Whatever Happened to the Hole in the Ozone Layer?

Of course one is advised to put on hip waders when reading any of Suckee....s posts.

Real science from the scientists at NOAA.


http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/yos/resource/01state_of_science.pdf

What is Ocean Acidification and How Does it Affect Marine Species?
• The oceans have absorbed about 50% of the carbon dioxide (CO2) released from the burning of fossil fuels, resulting in chemical reactions that lower ocean pH. This has caused an increase in hydrogen ion (acidity) of about 30% since the start of the industrial age through a process known as “ocean acidification.” A growing number of studies have demonstrated adverse impacts on marine organisms, including:
• The rate at which reef-building corals produce their skeletons decreases (Figure 1).
• The ability of marine algae and free-swimming zooplankton to maintain protective shells is reduced (Figure 2).
• The survival of larval marine species, including commercial fish and shellfish, is reduced.

Okay going to play pretend and force me to embarrass you again douchebag? okay want to do this again in another thread no problem.....

Explain to me how corals and similar life forms evolved in times of 20x higher atmospheric CO2?

Not only did they evolve in times with 20x higher CO2 in the atmosphere, but the thrived and spread as well.... Just in the limited confirmed paleo study we can affirm this as fact..... IF the current theory pushed by your faithers and their agenda driven pseudo-science based theory is indeed accurate as stated and implied in their papers and claims in their pamphlets and through the media outlets, and politically oriented IPCC; How is that possible?

Its not and when you examine the theory itself you see the fact they take a theory and accepted current fact about CO2 in an enclosed water environment (not like an ocean but more like a pool), and try to make a case for ocean acidification based on that principle and concept.

Is a swimming pool like an ocean? Why no and why not? Well a pool is limited by a great many things that are not apart of the system. A short list of examples:

1. A pool does not have a soil or earth based system underneath it. There is no free and abundant source of alkali in a pool. Alkali inhibits acidification.

2. A pool does not benefit from waves stirring the system recycling the deeper water with the upper water. Deeper water as in measured in 100's and thousands of feet or more in some areas. The deeper water will naturally be far less acidic than the upper levels and multiple times less acidic than the surface water. The constant mixing and circulating of this, forcing the older more acidic surface water to eventually make contact with the alkali laden sea bed and various other substances which lower the acidity. And we aren't even mentioning the fact temperature of water effects the level of absorption of atmospheric CO2... Colder water holds more CO2, warmer water releases more CO2.... Anyone see a problem yet? keep this point in mind...More on it in a little bit....

3. A pool being a closed environment, and maintained in a timely basis only allows certain types of organisms to take hold. Most other organisms require the first organisms to set a groundwork for them to make a foothold. oceans are already set in this respect. This base and required structure already is established in an ocean. These things through life, waste, reproduction, and the cycle of life also inhibit acidification.

So when they take an example like PH in a pool or any closed environment and attempt to make a case regarding the oceans, it is a gross oversimplification. An oversimplification that gives a false scenario to an uneducated or already frightened over CO2 public.

All of this is a simplification as well, one made to give a more complete view of what any claims of ocean acidification really mean.....

Oldsocks will ask me for some scientific source for this..... Well all of this is easily found from actually reading the articles and information on this from even his own sources..... Don't go with the headlines or the pamphlets they give the AGW groups and major media. Actually read the stories or data summaries and FAQS.

All of this shows us categorically, we do not understand the relationship between atmospheric CO2 and ocean PH well enough to make any rash claims like those the propagandists and MSM, or their agenda driven scientists try to make....

I asked this simple question of oldrocks last time and he went into a fit...

I will ask it again....

Explain to me how corals and similar life forms evolved in times of 20x higher atmospheric CO2? IF CO2 ocean acidification theory is correct as stated and implied by your side and their proponents (be they scientific or any other) and coral and similar life are particularly susceptible to acidic conditions as claimed. How could they have possibly evolved and thrived in such times of vastly greater atmospheric CO2?

Using simple logic and sound reason we see that there is a marked conflict here... Either the theory is unsound in some way, overstated to generate fear, or our understanding of the bigger process isn't detailed enough. Because our own researchers give us data that is conflicting and counters each others claims.

In the meantime here is a new one for him to bake his little noodle trying to make an excuse for it....

Also the same so-called scientists from the pro-AGW agenda driven organizations out there tell us of a feedback loop regarding CO2 ocean acidification and Global Warming. As in the planet gets warmer from Atmospheric CO2, the oceans absorb more of it because the oceans are warmer, one feeds the other until we heat up land kill the planet. Well that would be fine if the fact the ocean warming did not actually slow down CO2 absorption.... What was that??? yep warmer oceans absorb less CO2. So that kinda puts a bit of a monkey wrench in the whole theory doesn't it....

IF warmer oceans absorb less CO2 the so-called feedback loop is broken. SO if atmospheric CO2 causes drastic warming as they claim, the oceans will warm absorbing less CO2, leaving more in the atmosphere... Which means? The whole premise of ocean acidification is again in question... if they absorb less as they warm the claims of massive ocean acidification getting worse as the planet warms is highly unlikely if not impossible given the nature of the system..

The way they sell this nonsense for grant money is simple.... They take a legitimate concept or theory like Ph balance and acidification in water. And ask questions like "does CO2 effect the oceans like it would my swimming pool?".. They first assume it must effect it somewhat because its water. Then they go about trying to prove this. They show some link and get a little grant money to further this study. Do a bit more research and show a bit more accurate a link, may get published in a science journal, and then make some bold statements of CO2 and Ph in the oceans. THey make the bold statements because they have a product to sell; their theory and themselves as researchers. Whom are they selling to? The governmental organizations, environmental organizations, the think tanks, the sierra club, the club of rome, etc. etc.. And BINGO! Grant money with a stipulation. That stipulation being; the study must show a link to AGW.... So now they are stuck... No tie in to AGW, no more grant money, no more inside track to the vast infrastructure perpetuating this AGW theory, no more big house, no more Benz in the driveway, and no more immediate publication in the major science journals......

Thats why they all but deny these simple and logical points. They either leave them out of their final publications, gloss over them and diminish them, or they try and hide this with charts, graphs, equations, and often wrong, misleading or irrelevant data to the claims they make in regards to the topic.

It's called BULLSHIT....

lets watch him dance around it and ask for sources for sound reason and logic again....... Douchebag can't even form a series of thoughts together well enough to think.. If its not on his green reading list or propaganda posting card he is dumbfounded....:lol:
 
Last edited:
Explain to me how corals and similar life forms evolved in times of 20x higher atmospheric CO2?

Not only did they evolve in times with 20x higher CO2 in the atmosphere, but the thrived and spread as well.... Just in the limited confirmed paleo study we can affirm this as fact.....

-----------------------------------

They evolved and thrived at 20X CO2, because that was the situation at the time. Present day corals did not evolve at that higher concentration and, therefore, can be effected adversely by rapid changes in pH. You can't expect the same results from changes over millions of years compared to changes over hundreds. That's too quick for species to adapt to a new situation and when it has happened, mass extinctions have followed. THAT'S what AGW believers are trying to avoid.
 
Explain to me how corals and similar life forms evolved in times of 20x higher atmospheric CO2?

Not only did they evolve in times with 20x higher CO2 in the atmosphere, but the thrived and spread as well.... Just in the limited confirmed paleo study we can affirm this as fact.....

-----------------------------------

They evolved and thrived at 20X CO2, because that was the situation at the time. Present day corals did not evolve at that higher concentration and, therefore, can be effected adversely by rapid changes in pH. You can't expect the same results from changes over millions of years compared to changes over hundreds. That's too quick for species to adapt to a new situation and when it has happened, mass extinctions have followed. THAT'S what AGW believers are trying to avoid.

They are the direct descendants of our coral and shellfish, their structure has not changed in there core makeup. They claim CO2 acidification wiped them out millions of years ago as well..... Naturally...... As in not man, but the natural world.....

Second, you tried that tactic before and it was already slapped for ignorance. Now try and follow the threads on this so you wont look like a repetitive non-reader...
 
Without the Ozone layer to filter UV rays, land animals never would have been able to evolve. We never would have left the ocean.
 
Without the Ozone layer to filter UV rays, land animals never would have been able to evolve. We never would have left the ocean.

I think the hole was plugged by the Messiah... Hey if Gore invented the internet, he can plug the hole in the Ozone layer....:lol::lol:
 
Please educate us on how anyone can say that 50% of the CO2 created by man ends up in the ocean. How exactly can you measure that? I am really curious. My point of course is that when they can't prove their first assertion (as it is a physical impossibility to do so...in other words they pulled that number out of their butts) then all the rest of their nonsense is just that...nonsense.
Of course one is advised to put on hip waders when reading any of Suckee....s posts.

Real science from the scientists at NOAA.


http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/yos/resource/01state_of_science.pdf

What is Ocean Acidification and How Does it Affect Marine Species?
• The oceans have absorbed about 50% of the carbon dioxide (CO2) released from the burning of fossil fuels, resulting in chemical reactions that lower ocean pH. This has caused an increase in hydrogen ion (acidity) of about 30% since the start of the industrial age through a process known as “ocean acidification.” A growing number of studies have demonstrated adverse impacts on marine organisms, including:
• The rate at which reef-building corals produce their skeletons decreases (Figure 1).
• The ability of marine algae and free-swimming zooplankton to maintain protective shells is reduced (Figure 2).
• The survival of larval marine species, including commercial fish and shellfish, is reduced.
 
Actually with more radiation you get more evolution. Look it up sometime. I am not saying the ozone hole is bad, not at all. But like most things the warmers grab onto we havn't a clue what "normal" is. Nobody bothered to measure the damn thing till the 1970's!





Without the Ozone layer to filter UV rays, land animals never would have been able to evolve. We never would have left the ocean.
 
Once again you fail basic science 101. konrad old buddy...hy thee down to a community college and take some geology and physics classes. Some chemistry and biology classes are in order too.
Explain to me how corals and similar life forms evolved in times of 20x higher atmospheric CO2?

Not only did they evolve in times with 20x higher CO2 in the atmosphere, but the thrived and spread as well.... Just in the limited confirmed paleo study we can affirm this as fact.....

-----------------------------------

They evolved and thrived at 20X CO2, because that was the situation at the time. Present day corals did not evolve at that higher concentration and, therefore, can be effected adversely by rapid changes in pH. You can't expect the same results from changes over millions of years compared to changes over hundreds. That's too quick for species to adapt to a new situation and when it has happened, mass extinctions have followed. THAT'S what AGW believers are trying to avoid.
 

Forum List

Back
Top