Arctic Methane DOOM

 

Home Forums The Automatic Earth Forum Life Boat Arctic Methane DOOM

This topic contains 1 reply, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  BC Nurse Prof 6 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #4222

    Brunswickian
    Member

    Giant fountains/torches/plumes of methane entering the atmosphere up to 1 km across have been seen on the East Siberian Shelf. This methane eruption data is so consistent and aerially extensive that when combined with methane gas warming potentials, Permian extinction event temperatures and methane lifetime data it paints a frightening picture of the beginning of the now uncontrollable global warming induced destabilization of the subsea Arctic methane hydrates on the shelf and slope which started in late 2010. This process of methane release will accelerate exponentially, release huge quantities of methane into the atmosphere and lead to the demise of all life on earth before the middle of this century.

    Relax – it’s over.

    https://arctic-news.blogspot.co.nz/p/global-extinction-within-one-human.html

    #4321

    Thanks for this, Brunswickian. I’ve read it twice now and can’t fault it, but I’m no climate scientist. Someone who *IS* a climate scientist, however, has also taken a look.

    Guy McPherson on his blog, “Nature Bats Last” has evaluated the article and comes to even more frightening conclusions:

    https://guymcpherson.com/2012/06/were-done/

    which I tend to support. The comments on this post range from agreement to violent disagreement and I looked carefully at them. The disagreement comes mostly from ad hominem remarks, but there are some well reasoned analyses. Unfortunately, all of them are addressed and dismissed.

    I haven’t found any other considerations online about Malcolm Light’s work on this. People who quote peer-reviewed research to dispute Light’s conclusions are (in normal times) right to do so. Again unfortunately, let’s consider the position of the journal “Science” or “Nature” or any high quality climate science publication. Could the editors justify publishing anything that says the planet has, at most, fifty years of DNA-based life left to live? The IPCC has been toned down by sovereign governments for its entire existence. Could journals be any more independent? I doubt it. I never thought I’d say that, but there, I’ve done it now.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.