Sentences with phrase «significant oxygen atmosphere»

That challenges orthodox thinking about conditions on the young Earth, which would not have had a significant oxygen atmosphere for at least another billion years.

Not exact matches

Curiously, the decline in atmospheric oxygen over the past 800,000 years was not accompanied by any significant increase in the average amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, though carbon dioxide concentrations do vary over individual ice age cycles.

It wasn't possible to evolve complex life forms because there was not enough oxygen in the atmosphere, and there wasn't enough oxygen because complex plants hadn't evolved — It was only when land plants came about did we see a more significant rise in atmospheric oxygen.

Professor Andrew Scott, one of the lead authors, said: «High oxygen levels in the atmosphere at this time has been proposed for some time and may be why there were giant insects and arthropods at this time but our research indicates that there was a significant impact on the prevalence and scale of wildfires across the globe and this would have affected not only the ecology of the plants and animals but also their evolution.»

«It looks as if there's a significant time interval between the appearance of oxygen - producing organisms and the actual oxygenation of the atmosphere.»

«When we ran these calculations, we found that in some cases, there was a significant amount of ozone that built up in the atmosphere, despite there not being any oxygen flowing into the atmosphere,» said Shawn Domagal - Goldman of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

A significant release of methane due to melting of the vast deposits trapped by permafrost and clathrate in the Arctic would result in massive loss of oxygen, particularly in the Arctic ocean but also in the atmosphere.

There was still a significant amount of time for oxygen to build up in the atmosphere through biologic mechanisms, according to Trail.

By two billion years ago, in the middle of the Paleoproterozoic era, many proxies suggest that oxygen had built up to a small but significant level in the atmosphere.

It's generally recognized as possibly indication of life on any planet if there is a significant amount reactive Oxygen in it's atmosphere.

A significant release of methane due to melting of the vast deposits trapped by permafrost and clathrate in the Arctic would result in massive loss of oxygen, particularly in the Arctic ocean but also in the atmosphere.

In which case, does the oxygen and nitrogen in the earth's atmosphere emit significant amounts of radiation (at night for example)?

The world's climate is way too complex... with way too many significant global and regional variables (e.g., solar, volcanic and geologic activity, variations in the strength and path of the jet stream and major ocean currents, the seasons created by the tilt of the earth, and the concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere, which by the way is many times more effective at holding heat near the surface of the earth than is carbon dioxide, a non-toxic, trace gas that all plant life must have to survive, and that produce the oxygen that WE need to survive) to consider for any so - called climate model to generate a reliable and reproducible predictive model.

as for carbon dioxide and nitrogen gas and oxygen gas and the collisions you mention — the concentration by volume of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is very small — the most significant effects in the bottom layer of the atmosphere (troposphere) will surely be the heat trapping effect of increased carbon dioxide combined with the pressure - height changes of concentrations of carbon dioxide due to the warming effect.

When Methane decomposes in the atmosphere, does it absorb oxygen in significant quantities?