Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Earth Science

Global Anoxia Ruled Out As Main Culprit In the P-T Extinction 158

Posted by timothy
from the take-a-deep-breath-and-relax dept.
Garin writes "The late Permian saw the greatest mass extinction event of all-time. The causes for this extinction are hotly debated, but one key piece of the puzzle has recently been revealed: while the deep-water environments were anoxic, shallower waters showed clear signs of being oxygenated. This rules out global anoxia, and strongly suggests that other factors, such as the Siberian Traps vulcanism, must have played a dominant role. From the article: 'Rather than the direct cause of global extinction, anoxia may be more a contributing factor along with numerous other impacts associated with Siberian Traps eruption and other perturbations to the Earth system.' See the full research article (behind a paywall) here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Global Anoxia Ruled Out As Main Culprit In the P-T Extinction

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    To this day, we're all still very wary of Siberian Traps.
    • speak for yourself.
      We aren't all named Snowden ;-O
  • by NEDHead (1651195) on Sunday July 14, 2013 @11:39PM (#44281525)

    or not...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jaymzter (452402)

      Well WTH, I have to pass half the terms in the summary through Wikipedia to figure out what the heck they're talking about? This is supposed to be a self-selecting site for smart folk, but being smart in one area doesn't make you knowledgeable in another.

      It would probably help if the editors required more than just copypasta from the original article. I don't think I'm being dumb, just acknowledging that I'm ignorant of certain topics.

      • by Garin (26873) on Monday July 15, 2013 @01:29AM (#44281877)

        Well, ok. Though there's not much more that I could have written in that short of a space that can teach the subject.

        I linked the Calgary Herald / Postmedia News article because it's an astonishingly well-written bit of science journalism that lays it all out superbly – kudos to Randy Boswell. He didn't put *exactly* the same emphasis on exactly the same things that Proemse (the principal author) would have, but it's minor. That's the "public" piece, and it's full of tons of great information.

        I also linked the official research article. Unfortunately it's behind a paywall. However, if that's the kind of thing that really turns your crank you probably already have access to it one way or another (in the worst case: via a physical trip to your local university). If you can't, well, correspondence with an author is a time-honored method for obtaining your own copy.

        • by Garin (26873) on Monday July 15, 2013 @01:39AM (#44281903)

          Actually, I'll take that back about the emphasis bit. Boswell pretty well nails it right on the head. Now I'm looking through some of his other articles, and they're excellent.

      • by ultranova (717540)

        I don't think I'm being dumb, just acknowledging that I'm ignorant of certain topics.

        You are doing more than acknowledging said ignorance: you are implying that other people, rather than you, should take some action about this. You are not being dumb, you are being lazy and entitled, which is much worse.

        Also, if the summary truly was incomprehensible to you, your level of general knowledge is rather pathetic. Not that that's surprising with that attitude.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Well WTH, I have to pass half the terms in the summary through Wikipedia to figure out what the heck they're talking about?

        1. There are not many "terms" to even be "passed" "through" Wikipedia. Which is not a goddamned algorithm.
        2. You didn't know what anoxia means? And "while the deep-water environments were anoxic, shallower waters showed clear signs of being oxygenated. This rules out global anoxia" didn't explain the word by context? Because otherwise you must be complaining about either "volcanism" (pathetic) or "perturbations" (even more pathetic) and you need to spend a fuck of a lot more time reading and less time writing com
    • by K. S. Kyosuke (729550) on Monday July 15, 2013 @06:30AM (#44282583)

      or not...

      It turns out that the reports of anoxia in the Permian were actually full of hot air.

  • by antifoidulus (807088) on Monday July 15, 2013 @12:29AM (#44281695) Homepage Journal
    I knew Dr. Spock was the one that killed the dinosaurs, "Captain, these giant bird-lizards are highly illogical and must be disposed of."
  • by dr2chase (653338) on Monday July 15, 2013 @09:53AM (#44283811) Homepage

    Given that we show every sign of running the CO2-enhancement experiment to completion, it is reassuring to know that this low-probability but extremely-high-cost outcome is that much more unlikely. (To my warmist comrades -- given a choice between losing a toe, a leg, or a life, we know which choice we would most want to avoid, but that does not mean the remaining choices are good. Anoxia is among the worst of the outcomes, far worse than the middle of the US becoming uninhabitable or the seas rising 100 feet. And to you denier bozos -- greenhouse science is cut-and-dried stuff, with only the detailed outcomes unclear, but it's also clear that between natural human greed and your foolish efforts, we will almost certainly burn all the fossil fuels we can until something truly alarming occurs. Perhaps we have overestimated the effects of the current CO2 levels -- but that's okay, we're just going to keep on burning it till we see an effect, and a big and unambiguous one.)

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      we're just going to keep on burning it till we see an effect, and a big and unambiguous one.

      No, we're seeing effects already. We're going to keep burning it until the devil is knocking at the door, then the skeptics will be the ones screaming the loudest about how they're new solution is the best.

      • We're going to keep burning it until the devil is knocking at the door

        We're going to burn until we run out of fuel. If we get some disaster before that, we'll just burn more fuel to cope with it (what'll probably involve shooting people and throwing bombs around) untill we have no other option available.

        Global Warming is not the kind of disaster humans can deal with.

    • by Hentes (2461350)

      Anoxia was never a possibility. The majority of fossil reserves is unexploitable. Even if we cut down all forests and burned everything we found, there's way too much oxygen in the air for it to make a difference.

"Our reruns are better than theirs." -- Nick at Nite

Working...