Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Its easy to forget that global warming doesnt just refer to the rising temperature of the air. Climate change is having an enormous, if less understood, impact on the oceans, which already absorb far more carbon dioxide than the atmosphere. Like so much of what goes on in the vast depths that cover more than two-thirds of our planets surface, the effect of climate change on the oceans remains a black box, albeit one that scientists are working to illuminate.
Or they could mean more fish...like you said...black box. Interesting that you choose the gloom and doom cup half empty senario....based on what? Were the oceans nearly devoid of life during geological times when the earth was much warmer than the present?....To the best of my knowledge, the paleo record shows oceans literally blooming with life during warm periods.
Life in the oceans or on land has not fared well when there was rapid change. Whether the change was toward the cold or toward the hot.
Life in the oceans or on land has not fared well when there was rapid change. Whether the change was toward the cold or toward the hot.
The evidence at present, especially around the coral reefs is that there is a loss of ocean life with this warming.
So your position is that species of fish which have been extinct for 5,000 years will now spring back to life?
I think a more logical assumption is that any significant change in temperature or pH will mean many hundreds of species become extnict.
The evidence at present, especially around the coral reefs is that there is a loss of ocean life with this warming.
No, there is evidence of runoff, pollution, recreational divers, and commercials fishing damaging corals. There isn't the first bit of hard evidence that the fraction of a degree in the past 100 years has had any effect whatsoever. In fact, actual research, as opposed to computer models shows that corals and other marine life do just fine in warmer temps.
So your position is that species of fish which have been extinct for 5,000 years will now spring back to life?
You really can't read if you got that out of anything I said.
I think a more logical assumption is that any significant change in temperature or pH will mean many hundreds of species become extnict.
Really? Based on what? The recent past has been warmer without ecological disaster and the paleo record shows exactly the opposite of your claims.
RAPID change is the problem.
It does not matter what life was like when the oceans were warmer, becasuse the life in the oceans then had time to adjust.
Seriously this concept ought not to confuse anybody.
One has to be purposefully in complete denial not to be able to understand the concept.
Very RAPID changes in any environment have negative impacts on the biospheres effected.
You said there were more species when it was much warmer in the past, and suggested that if it was much warmer in future, there would thus be more fish.
Species around coral reefs are already greatly endangered by bleaching - and research has proved this.
RAPID change is the problem.
It does not matter what life was like when the oceans were warmer, becasuse the life in the oceans then had time to adjust.
Seriously this concept ought not to confuse anybody.
One has to be purposefully in complete denial not to be able to understand the concept.
Very RAPID changes in any environment have negative impacts on the biospheres effected.
8 degrees in a few thousand years is not RAPID?
SSDD -
I do understand that whenever you are embarassed you will start throwing names and accusations around, of course.
I am sure you also understand that if you are going to recreate the diviersity of ocean life you tell us existed X thousand years ago, you will have to recreate species that have been dead forX thousand years, because they are the species best suited to warmer water.
Good thing there is no rapid change. A fraction of a degree in 100 years....and a large portion of that in serious question due to bias input due to poor temperature station location. That hardly constitutes rapid change. The paleo record shows periods of far greater change without the disasterous results warmists fear so much.
