Comments on: Rising Temperatures Could Shut Down Plate Tectonics

By: uhhhh

uhhhh — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:17:48 +0000

uhhh i thought tis was on global warming

By: davey

davey — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:50:31 +0000

I would say there are about 3 billion years of geologic history that says we should worry that much about it happening here.

By: Edward

Edward — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:35:17 +0000

A temperature increase of 38Â° C is equivalent to 68.4Â° F, not 100Â° F (as stated in the quote). It would seem that the author incorrectly added the 32Â° F scale adjustment, which applies only when calculating exact (as opposed to relative) temperatures.

1Â°F = 1.8Â°C
yÂ°F = 1.8 * xÂ°C + 32

While not a critical error, it is worthy of note.

By: geokstr

geokstr — Thu, 15 May 2008 03:56:06 +0000

I wonder if the fact that Venus is like, fifty MILLION miles closer to the sun has anything to do with its surface temperature. Or that, despite a lower gravity than Earth, the fact that it happens to have 90 times the atmospheric pressure might have something to do with its temperature. But no, it must be because the Venusians invented the first SUV's billions of years ago.

By: marcellus

marcellus — Thu, 15 May 2008 03:39:45 +0000

AMEN! to Rusty.

By: Rusty

Rusty — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:07:49 +0000

Glad to hear this isn't yet ANOTHER global warming article, thanks….

By: alphonso richardson

alphonso richardson — Wed, 14 May 2008 14:02:01 +0000

IF this theory's correct, we could be screwed.

Again

By: NoAstronomer

NoAstronomer — Wed, 14 May 2008 12:39:24 +0000

What rationale is posited for increasing temperatures making the mantel *more* viscous?

Crust inversion – sounds nasty.

By: pantzov

pantzov — Wed, 14 May 2008 10:13:20 +0000

it's good to have the debate started but this theory has a long way to go and much more research is needed to even begin taking it seriously.

what sort of research was done? the article does not say so i am guessing it was a computer sim.

By: Astrofiend (Syd, Aust)

Astrofiend (Syd, Aust) — Wed, 14 May 2008 02:04:38 +0000

Hmmm – never heard of crust inversions. Catastrophic resurfacing through volcanism was the only theory I'd heard of (which seems likely), but no doubt someone has proposed an alternate explanation for the relatively young surface.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 13 May 2008 23:39:18 +0000

Do we know that the core, or the mantle of Venus is molten?

By: David

David — Tue, 13 May 2008 22:40:12 +0000

I read/saw the same study. If I remember correctly, the theory explains the relatively young appearance of Venus' surface. The inversion is supposedly caused by the intense heat. Does this ring a bell with anyone else out there…

By: Cynthia

Cynthia — Tue, 13 May 2008 22:27:50 +0000

I thought I read that Venus may have experienced catastrophic inversions of its crust in relatively recent terms. While that's not tectonic plate action that would certainly be another worry!