So Hot it's Cold

[faethor]

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014...-ice-may-be-putting-us-in-a-long-deep-freeze/

"A few years back, researchers suggested that strange weather in the temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere might be a consequence of changes taking place in the Arctic. Now, with a few years of additional data, some researchers are arguing that we have detected clear signs that Arctic warming is driving our weird weather."

 

[Robert]

Global Weirding.

 

[cecilia]

http://www.climatehotmap.org/

 

[Glaucus]

So should I move North or South?

 

[faethor]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3318531/january-2014-hottest-recorded/

 

[metalman]

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3318531/january-2014-hottest-recorded/

When do you think the Holocene will end?

 

[faethor]

The Holocene, and other areas, are defined by the activity of the planet at the time. They're convenient terms for discussion. The Holocene is divided into 3 periods and we're living in the Anthropocene - one characterized by humans contributing factors to the planet's environment. When does science know when the Holocene ends? When our planet sees a shift in market in the contributing factors to our environment.

 

[metalman]

The Holocene, and other areas, are defined by the activity of the planet at the time. They're convenient terms for discussion. The Holocene is divided into 3 periods and we're living in the Anthropocene - one characterized by humans contributing factors to the planet's environment. When does science know when the Holocene ends? When our planet sees a shift in market in the contributing factors to our environment.

the Holocene is 11,700 years old

Which boundary layer of rock strata is the indicator of the start of the Anthropocene ?

 

[faethor]

Which boundary layer of rock strata is the indicator of the start of the Anthropocene ?

It is that layer in which the impact of humans on the flora and fauna can be detected. It's 10K-14K year old soil where human factors can be detected. This is both physical (for example: trenches, leveling, birms caused not by weather events but people), and compositional (for example, such as high nitrogen composition from the enrichment from humans using manure on the field). These sorts of items are not in previous soil layers. It appears dinosaurs didn't undertake organized farming or city building to a level that left their 'footprints'.

 

[metalman]

Which boundary layer of rock strata is the indicator of the start of the Anthropocene ?

It's 10K-14K year old soil where human factors can be detected. This is both physical (for example: trenches, leveling, birms caused not by weather events but people), and compositional (for example, such as high nitrogen composition from the enrichment from humans using manure on the field). These sorts of items are not in previous soil layers.

there is no Anthropocene period in geology, that is pseudo science

the Holocene is only 11,700 years old, so your saying the human development of farming was a greater impact geologically then the melting of the Wisconsin glaciers and the draining of Lake Agassiz??

Or are you saying the Holocene should instead be renamed the Anthropocene?

 

[metalman]

Why Is the Cold U.S. Winter Killing Off Stinkbugs?

“In the previous two years, natural mortality averaged about 20-25 percent”. In January 2014, however, Kuhar’s team discovered that the subfreezing temperatures has killed off 95 percent of the population.

 

[metalman]

Using the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's warming projections, Ranson calculated that from 2010 to 2099, climate change will "cause" an additional "22,000 murders, 180,000 cases of rape, 1.2 million aggravated assaults, 2.3 million simple assaults, 260,000 robberies, 1.3 million burglaries, 2.2 million cases of larceny, and 580,000 cases of vehicle theft" in the US.

Correlation = Causation!

2013 hottest year ever = a 2.2% increase in murder and a 3.1% increase in rape!

 

[metalman]

 

[faethor]

there is no Anthropocene period in geology, that is pseudo science

So you don't believe that humans have been able to change the soil records? Nature does indeed move nutrients around in the soil, which are detectable, but you don't think man moving nutrients around is detectable? Nature indeed impacts the soil by erosion (like a river charting a new course moving dirt) or deposition (like the settlement in a lake). But, some man's 'erosion' from a new channel or redirecting a river or man's deposition from a lake (aka resevior) have no impact to soil? Personally, it seems daft to me that man, being one of the largest animals that modify the planet for our own purposes, in no way impacts the soil.

the Holocene is only 11,700 years old, so your saying the human development of farming was a greater impact geologically then the melting of the Wisconsin glaciers and the draining of Lake Agassiz??

This seems to me to be a Strawman argument. What this statement depends on would be me claiming there were no Holocene and only was an Anthropocene. While there are some that might, I haven't fronted this idea. So, I see you fronting a strawman.

Remember the earth itself doesn't care about these names. They are definitional for communication in science. The Holocene marks the period since the last ice-age. The Anthropocene marks the period when we can begin to detect how humans have impacted the planet. These aren't necessarily exclusive ideas that you attempt to frame your argument against yourself as.

 

[metalman]

So you don't believe that humans have been able to change the soil records? Nature does indeed move nutrients around in the soil, which are detectable, but you don't think man moving nutrients around is detectable? Nature indeed impacts the soil by erosion (like a river charting a new course moving dirt) or deposition (like the settlement in a lake). But, some man's 'erosion' from a new channel or redirecting a river or man's deposition from a lake (aka resevior) have no impact to soil? Personally, it seems daft to me that man, being one of the largest animals that modify the planet for our own purposes, in no way impacts the soil.

Your making a strawman argument, being able to scientifically detect the slight surface disturbances created by farming is not the same as being a geological event

Man has done little that nature cannot undo within a few years of erosion and weathering

. What this statement depends on would be me claiming there were no Holocene and only was an Anthropocene. While there are some that might, I haven't fronted this idea.

If the Holocene is 11,700 years old and man has been farming for 9-15k years, when did the Holocene end and the Anthropocene begin??

The Holocene marks the period since the last ice-age. The Anthropocene marks the period when we can begin to detect how humans have impacted the planet. These aren't necessarily exclusive ideas that you attempt to frame your argument against yourself as.

geologic periods do not overlap, its one layer of rock on top of another

there is no rock layer produced by farming

 

[faethor]

Your making a strawman argument, being able to scientifically detect the slight surface disturbances created by farming is not the same as being a geological event

Not quite. A strawman is akin to claiming you said something, when you did not, just so I could argue against that item. I never said you said that Anthropocene, nor did I knock it down. You asked when the Holocene will end. I described a related period within the Holocene in which we're currently living. Simply put you argued that no such point exists.

It's good to note that geologists are arguing themselves over this point. The Anthropocene is and has been gaining wider acceptance. It's a designation when a 6th factor is present in the soil - that of the changes in the soil which humans have made.

Needless to say the answer to my question of when the Holocene ends is when those factors attributed to the Holocene change in such a way that they're detectable to sufficient levels to satisfy the definition of a new period.

Man has done little that nature cannot undo within a few years of erosion and weathering

Not really true. Many of the 14K year old rock and soil are there because nature has not eroded or weathered that area. And if you want to talk about nature's impact how do you think nature will remove all of the 40K foot borehole that man made? Afterall, nature left those layers of rock uneroded and unweathered for millions of years. 'A few years' is wrong. Just because nature could does not mean it does.

there is no rock layer produced by farming

There is a noted delineation in the chemical composition of the rock composition from that area of farming and that rock left unfarmed next to it. And this composition is different than the undifferentiated rock layers below it. So, yes farming does change the rock.

 

[faethor]

What is the Anthropocene? http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...thropocene-and-are-we-in-it-164801414/?no-ist

Metalman, I thought you might like this article because it demonstrates how some geologists disagree with this classification. One thing to note from the article that even with that disagreement the geologist conceded that farms are detectable in the rocks, as well as fall out from the atomic age.

 

[metalman]

What is the Anthropocene? http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...thropocene-and-are-we-in-it-164801414/?no-ist

Metalman, I thought you might like this article because it demonstrates how some geologists disagree with this classification. One thing to note from the article that even with that disagreement the geologist conceded that farms are detectable in the rocks, as well as fall out from the atomic age.

Anthropocene is more about pop culture than hard science.

How about calling it the Politicallycorrectocene?

 

[faethor]

I thought you'd like that short article. It shows both our comments. First, it supports my comments that indeed people are making changes in the soils which wouldn't have happened without people. Second, it supports your point that the definition is not yet a fully accepted one by the scientific community.

To that later point the scientific community takes their time to work out the definitions and accept, or reject, accordingly. A recent example of changes in Astronomy and how a planet is defined. Shoring that up had the impact of 'demoting' Pluto. Likewise Geologists have their societies and how to classify and declare Anthropocene is under way. It appears the goal for establishment will be forthcoming in 2016. http://quaternary.stratigraphy.org/workinggroups/anthropocene/ Indeed we'll see the discussions ramping up on the formalization or rejection of the classification. Depending on how the definition is formalized, come 2016 we might have been out of the Holocene and into the Anthropocene for a few thousand years.

Here's a larger read that's good as well. http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/03/age-of-man/kolbert-text/1


Personally, I find it interesting on how the human pursuit of science evolves itself through the years. I wasn't around to see the Paradigm Shift to Plate Techtonics but I do have some older books which talk about Continental Shift. Certainly adding Anthropocene won't have that sort of impact but it will bring a few of it's own changes.

 

[faethor]

More changes to the soils? Fordite Mines are drying up. Humans made and baked enamel paints. The overspray of the autoindustry created lots of different colored layers of this enamel. This new 'mineral' is being reclaimed for jewelry. As far as the process it really can't exist without some sort of manipulation of the resources by an intelligent creature, on this planet we call that man.