Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

My amateur-level knowledge of geological history suggests that a warmer, wetter, and higher-CO2 atmosphere--such as that found in the Carboniferous Period prior to the rainforest collapse or the Middle Miocene prior to its extinction event--would support greater total biomass and a wider variety of viable species than current conditions.

In other words, the climate change that everyone is frantically trying to reverse would probably be better for the biosphere, and for humanity in general. For specific humans with well-established property interests on or near the oceanic coasts, the current climate trends will be disastrous.

If every organism on the planet had a vote, Earth would overwhelmingly be in favor of more anthropogenic CO2 emission. Of course, only the humans understand the potential downsides, such as temperature-triggered methane clathrate decomposition that may have already been a contributing factor for two planetary extinction events, including the Permian-Triassic (the worst).

~Obviously, the solution is to ignore the CO2, dig up all the methane hydrates, and turn them into useful plastics before the temperate rise causes them to melt.~



Such conditions emerged over very large timespans in which life had plenty of time to evolve in response. What you are talking about is the same changes but over a few hundred years...this would be absolutely DISASTROUS for life. Rising CO2 is already acidifying the oceans and we've already seen symptoms such as coral bleaching.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: