#ourocean2014

[CrusaderFrank]

First evidence of ocean acidification affecting live marine creatures in the Southern Ocean -- ScienceDaily

The shells of marine snails -- known as pteropods -- living in the seas around Antarctica are being dissolved by ocean acidification according to a new study published this week in the journal Nature Geoscience. These tiny animals are a valuable food source for fish and birds and play an important role in the oceanic carbon cycle.


During a science cruise in 2008, researchers from British Antarctic Survey (BAS) and the University of East Anglia (UEA), in collaboration with colleagues from the US Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), discovered severe dissolution of the shells of living pteropods in Southern Ocean waters.
The team examined an area of upwelling, where winds cause cold water to be pushed upwards from the deep to the surface of the ocean. Upwelled water is usually more corrosive to a particular type of calcium carbonate (aragonite) that pteropods use to build their shells. The team found that as a result of the additional influence of ocean acidification, this corrosive water severely dissolved the shells of pteropods.

Observations by real scientists, instead of blathering by posters on a board.

East Angelia is another way of saying "Bernie Madoff's accountant"

Tell 'em about the Oregon Oysters!!!

 

[PredFan]

#sand

Funniest post of the year so far!

 

[Dot Com]

Oceans warm faster, and may hold the key to climate change | TIME.com

The experts at the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had a particularly pressing challenge as they prepared the newest assessment on global warming science, the first chapter of which was released in September. The problem was that the climate wasn’t acting the way they’d expected. In recent years, global greenhouse gas emissions had kept rising—hitting an all-time record in 2012. Yet even though the carbon concentration in the atmosphere gradually increased, passing the 400 parts per million threshold earlier this year, the planet’s average surface temperatures have remained pretty much the same over the past 15 years. The Earth hasn’t cooled—this past decade has still been the hottest on record—but temperatures haven’t risen as climate models predicted. Call it a “pause,” call it a “hiatus,” but the question is clear: where’s the heat?

Try the ocean. That’s one takeaway from a new paper published in Science today, one of a number of studies suggesting that the oceans depths seem to be soaking up the excess heat energy created by the accumulation of greenhouse gases. Researchers led by Yair Rosenthal at Rutgers University reconstructed temperatures in one part of the Pacific Ocean and found that its middle depths have been warming some 15 times faster over the past 60 years than at any other time over the past 10,000 years. It’s as if the oceans have been acting as a battery, absorbing the excess charge created by the greenhouse effect, which leaves less to warm the surface of the planet, where we’d notice it.

Yes, the oceans are warming. Every study shows that.

denier response: "yabut our 4% of scientists say....."

 

[jc456]

oceans warm faster, and may hold the key to climate change | time.com

the experts at the u.n.’s intergovernmental panel on climate change (ipcc) had a particularly pressing challenge as they prepared the newest assessment on global warming science, the first chapter of which was released in september. The problem was that the climate wasn’t acting the way they’d expected. In recent years, global greenhouse gas emissions had kept rising—hitting an all-time record in 2012. Yet even though the carbon concentration in the atmosphere gradually increased, passing the 400 parts per million threshold earlier this year, the planet’s average surface temperatures have remained pretty much the same over the past 15 years. The earth hasn’t cooled—this past decade has still been the hottest on record—but temperatures haven’t risen as climate models predicted. Call it a “pause,” call it a “hiatus,” but the question is clear: Where’s the heat?

Try the ocean. That’s one takeaway from a new paper published in science today, one of a number of studies suggesting that the oceans depths seem to be soaking up the excess heat energy created by the accumulation of greenhouse gases. Researchers led by yair rosenthal at rutgers university reconstructed temperatures in one part of the pacific ocean and found that its middle depths have been warming some 15 times faster over the past 60 years than at any other time over the past 10,000 years. It’s as if the oceans have been acting as a battery, absorbing the excess charge created by the greenhouse effect, which leaves less to warm the surface of the planet, where we’d notice it.

yes, the oceans are warming. Every study shows that.

denier response: "yabut our 4% of scientists say....."

no evidence

 

[Dot Com]

NOAA Ocean Explorer: Coral Ecosystem Connectivity 2014: Background: Mission Plan

Mesophotic reefs are coral reef environments found at depths ranging from 30-40 meters to greater than 100 meters in the Gulf of Mexico where sufficient light enables certain reef-building corals (i.e., corals with symbiotic algae growing in them) to survive. Mesophotic reefs support a diversity of populations of algae, sponges, corals, other invertebrates, and fishes.

We need to stop factory fishing

discuss...

 

[jc456]

NOAA Ocean Explorer: Coral Ecosystem Connectivity 2014: Background: Mission Plan

Mesophotic reefs are coral reef environments found at depths ranging from 30-40 meters to greater than 100 meters in the Gulf of Mexico where sufficient light enables certain reef-building corals (i.e., corals with symbiotic algae growing in them) to survive. Mesophotic reefs support a diversity of populations of algae, sponges, corals, other invertebrates, and fishes.

We need to stop factory fishing

discuss...

discuss

 

[SSDD]

So, not being a scientist myself, I read things like this and go hmmmmmm. If there were acid issues in the ocean due to some influence by man, why wouldn't it be equal in all of the oceans? I'm just saying, this just doesn't seem to state consistancy to me. Can you explain why it isn't the same in each of the oceans if the cause is all the same? I mean water is water right?

The whole acidification thing is bullshit. The thing is, warm water can't hold as much CO2 as cold water...example, open 2 cans of soda...put one out in the sun and the other in the refrigerator...check them periodically and see which goes flat first...the warmer liquid will give up its CO2 much faster than the cold liquid....

That fact creates a problem for those who have been AGW supporters and ocean acidification supporters...you can't have both, it is a physical impossibility.

Either the oceans are getting warmer and outgassing more CO2 which makes them even less "acidic" and therefore the whole acidification claim is bullshit.....

or

The oceans are becoming cooler and absorbing more CO2 and becoming some small bit more "acidic" in which case, the claim of warming, melting ice, and sea level rise due to additional CO2 in the atmosphere is bullshit. It is an either or choice...they can't have both because the physics makes both happening at the same time impossible.

By the way, both claims...warming due to CO2 and ocean acidification are bullshit and the above was just to point out the idiocy and gullibility of warmers.

 

[Old Rocks]

oceans warm faster, and may hold the key to climate change | time.com

the experts at the u.n.’s intergovernmental panel on climate change (ipcc) had a particularly pressing challenge as they prepared the newest assessment on global warming science, the first chapter of which was released in september. The problem was that the climate wasn’t acting the way they’d expected. In recent years, global greenhouse gas emissions had kept rising—hitting an all-time record in 2012. Yet even though the carbon concentration in the atmosphere gradually increased, passing the 400 parts per million threshold earlier this year, the planet’s average surface temperatures have remained pretty much the same over the past 15 years. The earth hasn’t cooled—this past decade has still been the hottest on record—but temperatures haven’t risen as climate models predicted. Call it a “pause,” call it a “hiatus,” but the question is clear: Where’s the heat?

Try the ocean. That’s one takeaway from a new paper published in science today, one of a number of studies suggesting that the oceans depths seem to be soaking up the excess heat energy created by the accumulation of greenhouse gases. Researchers led by yair rosenthal at rutgers university reconstructed temperatures in one part of the pacific ocean and found that its middle depths have been warming some 15 times faster over the past 60 years than at any other time over the past 10,000 years. It’s as if the oceans have been acting as a battery, absorbing the excess charge created by the greenhouse effect, which leaves less to warm the surface of the planet, where we’d notice it.

yes, the oceans are warming. Every study shows that.

denier response: "yabut our 4% of scientists say....."

no evidence

135 Years of Global Ocean Warming - Perspectives on Ocean Science - UCSD-TV - University of California Television

A new study comparing past and present ocean temperatures reveals the global ocean has been warming for more than a century. Join Dean Roemmich, Scripps physical oceanographer and study co-author, as he describes how warm our oceans are getting, where all that heat is going, and how this knowledge will help scientists better understand the earth's climate. Learn how scientists measured ocean temperature during the historic voyage of the HMS Challenger (1872-76) and how today's network of ocean-probing robots is changing the way scientists study the seas. (#23999)

Plenty of evidence.

 

[jc456]

denier response: "yabut our 4% of scientists say....."

no evidence

135 Years of Global Ocean Warming - Perspectives on Ocean Science - UCSD-TV - University of California Television

A new study comparing past and present ocean temperatures reveals the global ocean has been warming for more than a century. Join Dean Roemmich, Scripps physical oceanographer and study co-author, as he describes how warm our oceans are getting, where all that heat is going, and how this knowledge will help scientists better understand the earth's climate. Learn how scientists measured ocean temperature during the historic voyage of the HMS Challenger (1872-76) and how today's network of ocean-probing robots is changing the way scientists study the seas. (#23999)

Plenty of evidence.

again, hmmmmm......sorry Charlie! See SSDD asked two simple questions to which you fail to respond. So either, the warming temperature in the ocean is therefore adding CO2 to the atmosphere, then the acidity thing can't be happening. So we know the oceans aren't warming since we have been in a cooling cycle and polar vortex's have been happening. So you have no evidence of anything still at this point.

Deflection, that's all you have.

 

[Crick]

SSDD's ignorance extends to every science topic on which he's ever made comment.

The amount of a gas that will dissolve in a specific given liquid is determined by the gas's partial pressure. Gases in a mixture like our atmosphere will exist in solution in an exposed liquid in amounts proportional to their portion of the atmospheric mixture. As their atmospheric levels change, so will their amount in solution in the exposed liquid.

The gas solubility of a liquid is inversely proportional to its absolute temperature. As its temperature goes up, a liquid's ability to hold gases in solution goes down.

These two effects are independent: the absolute amount of any specific gas found in solution will be the result of the algebraic sum of these two effects. As has been noted, the current trend of these two effects are in opposition. The increasing temperatures will reduce the amount of all gases the oceans holds in solution but the increasing amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere will put more of it into solution.

In the last century, the average temperature of the Earth's oceans have increased by about 0.1C from approximately 265K to 265.1K. That would be a temperature increase of 0.03%. In an earlier post in another thread, I erroneously stated the change was 0.3%. Mea culpa.

In the last century, the partial pressure of CO2 has increased from 0.0284 kP to 0.0405 kP, an increase of 42.75%. This effect is direct - no proportionality factor. That increase in partial pressure will produce that increase in dissolved gases.

Three guesses as to which one wins. And the first two don't count.

 

[SSDD]

SSDD's ignorance extends to every science topic on which he's ever made comment.

The amount of a gas that will dissolve in a specific given liquid is determined by the gas's partial pressure. Gases in a mixture like our atmosphere will exist in solution in an exposed liquid in amounts proportional to their portion of the atmospheric mixture. As their atmospheric levels change, so will their amount in solution in the exposed liquid.

The gas solubility of a liquid is inversely proportional to its absolute temperature. As its temperature goes up, a liquid's ability to hold gases in solution goes down.

These two effects are independent: the absolute amount of any specific gas found in solution will be the result of the algebraic sum of these two effects.

In the last century, the average temperature of the Earth's oceans have increased by about 0.1C from approximately 265K to 265.1K. That would be an increase of 0.03%.

In the last century, the partial pressure of CO2 has increased from 0.0284 kP to 0.0405 kP, an increase of 42.75%.

Three guesses as to which one wins. And the first two don't count.

A 42% increase of a whisp is still a whisp...and if the oceans are warming, then the chances of acidification are nil.....if the oceans are cooling and absorbing more CO2 then your claims of global warming are bullshit. You can't have it both ways.

You guys have bullshit excuses for every failure of your hypothesis....excuses for the lack of warming...excuses for the failure of the poles to melt...excuses for the increase in snow cover..excuses for the hot spot that climate science claimed not so long ago was the smoking gun fingerprint of AGW....excuses for everything.....fact is, your hypothesis has failed and there is no excuse for continuing to believe in it.

 

[Crick]

Your understanding of the sciences is so flawed it's amazing you can successfully make yourself breakfast in the morning. The wisp here is the loss of solubility resulting from a 0.1C temperature increase.

This idea that "you can't have it both ways" is your central meme, isn't it. It's the logic behind your insane concept that nothing can radiate towards warmer temperatures. You seem to think that all process are in a competition that only the winner can proceed. You need to restart your education back at the point where you started playing with wooden blocks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

SSDD's ignorance extends to every science topic on which he's ever made comment.

The amount of a gas that will dissolve in a specific given liquid is determined by the gas's partial pressure. Gases in a mixture like our atmosphere will exist in solution in an exposed liquid in amounts proportional to their portion of the atmospheric mixture. As their atmospheric levels change, so will their amount in solution in the exposed liquid.

The gas solubility of a liquid is inversely proportional to its absolute temperature. As its temperature goes up, a liquid's ability to hold gases in solution goes down.

These two effects are independent: the absolute amount of any specific gas found in solution will be the result of the algebraic sum of these two effects. As has been noted, the current trend of these two effects are in opposition. The increasing temperatures will reduce the amount of all gases the oceans holds in solution but the increasing amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere will put more of it into solution.

In the last century, the average temperature of the Earth's oceans have increased by about 0.1C from approximately 265K to 265.1K. That would be a temperature increase of 0.03%. In an earlier post in another thread, I erroneously stated the change was 0.3%. Mea culpa.

In the last century, the partial pressure of CO2 has increased from 0.0284 kP to 0.0405 kP, an increase of 42.75%. This effect is direct - no proportionality factor. That increase in partial pressure will produce that increase in dissolved gases.

Three guesses as to which one wins. And the first two don't count.

So we're letting you experiment with an INSTANTANEOUS increase of this devastating molecule, and you still don't have a single lab experiment backing up your insane theory

Are you Gullible?

 

[Crick]

Instantaneous increase? WTF are you talking about? Did you not see the repeated phrase "In the last century"?

 

[SSDD]

Your understanding of the sciences is so flawed it's amazing you can successfully make yourself breakfast in the morning. The wisp here is the loss of solubility resulting from a 0.1C temperature increase.

This idea that "you can't have it both ways" is your central meme, isn't it. It's the logic behind your insane concept that nothing can radiate towards warmer temperatures. You seem to think that all process are in a competition that only the winner can proceed. You need to restart your education back at the point where you started playing with wooden blocks.

So show me an observed, measured example of energy moving from a cooler object to a warmer object...you claim that it happens all the time everywhere but seem unable to provide a single observed, measured instance....the second law says that energy can't move from cold to warm without some work being done to make it happen...all observation agrees with the second law...you can't show any example of energy moving from cool to warm...ergo...you are operating from a position of faith.

 

[SSDD]

Instantaneous increase? WTF are you talking about? Did you not see the repeated phrase "In the last century"?

In the last century...most of the warming happened when the levels of this devastating molecule were in what climate science calls the "safe" range.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Instantaneous increase? WTF are you talking about? Did you not see the repeated phrase "In the last century"?

You're having trouble because we're talking about an experiment...that explains your inability to comprehend.

You allege a 120 ppm increase over 100 years raises temperature by 2-8 degrees. We're saying you can do a lab experiment with an instantaneous increase.

 

[Crick]

To what prior post are you referring? If it was not the post just preceding yours, it might have been helpful to have quoted it rather than having quoted MINE - which only discussed events in the real world - in its entirety.

Thousands of experiments have been done and, using laboratory-sized test samples, their results HAVE been immediate. I plan to never waste my time telling you about any more of them. Look them up yourself.

 

[Crick]

Instantaneous increase? WTF are you talking about? Did you not see the repeated phrase "In the last century"?

In the last century...most of the warming happened when the levels of this devastating molecule were in what climate science calls the "safe" range.

Let's see your reference for that "safe range".

 

[Dot Com]

To what prior post are you referring? If it was not the post just preceding yours, it might have been helpful to have quoted it rather than having quoted MINE - which only discussed events in the real world - in its entirety.

Thousands of experiments have been done and, using laboratory-sized test samples, their results HAVE been immediate. I plan to never waste my time telling you about any more of them. Look them up yourself.

good post. Don't give the deniers anything. Their fall-back position is always the know-nothing stance.