Eocene Epoch Versus Modern Climate Hysteria
by Lewis Loflin
Climate thumpers use the Eocene Epoch as an example of what modern CO2 emissions will create.
Based on proxy data, high CO2 levels are proof of their feared "runaway" greenhouse effect.
The problem is the earth's geology, positions of the continents, and lack of large mountain chains call this into question. These conditions don't exist in 2022.
Forty-five million years ago (MYA) saw the emergence of most mammal species. The planet was green and full of life, far more than today.
My interest is not dinosaurs but mammals. Many define the "Age of Mammals" as starting 65 MYA. I define that as the Eocene when most members of present mammal types appeared in the fossil records.
Also note my definition of background noise-thousands of small changes in the environment. This is normal and can be cyclical.
Mammals go back as far as the Triassic but as we know them now appeared during the Eocene Epoch.
Geology and past climate change studies seldom have clearly defined causes. The same problem with modern climate studies.
Why did hundreds of new mammal species appear 45-50 million years ago? Those new species are the ancestors of present-day mammals.
This geological period was far warmer than today—no polar ice in Antarctica. Vast forests covered the planet to the poles.
Proxy data suggests carbon dioxide levels peaked at nearly 4,000 parts per million (PPM), ten times today's level. Other studies play this down to as small as 1000 PPM.
The immediate conclusion is that "carbon dioxide caused it." Carbon dioxide was a side effect, perhaps not always the cause as such.
CO2 does cause warming, but in combination with others factors, the relationship isn't linear. It usually rises during warm periods.
Yes, CO2 increases during warming periods because oceans don't absorb nearly the amount and can outgas CO2.
The food chain will explode when sea ice melts. The open cold water absorbs more CO2.
Warming periods can release methane from permafrost, which oxidizes to CO2.
The opposite effect happens in colder periods. Cooler oceans absorb more CO2—ice locks methane into the permafrost.
This change is routine; variation is cyclical. It has gone on for millions of years. It will continue to do so.
The real cause was geology—the position of the continents and the lack of large mountain chains we have today.
Notice Fig. 1. The Himalayas and Alps were very small. The Rockies started forming 55 MYA and the Andes 6-10 MYA. I was shocked when I looked up the Andes.
The last 50 million years have seen massive and continuing mountain building. Mountain erosion removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
The erosion of rocks releases minerals into the oceans. To quote www.whoi.edu,
Scientists have long known that steep mountain ranges can draw carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the atmosphere—as erosion exposes new rock, it also starts a chemical reaction between minerals on hill slopes and CO2 in the air, "weathering" the rock and using CO2 to produce carbonate minerals like calcite.
Also known as calcium carbonate-limestone. CO2 forms a weak acid in rainwater. This erodes rocks. That calcium (and magnesium, barium) carbonate flows into the oceans. It neutralizes acid. That is why one takes an antacid for an upset stomach.
This also occurs in the oceans. No the oceans are not becoming acidic. The pH may vary in specific locations, but the oceans are still basic due to mountain erosion and carbonates from rivers. Measuring surface water pH will be lower than deeper water. CO2 dissolves at the surface, is removed in the deep oceans.
To quote https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/tertiary/eocene.php
In the middle Eocene, the separation of Antarctica and Australia created a deep water passage between those two continents, creating the circum-Antarctic Current. This changed oceanic circulation patterns and global heat transport, resulting in a global cooling event observed at the end of the Eocene.
By the Late Eocene, the new ocean circulation resulted in a significantly lower mean annual temperature, with greater variability and seasonally worldwide. The lower temperatures and increased seasonally drove increased body size of mammals, and caused a shift towards increasingly open savanna-like vegetation, with a corresponding reduction in forests.
Even with massive levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, etc. Antarctica alone with chemical reactions from erosion are what control climate. That makes "runaway" greenhouse effect nearly impossible.
I know the issue of methane and methane hydrate or methane ice. The claims of melting permafrost releases methane, more runaway climate, etc.
They have no clue what level of methane could do this if at all. Was the Eocene Epoch awash in methane?
They claim methane is 18% of greenhouse gases. (NOAA) They don't know this. Methane makes up 0.00017% of the atmosphere by volume. Carbon dioxide is 0.040-0.042% depending on location and temperature.
That methane claim is based on a computer model hypothesis. They have no real world proof. When they make this claim they leave out water vapor. Water vapor in combination with trace gasses is the primary greenhouse gas.
Water vapor varies by temperature. In the Arctic as low as 0% to 4% in the tropics.
Go to a dry desert at night. It might be 110 F. during the day, freezing at night.
Water vapor constantly varies as does the cooling effect of cloud cover, sunlight reflecting from ice, cosmic rays interacting with atmosphere, variations in solar radiation, axial tilt of the earth, etc. make computer modeling impossible.
The cosmic rays control the electrical system of the atmosphere which in turn affects cloud microphysics and radiative transfer of the atmosphere. Both clouds and radiative transfer change the global temperature and thus affect climate change.
How they heck can they computer model cosmic rays that randomly vary? Cosmic rays create clouds, clouds reflect sunlight. Let's throw in random volcanic eruptions where "the sulfur dioxide reacts with water to form microscopic droplets, or aerosols, of sulfuric acid."
It is impossible to accurately computer model future climate or many other facets of science. This is why they reject having to present proof for their claims. They have no proof based on the scientific method. It is opinion at best.
Known as the Eocene Epoch, this geological epoch lasted from about 56 to 33.9 million years ago. (MYA)
Also called the Eocene Climate Optimum, the earth was green, lush, and filled with animals.
To quote one source. "The oldest known fossils of most modern mammal orders appear within a brief period during the early Eocene."
Thus 15 million years after the Yucatan asteroid impact, alleged to have wiped out the dinosaurs.
That, too, is under dispute because many species of dinosaurs were already extinct. The simple, quick solution isn't so simple.
Another issue they avoid discussing is the appearance of whole animal groups in brief geological periods in fossil records.
Same with the Cambrian Explosion (540 MYA), when vast groups of complex marine animal life appeared within as few as 30 million years.
Both the Eocene and Cambrian call into question Darwinism. They clearly disprove it. I will NOT get into a discussion of God and any such thing. That is beyond science, science doesn't deal in it.
The Eocene Epoch also calls into question of "runaway" greenhouse effect on modern climate.
It is impossible for it to happen in my view. That doesn't mean we shouldn't reduce the use of fossil fuels with nuclear the clear alternative.
Earth science and geology have high error rates relative to small measured changes, particularly with proxy data.
Ice Cores are a good example. Precipitation falls as snow, then compacted as ice over time.
Some scientists assume the dissolved gases in the ice reflect the atmosphere's composition when the snow falls.
There is a significant error of unknown size. What was the exact temperature when the snow fell?
How about air pressure? How long did the ice process take? Even the solubility of gasses in water varies by temperature.
The scientists measure gasses in parts per million and find only background noise.
Oh, let's run it through a computer model! That model reflects their assumptions, not the actual events centuries ago.
The correct answer would be that they don't know. That doesn't make great headlines or support the narrative.
They must quantify the error and present all data. They must release the code for the computer model.
Climate models, medical studies, etc., researchers fight like crazy to suppress all of this.
When used as the basis of public policy, the public has an absolute right to know.
- Posted 9/16/2022
- Why Do EPA Scientists Oppose Public Disclosure?
- Why Public Disclosure is a Right
- 84% of Americans Fear the Government for Good Reason
- Mechanism Not Spiritualism the Basis of Science
- Eocene Epoch Versus Modern Climate Hysteria
- Example of Applied Reason with Electronics
- What is Actualism in Earth Science? Australia Drought
- Crackpot Biochemist Predicts End of World
- Crackpot Entomologist Predicts Mass Starvation
- Crackpot Press Falsely Blames CO2 for Great Lakes Water Level Changes
- Who are the Smartest Countries? Nobel Prizes Tell the Story
- Green Technology Highly Polluting, Environmentally Destructive
- Get Back to Earth Science
- How Modern Liberals are Traitors to Liberalism, Are Racists
- Hate Crime-Industrial Complex Debunked
The following are how history was altered by climate.
- Fall of the Late Roman Empire
- End of the Vikings in Greenland
- Lost Colony of Roanoke Island
- Whale Fossils Show Ice Free Arctic
The following links are how I built my own Geiger counter plus more earth science. My home state of Virginia has some of the largest uranium reserves in the United States.
- Geiger Counters and Radioactivity
- Getting Real About Radiation Myths and Hazards
- Uranium Hype-Facts and Virginia Uranium
- Climate Change and Volcanoes
- Article List
- Liberals Wage Racial Warfare
- Intelligence Predicts Economic Social Outcome
- Why Many People Shouldn't Get a 4-Year Degree
- How Progressives Ruin Education
- Michigan Education Ruined by Diversity
- Origins of Socialist Racism
- Critical Race Theory is Irrational
- Western-American Culture is Superior - Get Over It
- Scientific Advances Built on Western Culture
- Baltimore Schools Another Diversity Failure
- Black Boys Can't Read in California
- Off Site:
- Web Master
- Tri-Cities VA-TN
- General Science
- Hobby Electronics
- US Constitution
- Christianity 101
- Religious Themes
Web site Copyright Lewis Loflin, All rights reserved.
If using this material on another site, please provide a link back to my site.