Sahara Dust

6 Aug 2019

Gary also sent in a link to ... it seems the Amazon rainforest gets most of its phosphorous from cooking fires and landscape fires in Africa, via dust whipped up from the Sahara desert and wafted across the Atlantic. How it got its phosphorous, a vital nutrient, when the Sahara was a green and wet landscape 10,000 to 5,000 years ago, is left unmentioned. On reading further we learn the research was heavily focussed  on the role of Sahara dust and its phosphorous content, as well as a particle filter in French Guiana, used to collect the dust. Phosphorous sources in South and Central America do not appear to have figured greatly in the research. I suppose the big prize was to prove that humans actually had an effect on the climate (in the Amazon).

Meanwhile, something more revealing can be found at .... fossilised leaves and plant material from Labrador in Canada are an indicator of the climate in North America during the Cretaceous (latter stages of the dinosaur era). The Cretaceous is of course when the earth is supposed to have experienced runaway global warming as trees were growing in what is now the Arctic (on Ellesmere and Baffin islands for example) even though the poles are in darkness for several months during the winter. The analysis of the plant material in Labrador, not too distant from the Arctic, confirms this situation, as these plants would normally grow much further to the south. Hence, the temperatures in Labrador were warm and humid it would seem, quite unlike the situation in the modern world. The  interesting point we might ask - is this evidence the poles were somewhere else during the dinosaur era?

During the Cretaceous the climate in southern Britain has been likened to modern Florida, and shallow seas seem to point to such a situation (resembling the Florida Keys). Was it warmer in Labrador than it was in Britain? This is not obvious from the press release. However, the idea that the Cretaceous was a hothouse (runaway global warming) has been eagerly adopted by (some) geologists but is it only viable, as a theory, because trees were growing at the North Pole (or what is now the north pole). It is interesting to note that at ... we learn that mainstream is dissatisfied with the stranglehold it has on science information. They want more. This came about as they do not as yet control the Internet. It is chaotic and pseudo science gets aired just as much as real science. Individuals have to make up their own minds what is reality and what is hype. Mainstream wants to have the power to control content on the Internet and they hope to enlist social media platforms such as You Tube and Facebook in order to gain that control knob. The idea is to filter out conspiracy theories and the more absurd claims but as they have already made inroads via social media platforms and search engines to diminish the role of climate sceptics one can see the objective is perhaps to erase as much criticism as possible of the climate change alarmism so beloved of mainstream outlets (or to push it so far back down the search engine lists hardly anyone will stumble across it). Reading the article one can see they have climate change denial in their sights, lining them up for the initial crusade. We may wonder how long it will then be before they come after other so called pseudo science such as electric universe, creationism, and catastrophism. At that stage we will be where we are with pole shift. No debate whatsoever.