Global warming killing corals

[IanC]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

you do realize ocean pH has been higher and lower than it is right now, right? if it didn't cause disaster then why do you think it will cause disaster now?

 

[konradv]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

you do realize ocean pH has been higher and lower than it is right now, right? if it didn't cause disaster then why do you think it will cause disaster now?

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

 

[westwall]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

Ohhhh konrad, did you go to one of those seminars on how to deal with "deniers"? You sure sound like it. Allways attack the mental health of anyone who doesn't support the "science". Let me tell you bub, when you have to sink to that level you have really lost the plot!

The people no longer believe you!

 

[konradv]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

Ohhhh konrad, did you go to one of those seminars on how to deal with "deniers"? You sure sound like it. Allways attack the mental health of anyone who doesn't support the "science". Let me tell you bub, when you have to sink to that level you have really lost the plot!

The people no longer believe you!

Back up your theory then. Is what I said anything worse that you calling AGW a "religion". Look to yourself first. I'm just trying to find out what the Laws of Chemistry and Physics are where you're from. Where I come from if energy-out doesn't equal energy-in, you have a build up. What's that energy doing?

 

[westwall]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

Ohhhh konrad, did you go to one of those seminars on how to deal with "deniers"? You sure sound like it. Allways attack the mental health of anyone who doesn't support the "science". Let me tell you bub, when you have to sink to that level you have really lost the plot!

The people no longer believe you!

Back up your theory then. Is what I said anything worse that you calling AGW a "religion". Look to yourself first. I'm just trying to find out what the Laws of Chemistry and Physics are where you're from. Where I come from if energy-out doesn't equal energy-in, you have a build up. What's that energy doing?

Maybe the energy isn't even there. Ever give a thought to that? The alarmists assume many things. So far all of their assumptions have been proven wrong. One of their assumptions is that the energy is coming in, but what if it isn't?

 

[loosecannon]

It's funny how CO2 acidifies water in the lab, but in WestyWorld it doesn't seem to have the same properties!!! Where is this data coming from? Perhaps one of the worlds westy told us about, where it's possible for inert gases to form the basis of life?!?! Only he and his therapist know for sure!

you do realize ocean pH has been higher and lower than it is right now, right? if it didn't cause disaster then why do you think it will cause disaster now?

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

 

[konradv]

Ohhhh konrad, did you go to one of those seminars on how to deal with "deniers"? You sure sound like it. Allways attack the mental health of anyone who doesn't support the "science". Let me tell you bub, when you have to sink to that level you have really lost the plot!

The people no longer believe you!

Back up your theory then. Is what I said anything worse that you calling AGW a "religion". Look to yourself first. I'm just trying to find out what the Laws of Chemistry and Physics are where you're from. Where I come from if energy-out doesn't equal energy-in, you have a build up. What's that energy doing?

Maybe the energy isn't even there. Ever give a thought to that? The alarmists assume many things. So far all of their assumptions have been proven wrong. One of their assumptions is that the energy is coming in, but what if it isn't?

The energy isn't even there? Then where did it go? Are you saying all those photons the sun emits missed every single CO2 molecule? You seem to be getting really desperate, if that's your best argument.

 

[konradv]

you do realize ocean pH has been higher and lower than it is right now, right? if it didn't cause disaster then why do you think it will cause disaster now?

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

 

[Missourian]

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

Bunk.


Man-made GHG only account for 5.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions, the other 94.5% is naturally occuring.

And that calculation excludes water vapor as a GHG.

Just how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity?
It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not.

Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers
​

​

Wikipedia has this

Natural sources of carbon dioxide are more than 20 times greater than sources due to human activity.

Greenhouse gas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

They cite this UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change page as a reference.

Vital Climate Graphics | UNEP/GRID-Arendal - Publications - Vital Climate Graphics
​

That corresponds with the 5.5% above...20 times greater equals 20 to 1 equals 100 to 5 equals 5%.



So if mankind gave up all fossil fuels, industry and livestock, built mud huts and returned to hunting and gathering, 94.5% of greenhouse gas emissions would remain because they are naturally occurring.


Is this true?

Yes, it is true, but the problem is that CO2 stays in the atmosphere a long time, and if you add 8 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere every year, year after year, and you cut down trees at the same time, you are going to increase atmospheric CO2 by 40% in 200 years.

Yes, each year we add a small percentage compared to what nature adds. Yet nature also takes out a very large amount of what is added. It removes, throught plant life, absorbtion in the ocean, more than it adds. But not enough more to make up for what we add. And that is how we end up with a 40% increase of CO2 over what that level was 150 years ago. Not only that, that represents a 30% increase over what it has been in at least 650,000 years, possibly in over a million years.

If you read the article on the Carbon 13 and 14 ratios, you will see how we can tell that the additional CO2 is from the burning of fossil fuels.

Excerpted from this thread:http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...ecedes-10-miles-in-8-years-4.html#post1341995

 

[westwall]

Back up your theory then. Is what I said anything worse that you calling AGW a "religion". Look to yourself first. I'm just trying to find out what the Laws of Chemistry and Physics are where you're from. Where I come from if energy-out doesn't equal energy-in, you have a build up. What's that energy doing?

Maybe the energy isn't even there. Ever give a thought to that? The alarmists assume many things. So far all of their assumptions have been proven wrong. One of their assumptions is that the energy is coming in, but what if it isn't?

The energy isn't even there? Then where did it go? Are you saying all those photons the sun emits missed every single CO2 molecule? You seem to be getting really desperate, if that's your best argument.

Desperate? I am thinking like a scientist. Scientists ask questions (at least that's what we were supposed to do...before the AGW mafia tried to make that illegal!) they do research.

You religious types need no research...you ask no questions, you have "faith". Me, I ask questions because I want to know what's really happening.

 

[westwall]

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

Then why is it that whenever there is a major volcanic eruption there is an immediate, measurable impact on the weather? We've been pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere for over a century and we are arguing if the recorded rise of less than a degree is attributable to us. Do you see a problem there?

 

[loosecannon]

Who said it didn't cause disaster? There's also the matter of the time course, long-good, short-bad. Which leads to the fact that those that lived at other times evolved in those conditions. The problem with ocean acidification due to man's agency is the possibility that it will happen faster than sea life can adapt. In the past when you get slow change, you get evolution, rapid change brings mass extinctions. Check out those higher and lower times, when they happened quickly, life nearly died out.

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

All of the CO2 we are emitting is natural. It was once in the biosphere circulating and promoting the vibrant growth of plants, then it got locked into sediments, now we have returned it into circulation.

100% natural, 100% organic.

Plastics and chemicals on the other hand not so. You are chasing the wrong distastrification.

 

[konradv]

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

Then why is it that whenever there is a major volcanic eruption there is an immediate, measurable impact on the weather? We've been pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere for over a century and we are arguing if the recorded rise of less than a degree is attributable to us. Do you see a problem there?

Apples and oranges. The immediate impact of a volcano is to LOWER temps due to pariculate matter and SO2 emissions, which block sunlight. Take THAT into account and the contribution of man may be "hidden by the decline" and actually be more than the degree so often mentioned. You really have to take EVERYTHING into account and not just the parts that fit your bias. It's what you keep telling us, but it doesn't seem to apply to you. Why not?

 

[konradv]

That's the way the world works. There have been abrupt ocean acidification trends in the past, in fact the biggest global extinction event of all time was likely one of those.

But every major extinction event has been followed by an even more extreme repopulation of even more diversity of species.

That's the way the world works.

We are neither breaking new ground in creating new negative ocean PH conditions or in creating new warming conditions, or creating new CO2 conditions.

The majority of the Earth's history since life evolved included warmer climate, higher atmospheric CO2 and probably higher ocean PH.

So what's the problem? You think the Earth wants to stay the same forever? That it is supposed to stay the same forever?

What if you are dead wrong and global warming, higher CO2 and increased ocean acidity turn out to be a bonanza for most species? It certainly will be a bonanza for most plants.

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

All of the CO2 we are emitting is natural. It was once in the biosphere circulating and promoting the vibrant growth of plants, then it got locked into sediments, now we have returned it into circulation.

100% natural, 100% organic.

Plastics and chemicals on the other hand not so. You are chasing the wrong distastrification.

While what you're saying may be true, it's also irrelevant. You're making no distinction between natural and humanly generated CO2. While there's no difference in their effect, one was in the range of 280-300 ppm, during most of human evolution, while the other is 380 and rising, since the advent of the IR.

 

[konradv]

Maybe the energy isn't even there. Ever give a thought to that? The alarmists assume many things. So far all of their assumptions have been proven wrong. One of their assumptions is that the energy is coming in, but what if it isn't?

The energy isn't even there? Then where did it go? Are you saying all those photons the sun emits missed every single CO2 molecule? You seem to be getting really desperate, if that's your best argument.

Desperate? I am thinking like a scientist. Scientists ask questions (at least that's what we were supposed to do...before the AGW mafia tried to make that illegal!) they do research.

You religious types need no research...you ask no questions, you have "faith". Me, I ask questions because I want to know what's really happening.

Total BS. My opinion is based on science and logic. It just underscores your desperation that you continually have to resort to the "religion" charge. If you like to answer questions, tell me where the extra trapped infra-red radiation due to the 1/3 rise in CO2 is going? If CO2 absorbs energy and it's been going up, then there MUST BE more trapped energy. What's it doing, if not heating the earth?

 

[westwall]

You're missing the point. The variations in the past- natural. A situation where humans are emitting billions of tons of CO2 DAILY- unnatural. Sure the earth comes back. The point is, are we creating a world where WE won't come back?

Then why is it that whenever there is a major volcanic eruption there is an immediate, measurable impact on the weather? We've been pumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere for over a century and we are arguing if the recorded rise of less than a degree is attributable to us. Do you see a problem there?

Apples and oranges. The immediate impact of a volcano is to LOWER temps due to pariculate matter and SO2 emissions, which block sunlight. Take THAT into account and the contribution of man may be "hidden by the decline" and actually be more than the degree so often mentioned. You really have to take EVERYTHING into account and not just the parts that fit your bias. It's what you keep telling us, but it doesn't seem to apply to you. Why not?

Apples and apples konrad. You claim that man puts more crap into the atmosphere then all of the volcanos on Earth and yet mans impact is arguable.... proveable only with computer models that can't recreate what occured ten days ago.

An eruption however causes an IMMEDIATE, MEASURABLE impact on weather. Seems to me you need to figure out what's really happening there, don't you?

 

[westwall]

The energy isn't even there? Then where did it go? Are you saying all those photons the sun emits missed every single CO2 molecule? You seem to be getting really desperate, if that's your best argument.

Desperate? I am thinking like a scientist. Scientists ask questions (at least that's what we were supposed to do...before the AGW mafia tried to make that illegal!) they do research.

You religious types need no research...you ask no questions, you have "faith". Me, I ask questions because I want to know what's really happening.

Total BS. My opinion is based on science and logic. It just underscores your desperation that you continually have to resort to the "religion" charge. If you like to answer questions, tell me where the extra trapped infra-red radiation due to the 1/3 rise in CO2 is going? If CO2 absorbs energy and it's been going up, then there MUST BE more trapped energy. What's it doing, if not heating the earth?

No, it isn't. Your opinion is based on computer models that have never worked and on continuously massaged data to make it conform to the desired results of your high priests.

Science and logic are on my side....that's why you folks are losing all over the world.


http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.com/2010/10/rob-maris-survey-among-skeptics.html

 

[loosecannon]

one was in the range of 280-300 ppm, during most of human evolution, while the other is 380 and rising, since the advent of the IR.

so?

CO2 historically has been in the range between 1000 and 7600 ppm, what has since human evolution got to do with it?

 

[konradv]

I don't know anything about the computer models. Speak for yourself. What I know is:

The ability of CO2 to absorb energy is well documented.

The concentration has been going up, since the IR.

Therefore, if the trend continues, warming is inevitable.

It's your inability to deal with that basic logic, that forces you to resort to "religion" slurs. But that's ALL they are, slurs. They're NOT proof and they certainly aren't logic.

 

[konradv]

one was in the range of 280-300 ppm, during most of human evolution, while the other is 380 and rising, since the advent of the IR.

so?

CO2 historically has been in the range between 1000 and 7600 ppm, what has since human evolution got to do with it?

I only care about our history. It's OUR climate we're trying to preserve, NOT the dinosaurs'!!!