#ourocean2014

[westwall]

Climate news: Arctic seafloor methane release is double previous estimates, and why that matters - AMERICAblog News

Where was the news? I saw a lot of opinion but none of it was backed up by anything real.

 

[Mr. H.]

30 Days of the Ocean

None of that shit, I repeat... none of that shit would be possible without...

hydrocarbons.

Take your play time elsewhere, tiny tot.

 

[flacaltenn]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

WTF?

It’s impossible to know how much the animals are eating, says Kara Law, a physical oceanographer at the Sea Education Association in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, who was not involved in the work. The estimated amount of plastic entering the ocean that the study uses is almost half a century old, and “we’re desperately in need of a better estimate of how much plastic is entering the ocean annually.”

What’s more, both Davison and Law say there are a number of other potential places the plastic could be ending up. It could be washing ashore, and a lot of it could be degrading into pieces too small to be detected. Another possibility is that organisms sticking to and growing on the plastic are dragging the junk beneath the ocean’s surface, either suspending it in the water column or sinking it all the way to the sea floor. Microbes may even be eating the stuff.

Who are we hiring to do this work? Beavis and Butthead? The study uses 50 yr. old "estimates" and we have been all flustered and panicked. And these guys can't rig a nylon stocking and drag it behind a boat??

 

[westwall]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

WTF?

It’s impossible to know how much the animals are eating, says Kara Law, a physical oceanographer at the Sea Education Association in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, who was not involved in the work. The estimated amount of plastic entering the ocean that the study uses is almost half a century old, and “we’re desperately in need of a better estimate of how much plastic is entering the ocean annually.”

What’s more, both Davison and Law say there are a number of other potential places the plastic could be ending up. It could be washing ashore, and a lot of it could be degrading into pieces too small to be detected. Another possibility is that organisms sticking to and growing on the plastic are dragging the junk beneath the ocean’s surface, either suspending it in the water column or sinking it all the way to the sea floor. Microbes may even be eating the stuff.

Who are we hiring to do this work? Beavis and Butthead? The study uses 50 yr. old "estimates" and we have been all flustered and panicked. And these guys can't rig a nylon stocking and drag it behind a boat??

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

 

[Dot Com]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

You think that helps your sides "pro- foul out own nest" side? Contaminating the food supply is OK now as long as it comports w/ your pro- conspicuous consumption ideology? I'll use the Bu$h II/Rumsfeld/Cheney rebuttal then- "just because you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't there"

 

[westwall]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

You think that helps your sides "pro- fowl out own nest" side? Contaminating the food supply is OK now as long as it comports w/ your pro- conspicuous consumption ideology? I'll use the Bu$h II/Rumsfeld/Cheney rebuttal then- "just because you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't there"

You guys have been pushing this fiction of the gyre for years and when anyone has actually tried to find it they have had no luck. The problem you have Dottie is just like the boy who cried wolf one too many times, you asshats have been found to be lying one too many times (or is it 30 or 40 now) and because you no longer have the credibility of a gnat real anti pollution programs will suffer because the people are going to lump the legitimate programs in with your bullshit.

See the problem yet?

 

[flacaltenn]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

You think that helps your sides "pro- fowl out own nest" side? Contaminating the food supply is OK now as long as it comports w/ your pro- conspicuous consumption ideology? I'll use the Bu$h II/Rumsfeld/Cheney rebuttal then- "just because you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't there"

Maybe when you fledge the nest Dottie -- You'll be able to contribute more to solutions and debate on the enviro than twitter slogans about the nest you hatched from....

 

[mamooth]

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

 

[westwall]

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

Cherry picking data is a prerogative of the anti science AGW religious cult. That is very well known. Like I said, you guys talk about the gyre and yet no one can seem to find it.

 

[Dot Com]

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

^ that.

He's either w/ the 96% of scientists or he's a denier cultist [MENTION=19448]CrusaderFrank[/MENTION]

 

[Kosh]

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

^ that.

He's either w/ the 96% of scientists or he's a denier cultist [MENTION=19448]CrusaderFrank[/MENTION]

One AGW cult member agreeing with another AGW cult member, proves absolutely nothing!

Other than this was a failed thread from the beginning...

 

[flacaltenn]

They took 3000 water samples and could find nothing! Well, almost nothing. Pretty sad isn't it?

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

Cherry picking data is a prerogative of the anti science AGW religious cult. That is very well known. Like I said, you guys talk about the gyre and yet no one can seem to find it.

They found a dozen different gyres off the Australian Coast looking for that Malaysian Jet (IIRC). A lot of filled with LARGE trash presumably some plastic..

 

[westwall]

Westwall, you always regard new data as sad, provided you're not declaring it's fraudulent. It's one charming facet of your anti-scientific-method mindset.

Remember, you won't be allowed into the reason-based community until you stop cherrypicking and only accepting data you like. Embracing the scientific method obviously will get the denier cult enraged at you, but you need to make that hard choice. It's either reason or your political cult; there's no way to embrace both.

Meanwhile, understand the world is rejecting your cult's putrid and pathological dishonesty and simply moving on without you. If you want to stay with your cult, it's going to be very lonely for you, with only a handful of fellow cranks to keep you company.

Cherry picking data is a prerogative of the anti science AGW religious cult. That is very well known. Like I said, you guys talk about the gyre and yet no one can seem to find it.

They found a dozen different gyres off the Australian Coast looking for that Malaysian Jet (IIRC). A lot of filled with LARGE trash presumably some plastic..

No doubt. The Sargasso sea is likewise polluted as hell. There is no question that there is far too much crap making its way into the oceans. What pisses me off is no one bothers to do anything about it.

100 billion pissed away on crap AGW "research" and not a penny of that actually being used to clean things up.

 

[Dot Com]

Healthy Habitat: The Foundation of America's Seafood and Fisheries :: NOAA Fisheries

Fisheries Home » Feature Stories
Healthy Habitat: The Foundation of America's Seafood and Fisheries

July 15, 2014

Habitat is the foundation for the commercial and recreational saltwater fishing industries
that provided more than 1.7 million jobs and over $199 billion dollars in economic activity in 2012. Watch this short video to learn more about the important role healthy habitat serves as the foundation of America’s seafood and fisheries and what NOAA is doing to conserve habitat to rebuild fisheries.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5POPdvbKtQA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5POPdvbKtQA[/ame]

 

[Dot Com]

NOAA-led study shows Alaska fisheries and communities at risk from ocean acidification

 

[Harry Dresden]

Remember that "Great Pacific Gyre" the enviro Nazis got their panties all in a bunch over?
Turns out it ain't there. I mean like really not there...like 99% not there......


Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing

"Millions of tons. That’s how much plastic should be floating in the world’s oceans, given our ubiquitous use of the stuff. But a new study finds that 99% of this plastic is missing. One disturbing possibility: Fish are eating it.

If that’s the case, “there is potential for this plastic to enter the global ocean food web,” says Carlos Duarte, an oceanographer at the University of Western Australia, Crawley. “And we are part of this food web.”



Ninety-nine percent of the ocean's plastic is missing | Science/AAAS | News

You think that helps your sides "pro- fowl out own nest" side? Contaminating the food supply is OK now as long as it comports w/ your pro- conspicuous consumption ideology? I'll use the Bu$h II/Rumsfeld/Cheney rebuttal then- "just because you can't find it doesn't mean it isn't there"

Maybe when you fledge the nest Dottie -- You'll be able to contribute more to solutions and debate on the enviro than twitter slogans about the nest you hatched from....

that will be the day....Dottie does not question....just takes what she is told and runs with it....

 

[Dot Com]

This message is hidden because Harry Dresden is on your ignore list.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How much do we have to reduce CO2 to reverse this Imaginary "Ocean Acidification"?

 

[Harry Dresden]

This message is hidden because Harry Dresden is on your ignore list.

you say something the poor fucker dont like and its off to the corn field with you.....dottie....the example of a pussy.....why dont you just admit you are scared to death of me dottie.....what else could it be?....

 

[westwall]

How much do we have to reduce CO2 to reverse this Imaginary "Ocean Acidification"?

That's a good question in light of the fact that if we were to burn every rock on this planet we could only lower the pH from 8.1 to 8.0 I too am wondering!