Faves for this Web page

• mohit - Oct 03 2006 | dinosaurs, global warming, science

  Very interesting. I certainly am unhappy about global warming. But, this is kinda interesting. While we will lose our coastal cities, maybe global warming doesn't imply doomsday is near? If dinosaurs could survive in the following conditions, what about humans?

  Quoted: At the peak of the dinosaur era, there were no polar ice caps, and sea levels are estimated to have been from 100 to 250 metres (330 to 820 feet) higher than they are today. The planet's temperature was also much more uniform, with only 25 degrees Celsius separating average polar temperatures from those at the equator. On average, atmospheric temperatures were also much warmer; the poles, for example, were 50 °C warmer than today. [38][39]
  ...
  The atmosphere's composition during the dinosaur era was vastly different as well. Carbon dioxide levels were up to 12 times higher than today's levels, and oxygen formed 32 to 35% of the atmosphere, as compared with 21% today.

  • akabagel - Oct 03 2006
    

    I think that even in worst case scenario there is little threat to the human race from global warming. Many people will have to relocate, but it's not going to kill us all. What it will kill however is our biodiversity - there will be a very large number of species that will not make it.

  • X - Oct 03 2006
    

    I think 90% the hubbub about global warming is the media blowing things out of proportion. Climate changes over time; just because its changing doesnt mean that people should stop driving hummers. (though, they should stop driving them because they are damn ugly cars.)

  • X - Oct 03 2006
    

    Also, just as a lot of species will not make it, the climate change will create many new species at the same time. Evolutionary pressures (like environmental change) are what cause species to differentiate in the first place.

    See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

    But then again I could be wrong and we are all going to die in the next 50 years.

  • akabagel - Oct 03 2006
    

    Yes I also think things have been blown out of proportion. Climate does change over time, however this time around it is likely that our species actions have contributed to it. This is not purely a bad thing; however it is important that we try to understand the consequences.

    One of the negative consequences is the loss if biodiversity. Current species represent a wealth of information that is rapidly being lost. As the climate changes new species will emerge (life will persist), however we will never again have access to the information that exists right now. This is why I think it is important that we map the genomes of endangered species as soon as possible.

    I hypothesize that in our recent history the greatest harm to biodiversity has come from habitat loss, not climate change. Cutting down the rain forest has probably killed a lot more species then a slight change in average global temperature.

  • X - Oct 03 2006
    

    Right you are.

  • kutta - Oct 05 2006
    

    Finally, two people who don't cream their pants when Al Gore comes to town :)

    Agree 100% with you guys...

Votes for this web page

• fossilhuntress