The Glacial-Interglacial Cycle is Driven by Orbital Forcing

Crick

Gold Member
May 10, 2014
29,799
5,785
290
N/A
The Earth has had an interesting temperature history. Over the past few billion years, it has been one of cooling. That includes the latest ice age, the Quaternary Period, which began 2.58 million years ago and continues through this day. That span of time has been divided into warmer and cooler periods termed interglacials and glacials, respectively. We are currently in a warmer interglacial period known as the Holocene. For the past 6,000 years, since a maximum temperature point known as the Holocene Climate Optimum, the Earth has been gradually cooling. However, the best estimates as to when the Earth will begin moving back into a glacial period are on the order of 50,000 years. Carbon dioxide from human emissions could theoretically delay that by another 50,000 years.

As noted, the Quaternary Period is divided into glacial and interglacial periods. In the first million years of the Quaternary, that cycle took place at a 41,000 year period with a relatively low thermal amplitude. At the Mid-Pleiocene Transition (MPT), however, the Earth underwent an "abrupt" shift to a high amplitude, 100,000 year period. The cause of the MPT is still under debate with the primary factors under discussion being the removal of regolith and exposure of unweathered bedrock by glacial scraping of the Laurentide and Cordillera ice sheet, a slow decrease in available CO2 due to decreased volcanism, increased carbonate weathering and the increased subduction of ocean sediments. Other discussions re CO2 availability concern the changes in vegetated area created by glacial growth and decline.

Another theory contends that the scraping of the major ice sheets and exposure of the bedrock beneath them dramatically increased the friction between ice and rock and slowed the movement and oscillation of the glacial sheets. Still another suggests that the phase locking of the Northern and Southern Hemispheric ice sheets allowed for a much greater build up of ice slowing the oscillation cycle.

Roughly a century ago, Serbian scientists Milutin Milankovitch:

"...hypothesized the long-term, collective effects of changes in Earth’s position relative to the Sun are a strong driver of Earth’s long-term climate, and are responsible for triggering the beginning and end of glaciation periods.
...
Milankovitch’s work was supported by other researchers of his time, and he authored numerous publications on his hypothesis. But it wasn’t until about 10 years after his death in 1958 that the global science community began to take serious notice of his theory. In 1976, a study in the journal Science by Hays et al. using deep-sea sediment cores found that Milankovitch cycles correspond with periods of major climate change over the past 450,000 years, with Ice Ages [glacial periods] occurring when Earth was undergoing different stages of orbital variation.
Several other projects and studies have also upheld the validity of Milankovitch’s work, including research using data from ice cores in Greenland and Antarctica that has provided strong evidence of Milankovitch cycles going back many hundreds of thousands of years. In addition, his work has been embraced by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
Scientific research to better understand the mechanisms that cause changes in Earth’s rotation and how specifically Milankovitch cycles combine to affect climate is ongoing. But the theory that they drive the timing of glacial-interglacial cycles is well accepted."

The orbital dynamics that Milankovitch studied were three cycles:

1) Eccentricity: This is basically the shape of the Earth's orbit which becomes, very slightly, more and less elliptical in a 100,000 year cycle. At its most circular, the Earth's orbit has an eccentricity of 0.0034. At its most elliptical, an eccentricity of 0.058. The eccentricity of a perfect circle is 0, that of a parabola is 1. Earth's eccentricity is currently decreasing. Our orbit is approaching maximum circularity. Eccentricity is why seasons are of different lengths in the northern and southern hemisphere and alters the Earth total solar irradiance (TSI) over the course of the solar year. When the Earth's orbit is its most eccentric, there is a 23% difference in TSI between perihelion and aphelion (the closest and furthest points from the sun, respectively). Changes in eccentricity are small and so this factor has a small, but non-zero, effect on the Earth's climate. Eccentricity is due primarily to the gravitation influence of Jupiter and Saturn, the two largest planets. As many of you know, at present, the Earth is actually closest to the sun in mid-Winter and furthest in mid-Summer.

2) Obliquity: These are changes in the angle between the Earth's axis of rotation and our orbital plane. The Earth's obliquity varies between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees over a period of roughly 41,000 years. When the angle increases, the Earth's hemispheres experience warmer summers and colder winters. The effect is latitudinally dependent as higher latitudes (closer to the poles) see larger changes than lower latitudes closer to the Equator. Larger obliquity angles lead to deglaciation. The Earth's obliquity is currently at 23.4 degrees and is decreasing towards the next minimum in about 10,000 years.

3a) Axial Precession: Precession is the wobble of Earth's rotational axis relative to the stellar background which occurs in a period of 25,771.5 years. This motion is similar to the wobble of the rotational axis of an off-center toy top. The precession angle controls the seasonal contrast of each hemisphere. As noted above, the Earth is currently closest to the sun in January. This tends to moderate northern hemisphere (NH) winter and increase the intensity of southern hemisphere (SH) summers. When the angle has rotated 180 degrees, these effects will be reversed. It is axial precession that will eventually remove Polaris and Sigma Octantis (aka Polaris Australis) from their "North Star" and "South Star" positions just as a few thousand years ago the stars Kochab and Pherkad held those positions.

3b) Apsidial Precession: There is another precessive movement in which the plane of the Earth's orbit wobbles irregularly on a roughly 112,000 year cycle, due once more, primarily from the gravity of Jupiter and Saturn. The combination of the two movements produce a cycle of approximately 23,000 years.

As I'm sure all the regulars here have noted, poster ding and I have been in a protracted argument about the cause of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Ding has claimed that changes in ocean currents are responsible for all climate change for the past 3 million years, which would include the entire Quaternary and it ~30 glacial-interglacial cycles. Ding has repeatedly rejected Milankovitch's widely accepted theories that the trigger for that cycle is the orbital forcing described above. Shortly after our discussions began and following my pointing out to him that he had yet to find (and still has not found) a single source to support his idea that ocean current changes were responsible for the glacial-interglacial cycle, he altered his contention and now will not utter the term "glacial-interglacial cycle" and instead argues over and over again that changes in ocean currents are responsible for "abrupt climate changes". Initially, he attempted to include the glacial-interglacial transitions as just one more "abrupt climate change" but seems to have pulled back from that stance. It is possible that some portion of ding's motive in holding the positions he does in opposition of mainstream science and great deal of evidence is that orbital forcing produces the glacial-interglacial cycle with positive and negative feedback from CO2 released and withdraw to and from the atmosphere by temperature changes of the world's oceans and the gain and loss of arable land to oscillating ice sheets.

My position in this argument has consistently concerned the causative trigger of the glacial-interglacial cycle. I have not allowed myself to be drawn off into discussions of the D-O and Heinrich events that produce the "noise" commonly seen on ice core temperature and CO2 records that ding would dearly prefer. The transitions between glacial and interglacial periods are not D-O or Heinrich events. Ding likes to take my refusals to so engage as rejections of his comments about oceans and abrupt climate events. I am fully aware of the magnitude of the oceans heat capacity and what effects changes in ocean circulation, either from large meltwater impacts or tectonic movement can have on the Earth's global and regional climate. I am also aware that climate changes can alter ocean circulation producing complex and occasionally counterintuitive effects. However, my sole point of contention with him at this point is the causes of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Now ding has also claimed that the warming since the Industrial Revolution is not due to increased CO2 but, again, due to changes in ocean circulation. I save that discussion for another day.

I would like to point out that if ding had not even brought up glacial-interglacial cycles but had stuck to D-O and Heinrich events or even to full-up ice ages, I would have had no objection to the importance of ocean circulation, thermohaline circulation and tectonics changes in current paths. It was his insistence that orbital forcing did nothing and that the glacial-interglacial cycles were driven by changes in ocean currents, which causes he has never actually detailed.

So, in summation, I wish to encourage the readers here, once more, to review the results of asking Google or Google Scholar - or any search engine you wish to use - the following question: "WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THE GLACIAL-INTERGLACIAL CYCLE?" I have done so now repeatedly and have gone through pages of the results. I have yet to find a single result that suggests ANYTHING other than Milankovitch's orbital forcing. The links below are from my last such search. Every one of these, at some points, specifically states or explicitly assumes that the glacial-interglacial cycle is triggered by Milankovitch's orbital forcing and, though the system and its responses are complex, I have yet to find ANY other triggering mechanisms even suggested.


J'espère que tu connais le français mieux que moi


"Among the longest astrophysical and astronomical cycles that might influence climate (and even among all forcing mechanisms external to the climatic system itself), only those involving variations in the elements of the Earth's orbit have been found to be significantly related to the long-term climatic data deduced from the geological record."

Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate - NASA Science

He calculated that Ice Ages occur approximately every 41,000 years. Subsequent research confirms that they did occur at 41,000-year intervals between one and three million years ago. But about 800,000 years ago, the cycle of Ice Ages lengthened to 100,000 years, matching Earth’s eccentricity cycle. While various theories have been proposed to explain this transition, scientists do not yet have a clear answer.


Variations in Earth’s orbit through time have changed the amount of solar radiation Earth receives in each season. Interglacial periods tend to happen during times of more intense summer solar radiation in the Northern Hemisphere. These glacial–interglacial cycles have waxed and waned throughout the Quaternary Period (the past 2.6 million years).


Glacial-interglacial cycles are believed to be driven by changes in the orbital pattern of the Earth that has periods of about 20 ka, 40 ka and 100 ka [25].


The onset of an interglacial (glacial termination) seems to require a reducing precession parameter (increasing Northern Hemisphere summer insolation), but this condition alone is insufficient. Terminations involve rapid, nonlinear, reactions of ice volume, CO2, and temperature to external astronomical forcing.


What drove these climate oscillations? Astronomers quickly came up with a suggestion. It had to do with cyclic changes in the Earth’s orbit.


While we interpret the dominant periodicities of glacial cycles as the result of synchronization of internal self-sustained oscillations to the astronomical forcing, the Quaternary glacial cycles show facets of both synchronization and forced response.


One significant trigger in initiating ice ages is the changing positions of Earth’s ever-moving continents, which affect ocean and atmospheric circulation patterns.


The lead-lag relationship between precession and obliquity controls the length of interglacial periods, the shape of the glacial cycle, and the glacial ice-sheet geometry.


Glacial cycles are driven by cyclical changes in Earth's orbital parameters: obliquity, precession, and eccentricity.


Each of these Milankovitch Cycles can influence the amount of sunlight the planet receives, which in turn can influence climate. The changes cycle through every 100,000, 41,000 and 21,000 years.


The Earth has gone through multiple ice ages in the past million years. Understanding the ice age dynamics is crucial to paleoclimatic study, and is helpful for addressing future climate challenges. Though ice ages are paced by variations in Earth’s orbit geometry, how various climatic system components on the Earth respond to insolation forcing and interact with each other remains unclear.


A transition from low-amplitude sinusoidal obliquity (~41 ky) and precession (~23 ky) driven glacial/interglacial cycles to high-amplitude ~100 ky likely eccentricity-related sawtooth cycles seen between −1.25 My and −0.75 My BP (the Mid-Pleistocene transition or “MPT”) in FIT simulations disappears in BIT integrations depending on the details of how the regolith removal process is treated.


While it is mostly agreed that astronomical forcings trigger glacial–interglacial transitions, a similar shape is not observed in insolation changes, suggesting a nonlinear response by the climate system (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2007).


Interglacials and glacials coincide with cyclic changes in Earth's orbit. Three orbital variations contribute to interglacials. The first is a change in Earth's orbit around the Sun, or eccentricity. The second is a shift in the tilt of Earth's axis, or obliquity. The third is the wobbling motion of Earth's axis, or precession.[Eldredge, S. "Ice Ages – What are they and what causes them?". Utah Geological Survey. Retrieved 2 March 2013.]
 
1723571605403.png


In my next episode of the Cosmos, we will show how the democrat party that can't even control inflation will now magically control the weather if we only surrender enough our money and freedom to them.
 
Over the past 10k, 20k, 50k, and 1 million years


GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED


which 100% disproves the bullshit "glacials" stuff and means all the "studies" about glacials that YOU PAID FOR are completely worthless BULLSHIT
 
Over the past 10k, 20k, 50k, and 1 million years


GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED


which 100% disproves the bullshit "glacials" stuff and means all the "studies" about glacials that YOU PAID FOR are completely worthless BULLSHIT
How about you show us the temperature history for Greenland and North America over that last million years?
 
How about you show us the temperature history for Greenland and North America over that last million years?


I'll do better...

I'll document Greenland froze while North America thawed...


Greenland's ice age glacier moves south. It started at the top, less than 2 million years ago, when that land got to within 600 miles of the North Pole. There, the annual snowfall ceased to fully melt during the summer, and hence started to stack.


documents that 2 million years ago Greenland was green at the top, the northernmost part... aka completely green top to bottom.


The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetle


So the middle of Greenland went from forest to ice age 450k-800k years ago...

Bottom of Greenland, the Vikings farmed it until the 1400s when they were FROZEN OUT....

For the past 1+ million years, GREENLAND FROZE. And the ice cores prove IT DID NOTHING BUT ADD ICE, REFUTING THE BULLSHIT "glacials" nonsense.



There is a tremendous dispute over the timing of what used to be called North American Ice Age. Prior to 2012, it was widely accepted that North America down to Indiana was buried under 2+ mile thick ice.

That debate is here and it isn't close.



Milankovitch Cycles, which I call McBullshit Cycles, take a very "Dennis Quaid" approach to ice ages - they are lightning fast, quick, and agile. They come and go really fast.

Since 2010, Milankovitch has replaced "North American Ice Age" with the claim that the ice on Chicago recently that was 2.5 miles thick was only 75k years old.

Really....

My side, which is just me now, since all of the pre 2010 reports on North American Ice Age online have been "canceled" and replaced by McBullshit, is that North America was covered with Ice Age glacier down to Chicago and beyond for 30-50 million years.


So we have a dispute, a healthy thing for SCIENCE...

What is the EVIDENCE???


1. LIFE

Any evidence of LIFE on Chicago for the past 50 million years .... NO

Any evidence of LIFE on Greenland.... YES

www.livescience.com

Ancient Greenland Was Actually Green

Greenland was once carpeted in lush forests, a new study shows.
www.livescience.com
www.livescience.com

The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetle


www.nature.com

A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA - Nature

Analysis of two-million-year-old ancient environmental DNA from the Kap København Formation in North Greenland shows there was an open boreal forest with diverse plant and animal species, of which several taxa have not previously been detected at the site, representing an ecosystem that has no...
www.nature.com
www.nature.com


So it is fair to say that the ice covering Greenland started up north in the past 2 million years, got to the middle of Greenland 400-800k years ago, and flushed out the Vikings in the 1400s on the southern tip, since when the Vikings found the Southern Tip of Greenland, they called it GREENland because it was green and were able to farm there for centuries before the Greenland ice age pushed them off...


Any evidence of life on Antarctica?

antarctic dinosaurs 70 million years ago - Google Search

This Cretaceous period dinosaur lived about 70 million years ago, towards the end of the Mesozoic Era. A bipedal, long-necked, plant-eating dinosaur (a sauropod) was discovered in the Antarctic interior by William R. Hammer and his team in late 2003.


For the record, prior to 2010 nobody disputed that Antarctic ice was at least 40 million years old. McBullshit disputes that completely...


2. Speed of ice age glacier

Indeed, the data from Greenland above is the best data we have, since it is recent and conclusive. It took Greenland's ice age somewhere between 500k years and 2 million years from its beginning at the northern part of Greenland to get to where it is now.


That is WAY SLOWER than McBullshit suggests.


3. size of the glacier

Greenland's ice is not yet 2 miles thick anywhere. Below the Arctic Circle, Greenland's ice is under 1 mile thick.

Hence the claim of 2.5 mile thick glacier on Chicago being 75k years old is, well, NOT SUPPORTED BY DATA POINT GREENLAND at all.

Antarctica has 2.5 mile thick glacier. There is a dispute over the age of those too. McBullshit claims it is not that old and that while sitting on the South Pole Antarctica has frozen and thawed over and over like Dennis Quaid claimed in the movie "Day After Tomorrow"

4. ice cores

antarctic ice cores years - Google Search

The oldest continuous ice core records to date extend 123,000 years in Greenland and 800,000 years in Antarctica. Ice cores contain information about past temperature, and about many other aspects of the environment


And hence it is fair to say that the 2.5 mile thick glacier on Antarctica is WAY OLDER than 75k years... to put it mildly.

Even the Greenland ice is way older than that too, and it has yet to get to 2 miles thick



5. tectonic plate movement

Reiny recently claimed Greenland is part of North America. Not on my map. But it is on the SAME TECTONIC PLATE moving on the same vector because of the angle of the fault in the North Atlantic

www.bing.com

north atlantic ocean floor map - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.
www.bing.com
www.bing.com


That fault has pushed Greenland NW and Europe SE for tens of millions of years, and hence explains why all of Europe's glaciers are melting while Greenland went into ice age. It was also pushing North America NW until NA got to its closest point to the pole, and then NA started moving SW on the SAME VECTOR on a SPHERE...

Accepting the 600 miles to the pole = your land entered an ice age

North America would have been in ice age for 30-50 million years, and would have been where Greenland is today 30-50 million years ago. The accepted date of that prior to 2010 was 50 million years...




Hence, the evidence that the glaciers on Chicago 2.5 miles thick were 75k years old is contrary to ALL DATA ON ICE AGES AND GLACIERS on the planet today.

The ice cores prove glaciers 2.5 miles thick TODAY are WAY OLDER than 75k years.
 
I'll do better...

I'll document Greenland froze while North America thawed...


Greenland's ice age glacier moves south. It started at the top, less than 2 million years ago, when that land got to within 600 miles of the North Pole. There, the annual snowfall ceased to fully melt during the summer, and hence started to stack.


documents that 2 million years ago Greenland was green at the top, the northernmost part... aka completely green top to bottom.


The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetle


So the middle of Greenland went from forest to ice age 450k-800k years ago...

Bottom of Greenland, the Vikings farmed it until the 1400s when they were FROZEN OUT....

For the past 1+ million years, GREENLAND FROZE. And the ice cores prove IT DID NOTHING BUT ADD ICE, REFUTING THE BULLSHIT "glacials" nonsense.



There is a tremendous dispute over the timing of what used to be called North American Ice Age. Prior to 2012, it was widely accepted that North America down to Indiana was buried under 2+ mile thick ice.

That debate is here and it isn't close.



Milankovitch Cycles, which I call McBullshit Cycles, take a very "Dennis Quaid" approach to ice ages - they are lightning fast, quick, and agile. They come and go really fast.

Since 2010, Milankovitch has replaced "North American Ice Age" with the claim that the ice on Chicago recently that was 2.5 miles thick was only 75k years old.

Really....

My side, which is just me now, since all of the pre 2010 reports on North American Ice Age online have been "canceled" and replaced by McBullshit, is that North America was covered with Ice Age glacier down to Chicago and beyond for 30-50 million years.


So we have a dispute, a healthy thing for SCIENCE...

What is the EVIDENCE???


1. LIFE

Any evidence of LIFE on Chicago for the past 50 million years .... NO

Any evidence of LIFE on Greenland.... YES

www.livescience.com

Ancient Greenland Was Actually Green

Greenland was once carpeted in lush forests, a new study shows.
www.livescience.com
www.livescience.com

The DNA is proof that sometime between 450,000 and 800,000 years ago, much of Greenland was especially green and covered in a boreal forest that was home to alder, spruce and pine trees, as well as insects such as butterflies and beetle


www.nature.com

A 2-million-year-old ecosystem in Greenland uncovered by environmental DNA - Nature

Analysis of two-million-year-old ancient environmental DNA from the Kap København Formation in North Greenland shows there was an open boreal forest with diverse plant and animal species, of which several taxa have not previously been detected at the site, representing an ecosystem that has no...
www.nature.com
www.nature.com


So it is fair to say that the ice covering Greenland started up north in the past 2 million years, got to the middle of Greenland 400-800k years ago, and flushed out the Vikings in the 1400s on the southern tip, since when the Vikings found the Southern Tip of Greenland, they called it GREENland because it was green and were able to farm there for centuries before the Greenland ice age pushed them off...


Any evidence of life on Antarctica?

antarctic dinosaurs 70 million years ago - Google Search

This Cretaceous period dinosaur lived about 70 million years ago, towards the end of the Mesozoic Era. A bipedal, long-necked, plant-eating dinosaur (a sauropod) was discovered in the Antarctic interior by William R. Hammer and his team in late 2003.


For the record, prior to 2010 nobody disputed that Antarctic ice was at least 40 million years old. McBullshit disputes that completely...


2. Speed of ice age glacier

Indeed, the data from Greenland above is the best data we have, since it is recent and conclusive. It took Greenland's ice age somewhere between 500k years and 2 million years from its beginning at the northern part of Greenland to get to where it is now.


That is WAY SLOWER than McBullshit suggests.


3. size of the glacier

Greenland's ice is not yet 2 miles thick anywhere. Below the Arctic Circle, Greenland's ice is under 1 mile thick.

Hence the claim of 2.5 mile thick glacier on Chicago being 75k years old is, well, NOT SUPPORTED BY DATA POINT GREENLAND at all.

Antarctica has 2.5 mile thick glacier. There is a dispute over the age of those too. McBullshit claims it is not that old and that while sitting on the South Pole Antarctica has frozen and thawed over and over like Dennis Quaid claimed in the movie "Day After Tomorrow"

4. ice cores

antarctic ice cores years - Google Search

The oldest continuous ice core records to date extend 123,000 years in Greenland and 800,000 years in Antarctica. Ice cores contain information about past temperature, and about many other aspects of the environment


And hence it is fair to say that the 2.5 mile thick glacier on Antarctica is WAY OLDER than 75k years... to put it mildly.

Even the Greenland ice is way older than that too, and it has yet to get to 2 miles thick



5. tectonic plate movement

Reiny recently claimed Greenland is part of North America. Not on my map. But it is on the SAME TECTONIC PLATE moving on the same vector because of the angle of the fault in the North Atlantic

www.bing.com

north atlantic ocean floor map - Bing

Intelligent search from Bing makes it easier to quickly find what you’re looking for and rewards you.
www.bing.com
www.bing.com


That fault has pushed Greenland NW and Europe SE for tens of millions of years, and hence explains why all of Europe's glaciers are melting while Greenland went into ice age. It was also pushing North America NW until NA got to its closest point to the pole, and then NA started moving SW on the SAME VECTOR on a SPHERE...

Accepting the 600 miles to the pole = your land entered an ice age

North America would have been in ice age for 30-50 million years, and would have been where Greenland is today 30-50 million years ago. The accepted date of that prior to 2010 was 50 million years...




Hence, the evidence that the glaciers on Chicago 2.5 miles thick were 75k years old is contrary to ALL DATA ON ICE AGES AND GLACIERS on the planet today.

The ice cores prove glaciers 2.5 miles thick TODAY are WAY OLDER than 75k years.
Have you been saving that up for the right occasion?
 
The best thing about a message board is that prior thrashings of the Co2 FRAUD are recorded for all to see..
Any chance that ranting about Greenland and North America for the last couple years might allow you actually answer a request for the temperature history of the two locations for the past million years. If not, I can probably find it.
 
Any chance that ranting about Greenland and North America for the last couple years might allow you actually answer a request for the temperature history of the two locations for the past million years. If not, I can probably find it.
1723581516348.png


I could not find a temperature record labeled as covering North America. But you've made this claim dozens of times. You must have oodles of data. Let's see what you've got.
 
The Earth has had an interesting temperature history. Over the past few billion years, it has been one of cooling. That includes the latest ice age, the Quaternary Period, which began 2.58 million years ago and continues through this day. That span of time has been divided into warmer and cooler periods termed interglacials and glacials, respectively. We are currently in a warmer interglacial period known as the Holocene. For the past 6,000 years, since a maximum temperature point known as the Holocene Climate Optimum, the Earth has been gradually cooling. However, the best estimates as to when the Earth will begin moving back into a glacial period are on the order of 50,000 years. Carbon dioxide from human emissions could theoretically delay that by another 50,000 years.

As noted, the Quaternary Period is divided into glacial and interglacial periods. In the first million years of the Quaternary, that cycle took place at a 41,000 year period with a relatively low thermal amplitude. At the Mid-Pleiocene Transition (MPT), however, the Earth underwent an "abrupt" shift to a high amplitude, 100,000 year period. The cause of the MPT is still under debate with the primary factors under discussion being the removal of regolith and exposure of unweathered bedrock by glacial scraping of the Laurentide and Cordillera ice sheet, a slow decrease in available CO2 due to decreased volcanism, increased carbonate weathering and the increased subduction of ocean sediments. Other discussions re CO2 availability concern the changes in vegetated area created by glacial growth and decline.

Another theory contends that the scraping of the major ice sheets and exposure of the bedrock beneath them dramatically increased the friction between ice and rock and slowed the movement and oscillation of the glacial sheets. Still another suggests that the phase locking of the Northern and Southern Hemispheric ice sheets allowed for a much greater build up of ice slowing the oscillation cycle.

Roughly a century ago, Serbian scientists Milutin Milankovitch:

"...hypothesized the long-term, collective effects of changes in Earth’s position relative to the Sun are a strong driver of Earth’s long-term climate, and are responsible for triggering the beginning and end of glaciation periods.
...
Milankovitch’s work was supported by other researchers of his time, and he authored numerous publications on his hypothesis. But it wasn’t until about 10 years after his death in 1958 that the global science community began to take serious notice of his theory. In 1976, a study in the journal Science by Hays et al. using deep-sea sediment cores found that Milankovitch cycles correspond with periods of major climate change over the past 450,000 years, with Ice Ages [glacial periods] occurring when Earth was undergoing different stages of orbital variation.
Several other projects and studies have also upheld the validity of Milankovitch’s work, including research using data from ice cores in Greenland and Antarctica that has provided strong evidence of Milankovitch cycles going back many hundreds of thousands of years. In addition, his work has been embraced by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
Scientific research to better understand the mechanisms that cause changes in Earth’s rotation and how specifically Milankovitch cycles combine to affect climate is ongoing. But the theory that they drive the timing of glacial-interglacial cycles is well accepted."

The orbital dynamics that Milankovitch studied were three cycles:

1) Eccentricity: This is basically the shape of the Earth's orbit which becomes, very slightly, more and less elliptical in a 100,000 year cycle. At its most circular, the Earth's orbit has an eccentricity of 0.0034. At its most elliptical, an eccentricity of 0.058. The eccentricity of a perfect circle is 0, that of a parabola is 1. Earth's eccentricity is currently decreasing. Our orbit is approaching maximum circularity. Eccentricity is why seasons are of different lengths in the northern and southern hemisphere and alters the Earth total solar irradiance (TSI) over the course of the solar year. When the Earth's orbit is its most eccentric, there is a 23% difference in TSI between perihelion and aphelion (the closest and furthest points from the sun, respectively). Changes in eccentricity are small and so this factor has a small, but non-zero, effect on the Earth's climate. Eccentricity is due primarily to the gravitation influence of Jupiter and Saturn, the two largest planets. As many of you know, at present, the Earth is actually closest to the sun in mid-Winter and furthest in mid-Summer.

2) Obliquity: These are changes in the angle between the Earth's axis of rotation and our orbital plane. The Earth's obliquity varies between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees over a period of roughly 41,000 years. When the angle increases, the Earth's hemispheres experience warmer summers and colder winters. The effect is latitudinally dependent as higher latitudes (closer to the poles) see larger changes than lower latitudes closer to the Equator. Larger obliquity angles lead to deglaciation. The Earth's obliquity is currently at 23.4 degrees and is decreasing towards the next minimum in about 10,000 years.

3a) Axial Precession: Precession is the wobble of Earth's rotational axis relative to the stellar background which occurs in a period of 25,771.5 years. This motion is similar to the wobble of the rotational axis of an off-center toy top. The precession angle controls the seasonal contrast of each hemisphere. As noted above, the Earth is currently closest to the sun in January. This tends to moderate northern hemisphere (NH) winter and increase the intensity of southern hemisphere (SH) summers. When the angle has rotated 180 degrees, these effects will be reversed. It is axial precession that will eventually remove Polaris and Sigma Octantis (aka Polaris Australis) from their "North Star" and "South Star" positions just as a few thousand years ago the stars Kochab and Pherkad held those positions.

3b) Apsidial Precession: There is another precessive movement in which the plane of the Earth's orbit wobbles irregularly on a roughly 112,000 year cycle, due once more, primarily from the gravity of Jupiter and Saturn. The combination of the two movements produce a cycle of approximately 23,000 years.

As I'm sure all the regulars here have noted, poster ding and I have been in a protracted argument about the cause of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Ding has claimed that changes in ocean currents are responsible for all climate change for the past 3 million years, which would include the entire Quaternary and it ~30 glacial-interglacial cycles. Ding has repeatedly rejected Milankovitch's widely accepted theories that the trigger for that cycle is the orbital forcing described above. Shortly after our discussions began and following my pointing out to him that he had yet to find (and still has not found) a single source to support his idea that ocean current changes were responsible for the glacial-interglacial cycle, he altered his contention and now will not utter the term "glacial-interglacial cycle" and instead argues over and over again that changes in ocean currents are responsible for "abrupt climate changes". Initially, he attempted to include the glacial-interglacial transitions as just one more "abrupt climate change" but seems to have pulled back from that stance. It is possible that some portion of ding's motive in holding the positions he does in opposition of mainstream science and great deal of evidence is that orbital forcing produces the glacial-interglacial cycle with positive and negative feedback from CO2 released and withdraw to and from the atmosphere by temperature changes of the world's oceans and the gain and loss of arable land to oscillating ice sheets.

My position in this argument has consistently concerned the causative trigger of the glacial-interglacial cycle. I have not allowed myself to be drawn off into discussions of the D-O and Heinrich events that produce the "noise" commonly seen on ice core temperature and CO2 records that ding would dearly prefer. The transitions between glacial and interglacial periods are not D-O or Heinrich events. Ding likes to take my refusals to so engage as rejections of his comments about oceans and abrupt climate events. I am fully aware of the magnitude of the oceans heat capacity and what effects changes in ocean circulation, either from large meltwater impacts or tectonic movement can have on the Earth's global and regional climate. I am also aware that climate changes can alter ocean circulation producing complex and occasionally counterintuitive effects. However, my sole point of contention with him at this point is the causes of the glacial-interglacial cycle. Now ding has also claimed that the warming since the Industrial Revolution is not due to increased CO2 but, again, due to changes in ocean circulation. I save that discussion for another day.

I would like to point out that if ding had not even brought up glacial-interglacial cycles but had stuck to D-O and Heinrich events or even to full-up ice ages, I would have had no objection to the importance of ocean circulation, thermohaline circulation and tectonics changes in current paths. It was his insistence that orbital forcing did nothing and that the glacial-interglacial cycles were driven by changes in ocean currents, which causes he has never actually detailed.

So, in summation, I wish to encourage the readers here, once more, to review the results of asking Google or Google Scholar - or any search engine you wish to use - the following question: "WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THE GLACIAL-INTERGLACIAL CYCLE?" I have done so now repeatedly and have gone through pages of the results. I have yet to find a single result that suggests ANYTHING other than Milankovitch's orbital forcing. The links below are from my last such search. Every one of these, at some points, specifically states or explicitly assumes that the glacial-interglacial cycle is triggered by Milankovitch's orbital forcing and, though the system and its responses are complex, I have yet to find ANY other triggering mechanisms even suggested.


J'espère que tu connais le français mieux que moi


"Among the longest astrophysical and astronomical cycles that might influence climate (and even among all forcing mechanisms external to the climatic system itself), only those involving variations in the elements of the Earth's orbit have been found to be significantly related to the long-term climatic data deduced from the geological record."

Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles and Their Role in Earth's Climate - NASA Science

He calculated that Ice Ages occur approximately every 41,000 years. Subsequent research confirms that they did occur at 41,000-year intervals between one and three million years ago. But about 800,000 years ago, the cycle of Ice Ages lengthened to 100,000 years, matching Earth’s eccentricity cycle. While various theories have been proposed to explain this transition, scientists do not yet have a clear answer.


Variations in Earth’s orbit through time have changed the amount of solar radiation Earth receives in each season. Interglacial periods tend to happen during times of more intense summer solar radiation in the Northern Hemisphere. These glacial–interglacial cycles have waxed and waned throughout the Quaternary Period (the past 2.6 million years).


Glacial-interglacial cycles are believed to be driven by changes in the orbital pattern of the Earth that has periods of about 20 ka, 40 ka and 100 ka [25].


The onset of an interglacial (glacial termination) seems to require a reducing precession parameter (increasing Northern Hemisphere summer insolation), but this condition alone is insufficient. Terminations involve rapid, nonlinear, reactions of ice volume, CO2, and temperature to external astronomical forcing.


What drove these climate oscillations? Astronomers quickly came up with a suggestion. It had to do with cyclic changes in the Earth’s orbit.


While we interpret the dominant periodicities of glacial cycles as the result of synchronization of internal self-sustained oscillations to the astronomical forcing, the Quaternary glacial cycles show facets of both synchronization and forced response.


One significant trigger in initiating ice ages is the changing positions of Earth’s ever-moving continents, which affect ocean and atmospheric circulation patterns.


The lead-lag relationship between precession and obliquity controls the length of interglacial periods, the shape of the glacial cycle, and the glacial ice-sheet geometry.


Glacial cycles are driven by cyclical changes in Earth's orbital parameters: obliquity, precession, and eccentricity.


Each of these Milankovitch Cycles can influence the amount of sunlight the planet receives, which in turn can influence climate. The changes cycle through every 100,000, 41,000 and 21,000 years.


The Earth has gone through multiple ice ages in the past million years. Understanding the ice age dynamics is crucial to paleoclimatic study, and is helpful for addressing future climate challenges. Though ice ages are paced by variations in Earth’s orbit geometry, how various climatic system components on the Earth respond to insolation forcing and interact with each other remains unclear.


A transition from low-amplitude sinusoidal obliquity (~41 ky) and precession (~23 ky) driven glacial/interglacial cycles to high-amplitude ~100 ky likely eccentricity-related sawtooth cycles seen between −1.25 My and −0.75 My BP (the Mid-Pleistocene transition or “MPT”) in FIT simulations disappears in BIT integrations depending on the details of how the regolith removal process is treated.


While it is mostly agreed that astronomical forcings trigger glacial–interglacial transitions, a similar shape is not observed in insolation changes, suggesting a nonlinear response by the climate system (Lisiecki and Raymo, 2007).


Interglacials and glacials coincide with cyclic changes in Earth's orbit. Three orbital variations contribute to interglacials. The first is a change in Earth's orbit around the Sun, or eccentricity. The second is a shift in the tilt of Earth's axis, or obliquity. The third is the wobbling motion of Earth's axis, or precession.[Eldredge, S. "Ice Ages – What are they and what causes them?". Utah Geological Survey. Retrieved 2 March 2013.]
Is there physical evidence that ocean currents cause abrupt climate changes?
 

Forum List

Back
Top