearing Americans who just want to be left alone and make their way in this world by the honest sweat of their brows. It thinks all problems are created by government, that if the environmentalists and tax-and-spenders would just stop harassing people, all of life's problems would go away. It thinks America is being dragged down the wrong path by liberal do-gooders.

Most people really do look at the world as a Dr Strangelove battle between good and evil. How is this any different than a place like Pakistan where everything that goes wrong in life is automatically assumed to be the result of a CIA conspiracy? Life isn't a battle between good and evil, it's a struggle between competing views of the good.

RE: Slow news day
By Ammohunt on 9/1/2010 2:44:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hardly, its about those that are hyper informed and those that are not. Most people judge others by their actions and can easily distill motivations from an established pattern of said actions. Its much easier to figure out what Leftists are about since after they are confortable enough to feel they will come out on top openely discuss their motivations and brag about it every chance they get. Its not rocket science its simple observation coupled with a basic yet accute understanding of human nature.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 9/2/2010 12:22:08 PM , Rating: 2
Let me see if I follow you here.

You're saying that conservatives like yourself, who claim that AGW was thought up by the left "to ban Capitalism outright in Rich Western countries", are "hyper-informed", while your liberal opponents don't share your grasp of the issues.

Then in the 2nd sentence you state that because liberals are confident of the correctness of their position, and certain that they'll prevail in the end, they openly admit what they're after, and therefore it's easy to figure out what they want - which is, as you previously stated, the "outright banning of capitalism in the rich West".

Have I got that right?

Odd, though, that I've never heard an AGW proponent admit to wanting to ban capitalism in the West, let alone brag about it, but let's not quibble about details.

All in all, a very convincing argument you have there. I feel I should apologize. I clearly did you a disservice when I lumped you in with all those other conservatives who distort and misrepresent your opponents' positions.

It's not often that one encounters a guy with such an "acute understanding of human nature". Hats off to you bro.

RE: Slow news day
By Ammohunt on 9/2/2010 2:16:44 PM , Rating: 2
Reading comprehension not one of your strong points I see. Sorry i don’t have the patience to day to dumb it all down for you rest assured it will all come clear to you eventually.

RE: Slow news day
By PaterPelligrino on 9/2/2010 3:41:17 PM , Rating: 2
rest assured it will all come clear to you eventually.

I wouldn't count on it Ammohunt; after all, not everyone possesses your "hyper-informed" knowledge of the issues, and "acute understanding of human nature".

"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki