Well, if you give credance to the Snowball Earth hypothesis

There's the rub for me, it's a hypothesis.

What really gets my goat is when some people (I am not including you in this group) treat theories as fact and post them as such.

What event nearly wiped out all life on this planet around 70,000 years ago?

In my old geology days a few theories abounded and major papers were written on them ..... and they were all wrong.

Well, if you give credance to the Snowball Earth hypothesis

There's the rub for me, it's a hypothesis.

What really gets my goat is when some people (I am not including you in this group) treat theories as fact and post them as such.

What event nearly wiped out all life on this planet around 70,000 years ago?

In my old geology days a few theories abounded and major papers were written on them ..... and they were all wrong.

Sure I know it is a hypothesis.  That is why I wrote "if you give credance to" it.  There is some pretty good evidence that it could be true, but the evidence isn't overwhelming, and there are many noted scientists who do not believe it.

70,000 years ago?  I have never heard of that mass extiction, and that is pretty recent to have allowed for a repopulation of the world by now.  Or do you mean something almost happened, such a as a comet fly-by, which would have killed off all the life should it have been a hit rather than a near miss?

70,000 years ago?  I have never heard of that mass extiction, and that is pretty recent to have allowed for a repopulation of the world by now.  Or do you mean something almost happened

No, something happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Toba

(I know it's wiki, but it pretty much concurs with everything else I have read)

70,000 years ago?  I have never heard of that mass extiction, and that is pretty recent to have allowed for a repopulation of the world by now.  Or do you mean something almost happened

No, something happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Toba

(I know it's wiki, but it pretty much concurs with everything else I have read)

  OK, Lake Toba.  Well itis one thing to say there was a years-long climate change as the sky was darkened with ash, and that many people (homo sapiens or neanderthal) died, but that is not the same as life was nearly wiped out.  The fossil record is too complete to have had that happen.  

Unless, of course, you are saying that it was a close thing, and that if it was worse, it could have wiped out life.  

  OK, Lake Toba.

So you have heard of it before then? ......... highly unlikely as when anyone mentions 70,000 years ago, anyone who has done any real research in the history of this planet will bring it instantly to mind.

Well itis one thing to say there was a years-long climate change as the sky was darkened with ash

That one event pumped more harmful substances into the atmosphere than man could ever hope to achieve, and we have had much longer to try and beat that record.

and that many people (homo sapiens or neanderthal) died, but that is not the same as life was nearly wiped out. The fossil record is too complete to have had that happen.

Can you imagine how many beings were walking upright at that time, the most conservative estimates reduce the number from millions to thousands..... that's more than a teensy weensy drop on anyones spreadsheet..... and don't bring up fossil records please, there is a gap, that is why I said before that we knew something had happened, but we didn't know what.

Unless, of course, you are saying that it was a close thing, and that if it was worse, it could have wiped out life.

Marginally bigger, and yes, it could have done.

The one thing that really pisses me off about Mr Gore (the inventor of the internet) and his ilk, is that they cherry pick information that suits their agenda and ignore anything that doesn't...... and the second thing that pisses me off is, the sheep that follow them believing everything they hear as the gospel truth.

(you can go and shoot an elephant now if it will make you feel better)

  OK, Lake Toba.

So you have heard of it before then? ......... highly unlikely as when anyone mentions 70,000 years ago, anyone who has done any real research in the history of this planet will bring it instantly to mind.

That one event pumped more harmful substances into the atmosphere than man could ever hope to achieve, and we have had much longer to try and beat that record.

and that many people (homo sapiens or neanderthal) died, but that is not the same as life was nearly wiped out. The fossil record is too complete to have had that happen.

Can you imagine how many beings were walking upright at that time, the most conservative estimates reduce the number from millions to thousands..... that's more than a teensy weensy drop on anyones spreadsheet..... and don't bring up fossil records please, there is a gap, that is why I said before that we knew something had happened, but we didn't know what.

Unless, of course, you are saying that it was a close thing, and that if it was worse, it could have wiped out life.

Marginally bigger, and yes, it could have done.

The one thing that really pisses me off about Mr Gore (the inventor of the internet) and his ilk, is that they cherry pick information that suits their agenda and ignore anything that doesn't...... and the second thing that pisses me off is, the sheep that follow them believing everything they hear as the gospel truth.

(you can go and shoot an elephant now if it will make you feel better)

Why the nasty comment about elephants?  Haven't I made it clear over and over that I would not do that myself?  That I don't even kill cockroaches?  All I said is that there are reasons to cull elephants, and as I eat meat, I have no moral high ground to cast stones at the people who actually do this.

To address your non-personal points, I think anyone who watches Discovery or National Geographic Channel has heard of that volcanic explosion.  And yes, it certainly could have sent up more toxic substances in the air than the whole of mankind's efforts. And there would certainly have been massive loss of life.  But extinction?

But what gap in the fossil record are you talking about?  Homo sapiens made his arrival about 250,000 years ago, and there is no gap in their existence.  Neaderthal also bracketed this timeframe as did countless other animals.  The greatest mammalian die off was the Pleistocene die-off of 10,000 to 11,000 years ago.

As far as cherry-picking, it seems to me that those who scoff at the possibility of global warming do that quite well as well.  

I think anyone who watches Discovery or National Geographic Channel has heard of that volcanic explosion.  And yes, it certainly could have sent up more toxic substances in the air than the whole of mankind's efforts. And there would certainly have been massive loss of life.  But extinction?

Yes, extinction.

But what gap in the fossil record are you talking about? Homo sapiens made his arrival about 250,000 years ago, and there is no gap in their existence.

Perhaps I should have used the term 'speed bump'

http://blog.targethealth.com/?p=806

While Homo sapiens can be traced to around 200,000 years ago in the fossil record, it is remarkably difficult to find an archaeological record of our species between 80,000 and 50,000 years ago, and genetic data suggest that the population eventually dwindled to as few as 2,000 individuals. Yes, 2,000—fewer than fit into many symphony halls. We were on the brink of extinction.

I think anyone who watches Discovery or National Geographic Channel has heard of that volcanic explosion.  And yes, it certainly could have sent up more toxic substances in the air than the whole of mankind's efforts. And there would certainly have been massive loss of life.  But extinction?

Yes, extinction.

But what gap in the fossil record are you talking about? Homo sapiens made his arrival about 250,000 years ago, and there is no gap in their existence.

Perhaps I should have used the term 'speed bump'

http://blog.targethealth.com/?p=806

While Homo sapiens can be traced to around 200,000 years ago in the fossil record, it is remarkably difficult to find an archaeological record of our species between 80,000 and 50,000 years ago, and genetic data suggest that the population eventually dwindled to as few as 2,000 individuals. Yes, 2,000—fewer than fit into many symphony halls. We were on the brink of extinction.

Oh, I can easily accept that we were on the brink of extinction, and that if the eruption was bigger, we wouldn't be here.  BUt the fact that we are here, and that there were no major changes in the record before and after this period, shows that enough people (and animals) managed to pull through as to keep life going.

The 2,000 individual numbers are pretty much pulled out of the air (or pulled out of a less savory place).  There is no way that anyone can make such an exact number, and that number defies logic and what scant fossil we do have for that period.  We have no idea on the population on dinosaurs, for example, as we don't know what percentage of dinosaurs were fossilized and how many of those we have found.  We have mathematical models, but not much else.  But we do have fossils of mankind over this period ranging around the world, so if there were only 2,000 people, that means the 2,000 were scattered all over the world.  Doesn't sound too viable to me.  It is far more liekly that a huge event such as this eruption would concentrate populations in easier areas in which to find dwindling food sources, such as aroudn seashores, seashores which are now under water.

Somethign big happened, and life must have sucked for a decade or even longer.  But I personally doubt the 2,000 individuals figure.

Somethign big happened, and life must have sucked for a decade or even longer.  But I personally doubt the 2,000 individuals figure.

It was about sixty years, but by the by. I also doubt the 2,000 individuals figure (some say even lower, but that is just crazy) who were all located in Africa. 70,000 years is a minuscule amount of time when it comes to life on this planet, it's still a very short space of time when it comes to intelligent life (it's a <deleted> tertiary period when it comes to the general forum though )

Let me get the maths right (I'll do the working out in the left hand column)

4 generations every 100 years.

So

40 generations every thousand.

So

In 70,000 years that would be 2,800 generations...... is that enough to spread from one central region over the entire planet? I don't know.... no one does.

The one argument for it, instead of the other supposition that there were individual pockets of communities that managed to survive it spread throughout the globe, is that all humans alive today have almost identical DNA. But, then again, if we all climbed down from the same tree in the first place and then went walkies, how much of our DNA would have changed in that space of time.... we do have a similar pattern to pigs after all.

One thing that you do have to admit though is that 70,000 years ago, we experienced an extinction level event, the next one is probably going to be centered around Yellow Stone ..... if individual pockets of communities manage to survive then that's great.... if they don't the world will have to be restocked from Australia.

Nail down the beer mats

Somethign big happened, and life must have sucked for a decade or even longer.  But I personally doubt the 2,000 individuals figure.

It was about sixty years, but by the by. I also doubt the 2,000 individuals figure (some say even lower, but that is just crazy) who were all located in Africa. 70,000 years is a minuscule amount of time when it comes to life on this planet, it's still a very short space of time when it comes to intelligent life (it's a <deleted> tertiary period when it comes to the general forum though )

Let me get the maths right (I'll do the working out in the left hand column)

4 generations every 100 years.

So

40 generations every thousand.

So

In 70,000 years that would be 2,800 generations...... is that enough to spread from one central region over the entire planet? I don't know.... no one does.

The one argument for it, instead of the other supposition that there were individual pockets of communities that managed to survive it spread throughout the globe, is that all humans alive today have almost identical DNA. But, then again, if we all climbed down from the same tree in the first place and then went walkies, how much of our DNA would have changed in that space of time.... we do have a similar pattern to pigs after all.

One thing that you do have to admit though is that 70,000 years ago, we experienced an extinction level event, the next one is probably going to be centered around Yellow Stone ..... if individual pockets of communities manage to survive then that's great.... if they don't the world will have to be restocked from Australia.

Nail down the beer mats

Sounds about right to me (especially about nailing down the beer mats!)

SEA levels could rise more than 20 feet due to global warming — far higher than previous estimates, scientists claim. Many expect the West Antarctic ice sheet to collapse — which could see tides swamping the coasts of Europe and North America.

Experts predicted sea level rises of up to 17ft but boffins at Oregon State University say they did not take into account factors like gravity or changes in Earth's rotation.

The study in journal Science claims America's eastern seaboard could see tides up to 21ft higher — wiping out much of Washington DC — with most of Europe facing seas 18ft deeper.

Speculative futures are just guess work. Just another conduit for inducing fear, therefor control. Since we like it that way....

So, what's the consensus?

Should I sell my home in Pattaya and advertise my home in Isaan as beach front, or what?