History of mankind if seawater were not "salted"

Jun 2015
5,567
UK
#11
A world as old as the earth with fresh water seas would have to have little or no land masses for the reasons I already gave (post 2). If there are no land masses there is no land life, therefore no humans. Perhaps some form of more intelligent sea life would develop, possibly from mollusks (fresh water versions of octopuss, squid).

BTW speculative history shouldn't include unnatural SF fantasies IMO. For example, what if wood didn't burn?
land masses were initially created by steam condensing into liquid water. the Earth is a rocky planet, so once some steam condensed, some land would be of a higher altitude than the early oceans. Then the seas became salty due to minerals, but that's all land essentially is. The Earth's crust that is merely above sea-level.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
2,769
Las Vegas, NV USA
#13
This is an interesting question in its own right as humanity is currently busy looking (and finding) for exoplanets.... Its not completely wild to assume that some of them will only have fresh water....
Correct. But freshwater seas only stay fresh if dissolved salts don't drain into them. That will be the case if there are no continents. Rain will fall on oceans and not on rocks. Over time rain on rocky land masses erodes rocks and dissolves salts which drain into the sea. Salts of all all kinds are fundamental constituaents of rocks wherever they are. The natural elements and the compounds they form are universal, confirmed by spectrographic evidence.Our own biology processes salts. Routine hospital blood work measures sodium and potassium blood levels which form salts with chlorine. If any of these are too low, you are sick or dead.
 
Last edited:

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
2,769
Las Vegas, NV USA
#14
No one is forcing you to participate.
If you want "real" history then go find some, there is plenty of it on the forum and elsewhere.
There is no need to denigrate the OP or impose your standards on everyone else.
Don't like it? Move on and leave it to those who do.
I choose to participate in a critical way. If I read nonsense, I will respond or not respond as I see fit within tne rules of the forum.
 
Jun 2017
422
USA
#15
No, there are not many ways that the earth could have developed as did with its advanced life forms. It may not be unique in the entire universe, but the conditons that allow for such life are pretty specific and constraining.

Why does this particilar forum need to discuss science fiction (in this case bad science fiction) when so much interesting real history could have gone in another direction in a perfectly plausible way?
That's nonsense because this is nothing to do with the evolution of live, it's to do with salt content of the seas. If there is less salt in the crust there will be less in the seas. Or if there is less rainfall. Or one big continent. Or a thousand other things.

There does not need to be no land masses, that doesn't even make any sense.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,705
Portugal
#16
I choose to participate in a critical way. If I read nonsense, I will respond or not respond as I see fit within tne rules of the forum.
I think you gave here a quite good answer, albeit some people take critical answers in a personal perspective I think that if well intended (i.e. in Historical other Social Sciences and Natural Sciences perspectives) they can be enlightening and educational.
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
31,528
T'Republic of Yorkshire
#17
The OP did not ask "how could the Earth have developed with freshwater seas?". The question was "how would it have developed IF it had freshwater seas?"

So if you don't like the premise of the question, don't participate. Within the rules and scope of the forum, anyone is free to discuss whatever they like. Calling it "bad science fiction" is not being critical.

Here's a point. Most of the early civilisations in history were based near sources of freshwater, specifically, river valleys - the Yellow River, the Indus River, the Nile and the Euphrates. If the seas were fresh, there would obviously be no such restriction, and coastal communities would be more common, although they would still be concentrated around alluvial plains.
 

Kotromanic

Ad Honorem
Dec 2011
4,363
Iowa USA
#18
The OP did not ask "how could the Earth have developed with freshwater seas?". The question was "how would it have developed IF it had freshwater seas?"

So if you don't like the premise of the question, don't participate. Within the rules and scope of the forum, anyone is free to discuss whatever they like. Calling it "bad science fiction" is not being critical.

Here's a point. Most of the early civilisations in history were based near sources of freshwater, specifically, river valleys - the Yellow River, the Indus River, the Nile and the Euphrates. If the seas were fresh, there would obviously be no such restriction, and coastal communities would be more common, although they would still be concentrated around alluvial plains.
Geez.

Our nervous systems are evolved from those of echinoderms and fish, and those nervous systems could only evolve (in their current form!) in the presence of salted water.

Humans, a species noted for the evolution of the nervous system, could not have arisen without salt in the seas.

It's that straightforward.
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
12,770
#19
Geez.

Our nervous systems are evolved from those of echinoderms and fish, and those nervous systems could only evolve (in their current form!) in the presence of salted water.

Humans, a species noted for the evolution of the nervous system, could not have arisen without salt in the seas.

It's that straightforward.
Why is that ? There are fresh water fish
 

Similar History Discussions