THIS POST IS A PRESENTATION OF A PAPER BY ARTHUR VITERITO ON THE CORRELATION BETWEEN SEISMIC FREQUENCIES AND GLOBAL WARMING. {WITH THANKS TO COMMENTER FRED250 AT THE WATTSUPWITHTHAT BLOG SITE}.

Viterito, A. “The correlation of seismic activity and recent global warming.” J. Earth Sci. Clim. Change 7 (2016): 34: ABSTRACT: The latest report from the IPCC states with high confidence that the warming of global temperatures since 1901 has been driven by increased radiative forcing. The gases responsible for this enhanced forcing are greenhouse gases of anthropogenic origin, and include carbon dioxide, methane, and halocarbons. The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change has challenged these findings and concludes that the forcing from greenhouse gases is minimal and diminishing. They add that modelling attempts of past and future climate states are inaccurate and do not incorporate important solar inputs, such as magnetic strength and total irradiance.

A geophysical variable that has been overlooked by both groups is geothermal flux.

This study will show that increasing seismic activity for the globe’s high geothermal flux areas (HGFA), an indicator of increasing geothermal forcing, is highly correlated with average global temperatures from 1979 to 2015 (r = 0.785). By comparison, the correlation between CO2 forcing and global temperatures for the same period is lower (r = 0.739). Regression analysis indicates that HGFA seismicity is a significant predictor of global temperatures (P < 0.05), and that including carbon dioxide concentrations does not significantly improve the explained variance (P > 0.1).

A compelling case for geothermal forcing lies in the fact that 1) geothermal heat can trigger thermobaric convection and strengthen oceanic overturning, important mechanisms for transferring ocean heat to the overlying atmosphere, and 2) seismic activity is the leading indicator, while global temperature is the laggard.

RELATED WORK BY JAMES KAMIS: LINK: https://tambonthongchai.com/2019/07/03/iceage/

Human civilization got started in an interglacial period, the Holocene. It is in this context that we must understand our view of glaciation cycles. This view is an interglacial-centric view. This is why we see interglacials as the natural state of the earth and glaciation as a departure from this norm that requires a glaciation theory to explain even though interglacials are rather brief when compared with the time span of glaciation.

In the Quaternary Ice Age, the earth is glaciated more than 90% of the time with brief interglacials at irregular and random intervals. Because of the interglacial bias of humans, our research question in the study of glaciation cycles is not “why are there interglacials?” but rather our research question is “why are there glaciations?“. The currently held view of the interglacial bias is that glaciation is explained by the Milankovitch theory in terms of the tilt, precession, and eccentricity of the earth.

An alternative theory is proposed by James Kamis LINK: http://www.plateclimatology.com/ to undo the interglacial bias of the Milankovitch approach. The Kamis theory proposes an explanation, not for why there are glaciations but for why there are interglacials, and why there is so much uncertainty in their formation and duration with the new unbiased approach in which the normal state of the earth is glaciation. Therefore, it is the interglacial, those brief and somewhat random blip of warming and ice melt in the context of a cold and icy earth as the norm. In the Kamis view, to understand glaciation cycles we must understand not why glaciations happen but why interglacials happen. A brief literature review is provided below in support of the heat generation of plate tectonics assumed in the Kamis model.

Foulger, G. R., and J. H_ Natland. “Is” hotspot” volcanism a consequence of plate tectonics?.” Science 300.5621 (2003): 921-922. Many volcanoes are associated with subduction zones or mid-ocean ridges, but other areas of unusually high volcanism (or “hotspots“) have a more subtle connection to plate tectonic processes. In their Perspective, Foulger and Natland argue that “hotspot” volcanism is not very hot and is a shallow-source by-product of plate tectonics. In a related Perspective, DePaolo and Manga argue that evidence for at least some “hotspots” being caused by deep plumes originating at the base of Earth’s mantle is strong, although direct evidence is still lacking because of the limited resolution of seismic studies.

Lewis, T. J., A. M. Jessop, and A. S. Judge. “Heat flux measurements in southwestern British Columbia: the thermal consequences of plate tectonics.” Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 22.9 (1985): 1262-1273. Measured heat fluxes from previously published data and 34 additional boreholes outline the terrestrial heat flow field in southern British Columbia. Combined with heat generation representative of the crust at 10 sites in the Intermontane and Omineca belts, the data define a heat flow province with a reduced heat flow of 63mWm2 and a depth scale of 10km. Such a linear relationship is not found or expected in the Insular Belt and the western half of the Coast Plutonic Complex where low heat fluxes are interpreted to be the result of recent subduction. The apparent boundary between low and high heat flux is a transition over a distance of 20km, located in Jervis Inlet 2040km seaward of the Pleistocene Garibaldi Volcanic Belt. The warm, thin crust of the Intermontane and Omenica Crystalline belts is similar to that of areas of the Basin and Range Province where the youngest volcanics are more than 17Ma in age. Processes 50Ma ago that completely heated the crust and upper mantle could theoretically produce such high heat fluxes by conductive cooling of the lithosphere. But it is more likely that the asthenosphere flows towards the subduction zone, bringing heat to the base of the lithosphere. Since the reduced heat flow is high but constant, large differences in upper crustal temperatures within this heat flow province at present are caused by large variations in both crustal heat generation and near-surface thermal conductivity. The sharp transition in heat flux near the coast is the result of the combined effects of convective heating of the eastern Coast Plutonic Complex, pronounced differential uplift and erosion across a boundary within the Coast Plutonic Complex, and the subducting oceanic plate.

Bickle, M. J. “Heat loss from the Earth: a constraint on Archaean tectonics from the relation between geothermal gradients and the rate of plate production.” Earth and Planetary Science Letters 40.3 (1978): 301-315. The models suggested for the oceanic lithosphere which best predict oceanic heat flow and depth profiles are the constant thickness model and a model in which the lithosphere thickens away from the ridge with a heat source at its base. The latter is considered to be more physically realistic. Such a model, constrained by the observed oceanic heat flow and depth profiles and a temperature at the ridge crest of between 1100°C and 1300°C, requires a heat source at the base of the lithosphere of between 0.5 and 0.9 h.f.u., thermal conductivities for the mantle between 0.005 and 0.0095 cal cm⁻¹ °C⁻¹ s⁻¹ and a coefficient of thermal expansion at 840°C between 4.1 × 10⁻⁵ and 5.1 × 10⁻⁵ °C⁻¹. Plate creation and subduction are calculated to dissipate about 45% of the total earth heat loss for this model. The efficiency of this mechanism of heat loss is shown to be strongly dependent on the magnitude of the basal heat source. A relation is derived for total earth heat loss as a function of the rate of plate creation and the amount of heat transported to the base of plates. The estimated heat transport to the base of the oceanic lithosphere is similar to estimates of mantle heat flow into the base of the continental lithosphere. If this relation existed in the past and if metamorphic conditions in late Archaean high-grade terrains can be used to provide a maximum constraint on equilibrium Archaean continental thermal gradients, heat flow into the base of the lithosphere in the late Archaean must have been less than about 1.2–1.5 h.f.u. The relation between earth heat loss, the rate of plate creation and the rate of heat transport to the base of the lithosphere suggests that a significant proportion of the heat loss in the Archaean must have taken place by the processes of plate creation and subduction. The Archaean plate processes may have involved much more rapid production of plates only slightly thinner than at present.

CONCLUSION: SIGNIFICANT GEOLOGICAL ENERGY AND CARBON FLOWS MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND INTERGLACIAL TEMPERTURE CYCLES AS ATMOSPHERIC PHENOMENA