Can Global Warming Cause

In general no - the atmosphere doesn't have a lot of effect on the earth's crust.
It may lead to more frequent and more violent hurricanes/cyclones as more warm water is available to feed them and greater temperature differences to drive them.
Flooding is also a fairly obvious risk of rising sea levels.

 

"..A new study of possible links between climate and geophysics on Earth and similar planets finds that prolonged heating of the atmosphere can shut down plate tectonics and cause a planet's crust to become locked in place.."

I saw http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080512135102.htm" article on Science Daily, so there are some people that think its at least possible. People {and animals for that matter} would be long gone before we would see anything like that though..

 

That would mean they'd become less frequent and intense, surely?

 

I think this statement is very silly as it is contradicted by hundreds of millions of years of plate tectonics, both when the climate was much hotter and much colder than now.

 

One also could question it's scientific merit, it's not falsifiable, hence can it be science?

 

There are planets with similair climate and geophysics to Earth? Where?

 

.. Its not my article, nor my statement. I was merely responding to the original question, "Can Global Warming Cause Earthquakes .. and Volcanic Eruption?". Apparently Adrian Lenardic seems to think it could. As I said, and as stated in the article, it wouldn't be something we would see.

I think it references Venus.

 

I wasn't implying that. But no matter its source, it is a silly statement. During the Carboniferous, it was much warmer than today, and during the glacial periods of a few hundred thousand years ago, it was much colder than today. That didn't stop plate tectonics.

 

I'm sure you are right.. but again, I think the article implies a long period of thousands of years as a warmer planet.. warming on the order of hundreds of degrees above what we have or had..

 

Like the Earth being consumed by an expanding sun? Yes that would have an effect on plate techtonics.

 

Right, I should have read the article completely... So the point is that it is the temperature gradient through the crust which drives plate tectonics, and if it gets too hot, that gradient lowers, or at least the temperature distribution changes, and hence a different tectonics.

But it is true that heating up earth a hundred degrees is a rather extreme form of global warming

 

Have any of you heard of Ken Dickman?
He is aussie with some very interesting ideas, that seem to have pretty good correlation with tecktonic events related to planetary gravitational pull. He has calculated 4 points that he calls SER-X points that when occupied by planets have lead to volcanoes, and earthquakes. Both the China quake and the Chile volcano happened in a "window" he predicted would cause problems.
He has also fingered the first two weeks of June as very stressful weeks for the Earth.
His idea, labled the "Dickman Cross" is the subject of an extended article in the June issue of NEXUS.
Very interesting hypothesis and it has the advantage of being tracked back in time to major events in the past. This may turn out to be a potentially valuable prediction tool.

 

Madame Soleil predicted that I would have troubles in my sex life this week, and lo and behold, I had a dispute with my wife yesterday about why I didn't buy more than 2 packs of her favorite dessert when I went shopping ....

Seriously, that doesn't sound like anything else but a form of astrology, no ?

 

Dickman is far from an astrologer. I am disappointed that you would say that without (I suspect) doing any research into his work. Remember Theodore Landscheidt was labled an astrologer when he began studing the effects on the planets on the revolution of the Sun around it's barycentre. An effect which has been shown to affect the solar and geomagnetic force fields to a very large degree.
The angular momentum of planets on this excentric orbit of the Sun have had a high correlation with solar flares which are well correlated with weather activity on Earth. Dickman has quantified these forces relative to fixed positions in the orbit of the Sun around the barycentre. Back tracking has high high correlation with such events a Tambora, Krakatoa (sp?) and many quakes that have registered 6.9 + including the great Christmas tsunami of several years ago. At each of these events one or more of the greater planets was right on one of the four SER-X points.
Of course predicting earthquakes, volcanoes and violent storms is a science that only recently has begun to use real scientific methodology, so many ridicule it, but like all new science these are generally those who dismiss it wihout investigation.

I would be interested in your response, Vanesch, after reading the Nexus article, and Dickmans published work.

He has taken much of his theory as an extension from Rhodes Fairbridge, a fellow Aussie with impecable credentials.

 

I admit never having looked into Dickman's work. The reason why I'm extremely skeptical is that the gravitational effects (I guess it can only be gravitational effects, right ?) of the sun and the moon are way more important than any planetary configuration in the solar system, witness tidal effects (which are the only ones that could potentially have any tectonic effect, general relativity obliging). There are, as far as I know, no significant tidal corrections for the planetary constellations, once the sun and the moon's positions are taken into account.
If these almost unobservable tidal forces would have an influence on any volcanic activity, then imagine the influence of high tide !

 

I know someone who is studying the connection between solar flares and earthquakes. He can predict fairly accurately where, when, and how strong an earthquake could be based on the sun. He is hoping this is an area that can increase the warning time. Of course, it only predicts that an earthquake COULD happen, not that it WILL. There are many other factors yet to be found that play into the whole scheme of things.

 

Yes Ms Music, When you say there are many other factors.... you if anything are understating the case. Everything from strange clouds, electrical charges, to the family dog's unusual behavior is under study.
And I agree with you on the Would/Could statement as well.
We are barely at a point where we can identify possible stress creating conditions, and I doubt if ever we can identify a window of time less than years or months for specific events.

But then again, that is what is so exciting about a new field of science....the chance to have the inspiration to put together seemingly unrelated bits into a coherent whole, and to make a break through and thus add to the body of information.

Dickman contends that solar flares are one of the ways the Sun reacts to stress from it's position in relationship to the solar system, and while perhaps not creating events on Earth but happening because of these same influences. He also feels that there is correlation between these forces and temperature as well as great storms.

An interesting aspect to the serch for causation is that many of the different theorists seem to be unwilling to correspond with each other. Dickman tells me that he has made many attempts to correspond and has had little success. I wonder if it is that no one cares to share the success if it comes? Kind of petty but it seems to run in some scientific circles.