Personally I lean towards a large intergalactic object passing through the system close enough to interact with earth changing our orbit around the sun and quite possibly causing a realignment of earth relative to the other inner planets.
Obviously though whatever it was seems to have been a single event that substantially altered the solar system.
Gigantic planetoid, planet, monster asteroid, big chunk of anti matter, who knows but something clearly altered the dynamics of the solar system and permanently changed our natural climate cycles.
I did a search for anything which might hint at the birth of the moon, just in case that fitted the mega-event criteria. I found this article which appears to be dubious at best.
My main concern is the statement about the moon drifting away. It is true that gravitational drag is pushing the moon away as the Earth’s rotation imparts energy to the moon and slows the rotation of the Earth.
However a conversation that I had with a ‘learned man’ revealed that the point at which the moon becomes geostationary is reached when the orbit period has become 29 days (and the Earth’s rotation has slowed to once every 696 hours). Or thereabouts…
I have not done the calculation and so I remain ignorant. NASA regularly measures the distance to the moon … using a reflector which was left behind on one of their visits.
Everything I can find points to the moon having formed either concurrent with the earth or shortly thereafter due to a collision so that puts it way beyond that 2 million year mark.
Something however altered our climate permanently about 2 million years ago and the only thing I can see supported by the science would be a massive NEO altering our orbit and perhaps that of the other inner planets.
Sooner or later equilibrium is reached between all the gravitational bodies so even if we were temporarily thrown into a really eccentric orbit sooner or later we’d settle back into one that’s pretty well consistent which is where we are today.
All of the samples from the moon also indicate that it is made up of the same elements and in the same proportions as the earth’s crust so that strengthens the theory that it broke off from the earth a few billion years after earth had already begun to cool and the various layers had formed.
The current Ice Age we are sitting in (meaning Earth had Ice Ages before) is mostly due to the positions of Greenland and the separation of South America and Antarctica.
Moon has nothing to do with Ice Age.
Greenland, along with Siberia and North Pole forms a quasi-lake where ice cold water can be stored without escaping.
Separation of South America and Antarctica allows very cold current to circulate around Antarctica where ice sheets and glaciers form.
Combine these factors with the Milankovitch cycle, you have a very regular glacial and inter-glacial periods for this current Ice Age.
Remember the movie Titanic?
(It was actually its sister ship that sank whose identities were swapped in the last minute)
Northern Atlantic was becoming full of icebergs and that’s over 100 years ago.
Chunks of ice which are icebergs break off the glaciers on Greenland because glaciers are getting bigger and reaching the Atlantic coast,
There is only one scientific model that explains to any degree of certainty the events and conditions necessary for an Ice Age. Cold winters, cool summers, warm ocean temperatures for increased evaporation and high particulate in the atmosphere to block solar radiation. All this would occur, as explained in Genesis, with a catastrophic global flood.
Tremendous global volcanic activity including the ocean basins, as the mantle is torn apart, sending super-heated subterranean water and ash high into the atmosphere, heating the ocean temperatures by 1-5 degrees C.
No other model proposed has been able to explain the glaciation, especially the models postulating looooong ages for the ice to build.
This is just a scientifically logical theory.
"If you had done your homework on this issue, you would see that we have not assumed a constant rate. (Ironically, if the rate were constant, it would not be a problem for 4.5 billion years.) The rate is inversely proportional to the sixth power of distance. This is because both the force of the moon, which induces tides, and the force that the tides induce on the moon are dipoles, each of which goes as 1/r3. So, the combined tidal force on the moon goes as 1/r6. Integrating over r yields a maximum possible age much less than 4.5 billion years."1
After my father came home from Burma - WW2, he contacted several government agencies, with this proposal: KEEP THE WAR EFFORT RECYCLING PROGRAM in operation. All the logistics were already in place. It would have been effortless to continue; but no, our politicians believed they knew more than a cabinetmaker from PA. It could have eliminated landfills, and it would have given a leg up on stopping the tsunami of plastics that now pollutes our planet. Instead of using the waste for the war effort, it could have been turned into profitable industries. The horses have long left the barn, and are in the next county; so closing the door is moot.
This isn’t going to be a good look for the Swedish mental midget and her legion of followers. Her father and an Indian climate activist have been responsible for all of her posts on social media. This is an organized business not an organic rise to the top of the climate craziness pyramid.
One of the biggest thing driving plastics is simply health concerns and the cost of recycling bottles.
There’s always a higher risk of contamination when you reuse bottles and other containers for food and beverages.
Also, crazy as it sounds it’s generally cheaper to use fresh, raw metals than to recycle, particularly with Aluminum.
With steel recycling is even more difficult because you can’t easily control the quality of steel going in which makes it pretty well impossible to have a consistent high quality product going out.
It’s crazy but recycling creates a whole new dimension of costs.
Plastic would not be the monster it is today, if recycling began in it’s infancy. Remember, the war effort recycling was already in place, and it was not necessary to start from square one. It was just abandoned. Continuing could have caused no harm. Not continuing, well, have a look.
I get that, the problem is the energy and transportation requirments, sanitation, and the inability to control the quality of the end products produced.
If your spec’s call for a specific type of steel or aluminum you must start from scratch.
Except when prices for scrap go astronomically high it’s simply cheaper to make your metals starting with ores or raw base stock.
What I said: Some intelligent higher power said. I’m giving you a pristine planet, with wonderful resources; and I’m giving you the ability to reason, solve problems, and be able to thrive. So whatcha gonna do? Should have included in the contract; DON’T BE FUCKIN GREEDY.
The planet will outlast us all. A billion years from now those landfills will be full of oil and coal and anther incarnation of humanity will be building their own civilization with it.
Oh Yeah, the Earth abides. Once we’re erased from the planet, the Earth will clean itself up toot sweet. A few million years in geologic time. All that will remain pointing to our existence, is the gold - platinum ( and a few other metals that don’t degrade ) that we refined; and possibly Twinkies. Even glass will wear away physically. Time & pressure is all it takes. In fact, even the metals would wear away physically from erosion; so maybe just Twinkies.
The left always defaults to hiding behind human shields. That’s why they use children to push climate change, all this trans shit, their attempts to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment. That’s why the migrant invaders at our southern border push the few women and children they have with them to the forefront. Its why terrorists hide in population centers.
It’s about power and control and these people will stoop to literally anything to get it.
