The Acid Test of Climate Change Mitigation
| 07-04-2022 01:42 | |
IBdaMann ★★★★★(14389) |
squeal over wrote:this is how they welcome new members on their second day. This is how uneducated, scientifically illiterate, Marxist morons wear out even the heartiest of welcomes by only the second day: 1. The Grand Entrance: "Me!, me!, me! ... everybody look at me! I'm a PhD in [buzzword 1] and I am a professor of [buzzword 2],[buzzword 3] and [buzzword 4]. Everybody read the confusing, buzzword-laden article I'm going to leave for you to read to which you cannot ask any questions." 2. The Announcement: "I came to this site to learn about [buzzword5] by preaching [buzzword 6], [buzzword 7] and [buzzword 8] in the 29 new threads with which I will spam this board, each with a plethora of brand new undefined buzzwords while ignoring all questions for clarification." 3. The Denigration of the Board Members: "Although this is essentially my first day here, this board used to be GREAT until the people who ask me to define my terms showed up and totally RUINED this board. This board should have a panel of censors at my bidding who should assist me in my denial of service attacks on this board, and who will delete any posts from existing board members who ask me for any sort of clarification. Those TROLLS who ask me to define my terms have thoroughly TRASHED this board ... and they are always pointing out my egregious errors in science, math and logic which is totally unfair to me." squeal over wrote:"Define your fugging terms you dishonest, brain dead schytt." All anyone ever did was ask you to define your terms and to answer questions about what you claim. You have exhibited nothing but dishonesty ... and rudeness ... and disrespect ... and scientific illiteracy, mathematical incompetence and logical ineptitude ... and disruption of the conversations of others ... ... all under the pretense that some army of your followers is making some sort of pilgrimage to this site to read your library and you must hurry to prepare this site as a safe space for them. squeal over wrote:"and now your playbook tells you to cry like a baby and pretend your widdo feewings are vewy huut" ... and now your playbook tells you to cry like a baby and pretend your widdo feewings are vewy huut because you are such a victim in all this spamming of yours. Cheers! |
| 07-04-2022 15:44 | |
GretaGroupie ★★☆☆☆(350) |
IBdaMann wrote: Ok, I'll define my terms. Everyone play nice and stop swigging their dicks around. No, Phd's (pig headed douchbags) or Marxist Brothers. I feel a song coming on! |
| 06-06-2023 23:37 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
[quote]sealover wrote: This thread to stimulate discussion about the futility any efforts to mitigate climate change without addressing ocean acidification. Even in the rosiest, best-case scenario of emissions reduction and emissions sequestration, ocean acidification will continue to get worse for decades. The sea's capacity to continue absorbing carbon dioxide is being diminished. A mass extinction of sea life could nullify all our terrestrial (land based) efforts to reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. We have already seen worst-case scenarios unfolding ahead of schedule. The worst case scenario is that the sea stops absorbing about a third of the carbon dioxide emissions and becomes a net source of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere |
| 06-06-2023 23:38 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
[quote]sealover wrote: Grieving the death of my favorite coral reef in the Caribbean. The first time I snorkeled in the coral reef at Bayahibe on the Caribbean coast of the Dominican Republic, I was overwhelmed by the beauty that surrounded me. It was 1982. I was a Peace Corps volunteer, assigned to the central highlands to work in reforestation and environmental education. I had seen many beautiful ecosystems before, from wetlands to rainforests. But I had never seen anything as amazing as that coral reef. So much life in so many diverse forms. Such vibrant color. I went back several times to snorkel in that coral reef during my years of service. I got some nasty stings from some of the creatures there, and I even had a very close encounter with a very large barracuda. I didn't see the reef again until 1988. Scientists were already aware that something was harming the coral reefs. "Bleaching", during which the coral animal expels its photosynthetic symbiotic partners, had been observed among some coral reefs in the world's warmest seas. The reef at Bayahibe was among them. The reef was still amazingly beautiful. Still full of life, activity, and vibrant color. But the corpses of bleached coral could be seen scattered about in many places. It didn't look the same as before. Something was wrong. In 1997, I returned to the Dominican Republic to do postdoctoral research in the rainforest of the central highlands. It was a pleasant surprise to see what had become of the island's forests since my time as a volunteer working in reforestation. It looked pretty bleak in the 1980s. More than 90% of the island's forest cover had already been lost to deforestation, and it was only getting worse. By 1997, the situation had reversed. Significant gains had been made in the area covered with trees. The forest was coming back. It looked like there was hope after all. Maybe we could sequester some of that excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as new forest biomass and soil organic matter. It was a big improvement over the time when forests were routinely slashed and burned for cropping or grazing. In those days, the enormous reservoir of organic carbon contained in forest biomass and soil organic matter was being transformed into a major source of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. By 1997, it was clear that coral reefs worldwide were being ravaged. The increase in ocean surface water temperature clearly had something to do with it. But it had also become clear that there was a chemical imbalance involved. The alkalinity of the sea was being depleted by our excessive CO2 emissions. The balance of the sea's carbonate buffer system had shifted, with relatively more carbonic acid, and with carbonate ion becoming more scarce. Deficiency of carbonate ion was impeding shell formation. The heat was bleaching them, but the shortage of carbonate was making it hard to even grow. "Ocean acidification" had arrived. The sea absorbs more than a third of all terrestrial CO2 emissions. This has resulted in a more than 30% depletion of the sea's alkalinity (aka acid neutralizing capacity). The pH is declining. The capacity to absorb additional carbon dioxide is diminishing. The capacity of marine ecosystems such as coral reefs to remove carbon dioxide by photosynthesis is diminishing. My favorite island in the Caribbean turned out to be a success story of forest recovery. A beacon of hope that we really can turn this around. We can reverse the trend and manage the land to be a "sink" to sequester atmospheric carbon dioxide into biomass and soil organic matter. Rather than continue to mismanage the land so that decomposition and combustion during wildfire transforms biomass and soil organic matter into atmospheric carbon dioxide. On the other hand, my favorite coral reef in the Caribbean is a warning story and a call to take further action. In 1997, it made me feel sad to see the reef again. Another major "bleaching" event had occurred since my last visit. If I didn't know what the reef looked like before, I would have been overwhelmed by the beauty that surrounded. Still full of life, activity, and vibrant color. But now the corpses of bleached coral could be seen everywhere. In some parts, the reef was more dead than alive. It was only getting worse. It broke my heart. |
| 06-06-2023 23:40 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
sealover wrote:GasGuzzler wrote:. ------------------------------------------------------------ The shortest answer I can give requires some understanding about ocean currents and both the El Nino and the La Nina phenomenon. Both of these periodic shifts in ocean current have occurred with increasing frequency and severity in recent decades. Would I lie to you? The drought part is mostly straight forward as a matter of temperature increase. There has been an important ocean component. Such as the shift in the Atlantic when European nations stopped emitting so much sun blocking soot into the air. There wasn't as much shade to keep the Atlantic cool any more. Africa got some severe droughts because of it. Tropical rainforests have been burning when either Southeast Asia or South America gets a drought because of El Nino or La Nina. It's not that tropical rainforests never ever burned before. But never like this. The flooding is when the ocean currents shift (La Nina or El Nino) bring excessive rain. Or when a hurricane stalls over land and just dumps and dumps on the same spot because climate change shifted the polar vortex. California gets the worst of both worlds. When the "pineapple express" arrives, too much rain grows too much fuel. When the drought comes back we get the devastating wildfires. And that is my opinion |
| 06-06-2023 23:41 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
sealover wrote:GasGuzzler wrote:sealover wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank God for manmade COOLING! It's called "global dimming". It is a HUGE variable in climate change. If the Chinese hadn't ramped up their emissions of sun-blocking aerosols in the 1980s, temperatures would have risen much faster in the 1990s. Now that India is finally getting a chance to spew out more and more sun-blocking aerosols, there is less heating taking place in the surface waters of the Indian Ocean. Mad scientists, and I do think they are crazy, want to deliberately release massive amounts of sun-blocking aerosols in geoengineering schemes. There was a downside to cleaning up emissions from Europe. Those sun-blocking aerosols over the Atlantic had been protecting Africa from the drought caused by global warming. It's a horrible choice to have to make. |
| 06-06-2023 23:43 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
sealover wrote:GasGuzzler wrote:sealover wrote: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Global dimming doesn't get much attention in the debate, but it is a major variable influencing surface temperature. The soot and sulfur part is obvious. Dark material blocks incoming light. What is less obvious is that particulate aerosols influence the size of rain droplets. With aerosols present, tiny droplets form around particles. Because there are so many particles, the drops are all small. The clouds are more reflective. In the absence of aerosols, far fewer drops form, but they grow to much larger size. These clouds are less reflective, allowing more sunlight through. A big part of the dimming is cloud cover. Not because there more clouds than before, but because the clouds are more reflective than before. Any questions? Or did it kill your buzz that it didn't just make a good joke. "Manmade COOLING"! Ha Ha. Isn't that hilarious? |
| 06-06-2023 23:44 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
[quote]sealover wrote: The ignorance is truly astounding! Imagine someone who spends years constantly claiming superior scientific understanding regarding climate change... Didn't even know about "global dimming". Thought is was just a "new buzzword" they were going to start hearing from now on. Well, they've had almost an hour to study it now. I'll bet that they already have conclusive "proof" that "global dimming" is physically impossible. But what were they even debating about if they didn't even have the most basic comprehension of the impact of a major volcanic eruption, for example. Why was the earth so much cooler in the year following the eruption of Mt Pinatubo? Well, Rush Limbaugh explained. It proved global warming was a hoax. Rush Limbaugh believed the temperature evidence. At least for a year. Everybody already knew about "global dimming" before that. Well, almost everybody. The ignorance is truly astounding! |
| 06-06-2023 23:48 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
sealover wrote: .. and there still isn't a single thread with an unambiguous definition of: 1. Global Warming 2. Climate Change 3. Greenhouse Effect 4. greenhouse gas Not a single brain-dead, scientifically illiterate, Wikipedia-thumping wamizombie ever comes here to participate in an honest discussion. Not a single one. You are no exception. When simply asked to define your terms, you doubled down on dishonesty. Just like all the other Marxist schytts, you came here to preach your F'ed religion, not to tolerate any sort of differing views. You tried to fool others into accepting you as an expert in science, as though it somehow wasn't obvious by your gaffes that you are simply regurgitating opinions that were handed to you by someone else. When your audience asked you to use correct terminology, you pretended to speak for "everyone" in a true demonstration of omniscient preacher syndrome. ... and now your playbook tells you to cry like a baby and pretend your widdo-feewings are vewy huut. Do you feel the outpouring of sympathy? Define your fuqqing terms you dishonest, brain-dead schytt. Show your audience that you actually want to participate in an honest discussion. Don't expect a whole lot of sympathy otherwise. |
| 06-06-2023 23:50 | |
| sealover★★★★☆ (1238) |
[quote]sealover wrote: [quote]sealover wrote: This thread to stimulate discussion about the futility any efforts to mitigate climate change without addressing ocean acidification. Even in the rosiest, best-case scenario of emissions reduction and emissions sequestration, ocean acidification will continue to get worse for decades. The sea's capacity to continue absorbing carbon dioxide is being diminished. A mass extinction of sea life could nullify all our terrestrial (land based) efforts to reduce atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide. We have already seen worst-case scenarios unfolding ahead of schedule. The worst case scenario is that the sea stops absorbing about a third of the carbon dioxide emissions and becomes a net source of carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere |
Join the debate The Acid Test of Climate Change Mitigation:
Related content
| Threads | Replies | Last post |
| A Science Test | 18 | 09-12-2023 00:53 |
| Breaking news, updated retard test released, so can you drool with the best of them? | 25 | 12-12-2022 23:59 |
| volcanic effects on acid rain | 8 | 06-02-2021 19:40 |
| Attachment Test | 9 | 01-07-2020 00:06 |
| The hotter the classroom, the lower the test scores, research finds | 1 | 06-03-2019 21:58 |