Posted on 12/22/2011 11:59:36 AM PST by decimon
A great explosive burning of coal set fire and made molten by lava bubbling from the Earth's mantle , looking akin to Kuwait's giant oil fires but lasting anywhere from centuries to millennia, could have been the cause of the world's most-devastating mass extinction, new research suggests.
The event, called the Great Dying, occurred 250 million years ago, at the end of the Permian period. "The Great Dying was the biggest of all the mass extinctions," said study researcher Darcy Ogden of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego. "Estimates suggest up to 96 percent of all marine species and 70 percent of all land species were lost."
Researchers still debate the cause of this mass-extinction event, implicating everything from asteroids to volcanic eruptions to a decrease of the oxygen in the atmosphere.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Pittsburgh ping.
Coal killed the Dinos Ping.
Did Jennifer go to journalism school to write sentences this contorted or did it just come naturally to her? Can coal become molten or does it just burn?
A great explosive burning of coal set fire and made molten by lava bubbling from the Earth’s mantle , looking akin to Kuwait’s giant oil fires but lasting anywhere from centuries to millennia, could have been the cause of the world’s most-devastating mass extinction, new research suggests.”
Is it just me seeing this or have reporters generally lost the ability to compose sentences and spell correctly?
As for the theory, who cares? This announcement simply looks like another tenure seeking prof pimping for grants.
Maybe I've just gotten too cynical, but I suspect this is intended as some kind of support for EPA's determination to shut down the coal fired power industry.
I suppose The Not So Great Dying was the second-largest of all the mass extinctions, then.
So coal had to have been formed more than 250 million years ago, like millions of years before the 250 million years ago. Takes awhile to form coal from vegetation.
"Hey Karl, careful with that! You'll start a fire!"
You may be onto something.
|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
Thanks decimon. |
|
|
|
|
Permian-Triassic ImpactAn asteroid impact may have caused the mass extinction that occurred at the boundary between the Permian and Triassic periods 250 million years ago, said Michael Rampino of NYU at the AGU meeting. He asserted that he has found evidence---in the form of gravity anomalies and certain rock deposits---for such an impact in the South Atlantic, in an area where, many scientists believe, South America, Africa, and other land masses fit together in the primordial supercontinent called Gondwanaland. Rampino claims that the gradual breakup of Gondwanaland into present-day continents may have been initiated by the catastrophic impact. Another scientist at the meeting, Verne Oberbeck of NASA/Ames also believes an impact may have sundered Gondwanaland and that, in general, impacts should be given more credit for shaping earlier Earth geology. In particular, he believes that the small rock sediments called tillites, usually thought to result from the grinding and plowing action of glaciers, may in part be debris from impacts. Consequently, Oberbeck suggested, there might have been fewer glacial periods than is usually believed. Rampino went so far as to say that all tillites are of impact origin. Unlike the theory that describes the KT (Cretaceous-Tertiary) catastrophe 65 million years ago (when the dinosaurs became extinct) in terms of an asteroid impact, the notion that the PT catastrophe was caused by an impact or that tillites result from impacts is anything but a majority opinion; indeed, many scientists at the meeting were skeptical about Rampino's and Oberbeck's ideas. Thomas Crowley of the Applied Research Corp., a paleo-climatologist, said that his reaction to the proposed impact origin of tillites was one of "considerable disbelief, bordering on incredulity." For one thing, he said, tillite deposits are too extensive over time and physical extent to have been caused by an impact.
by Phillip F. Schewe and Ben Stein
Physics News Update
Number 106 (Story #2), December 14, 1992
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2358035/posts
Tiny organisms that covered the planet more than 250 million years ago appear to be a species of ancient fungus that thrived in dead wood, according to new research published October 1 in the journal Geology. The researchers behind the study, from Imperial College London and other universities in the UK, USA and The Netherlands, believe that the organisms were able to thrive during this period because the world’s forests had been wiped out. This would explain how the organisms, which are known as Reduviasporonites, were able to proliferate across the planet... By analysing the carbon and nitrogen content of the fossilised remains of the microscopic organisms, the scientists identified them as a type of wood-rotting fungus that would have lived inside dead trees... Geological records show that the Earth experienced a global catastrophe during this period... Up to 96 per cent of all marine species and 70 per cent of land species became extinct... The team reached their conclusions by analysing the carbon and nitrogen content of Reduviasporonites using a High Sensitivity Mass Spectrometer and comparing the results with those from modern fungi. They discovered that Reduviasporonites and modern fungi show similar chemical characteristics. In the future, the team plan to carry out further comparisons between Reduviasporonites and potential counterparts among modern fungi, which they hope will provide further clues about how Reduviasporonites lived.
Asteroid ‘destroyed life 250m years ago’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2084610/posts
Toxic Gases Caused World’s Worst Extinction
Discovery News | 2/4/09 | Michael Reilly
Posted on 02/04/2009 1:26:44 PM PST by NormsRevenge
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2178427/posts
Toxins may have doomed ancient forests
Discovery | July 14, 2009 | Michael Reilly
Posted on 07/15/2009 7:23:55 AM PDT by decimon
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2293105/posts
My question is simple, Where did the plant matter for the coal come from? As I understand it, it takes massive amounts of plant matter being laid down over millenia and then being covered by soil and rock and then compressed to make coal.
On the other hand it could have been massive peat bog fires which can be VERY smoky and last for years.
In any case, it’s a theory and to prove it one way or another is going to take a lot of research which in turn needs massive grants to fund the researchers. Which I suspect is the real reason for the theory in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
