Sad article on the future of coral reefs

[Kern]

To be honest, I've read a bit about the acidification of the oceans and much of it goes right over my head, but the basic thrust of it is that increased CO2 in the oceans leads to increased production of carbolic acid which changes the oceans pH slightly and since corals are particularly sensitive to pH it may be wiping them out.

From what I can tell, this is still somewhat speculative, but most everyone agrees on the fundamentals that increased CO2 in the water results in increased carbolic acid resulting in lower ocean pH and that corals are sensitive to this.

I personally don't know if this is part of the reason for dying reefs or not, but it sounds much more plausible to me than a 1 degree shift in temperature over a 100 year period.

Of course you mean carbonic acid (H₂ CO₃.) not carbolic acid (C₆ H₅ OH.)

 

[elmer fudd]

I stand corrected. I did pretty well in math and physics, but chemistry was never my strong point.

 

[MSilvia]

If it's not our doing then what can we do about? I bought a 15,000 BTU AC unit. I didn't use it until almost Aug. and turned my boiler on for heat at the start of Oct. What the heck is warming?

Global average temperatures, which can of course impact weather patterns in ways that don't make raise the temperature everywhere. As a fictional example, if temps in Greenland go up 4 degrees, and temps in Rhode Island go down a degree, it's still a warming trend on average.

 

[AfterDark]

Matt, The earth has faced a lot worse than us. We're a blink of an eye. This earth will be here long after we're gone and life for whatever life takes over will go on. This rock got hit with a 5-7 miles Dia astoroid do you think we're bigger than that? These GW alarmist are just snake oil sales men trying to make a buck. Enjoy life, the planet will keep going. We don't live in a static world things change and that includes the climate.

 

[Gombessa]

This rock got hit with a 5-7 miles Dia astoroid do you think we're bigger than that?

I don't think the concern is that the planet, or all life, will disappear. We do want to make sure we don't make the planet inhospitable to us or our way of life.

Enjoy life, the planet will keep going.

I guess we don't need recycle bins, or trash cans, or regulations against industrial, hazardous or radioactive waste disposal, then? I'm just going to enjoy life, and Chevron and Westinghouse can do the same, however we damned well please

 

[AfterDark]

I don't think the concern is that the planet, or all life, will disappear. We do want to make sure we don't make the planet inhospitable to us or our way of life.



I guess we don't need recycle bins, or trash cans, or regulations against industrial, hazardous or radioactive waste disposal, then? I'm just going to enjoy life, and Chevron and Westinghouse can do the same, however we damned well please

All that stuff is great! I'm saying it's a big resilent planet and we're like fleas on a dog, we may cause some irritation but the dogs goes on. One big volcanic eruption puts more crap in the air than we can ever do even if we tried. All the smoke from all the fire forest fires makes us look like a someone smoking a butt in a house fire. We cause problems we fix em. Calm down enjoy life.

 

[Kingpatzer]

All that stuff is great! I'm saying it's a big resilent planet and we're like fleas on a dog, we may cause some irritation but the dogs goes on. One big volcanic eruption puts more crap in the air than we can ever do even if we tried. All the smoke from all the fire forest fires makes us look like a someone smoking a butt in a house fire. We cause problems we fix em. Calm down enjoy life.

It's not about how small our contribution is compared to natural processes. It's a matter of how and where our contributions and deletions compete with the natural processes.

We've stripped away a huge amount of the natural carbon processing capability of this planet with deforestation. At the same time we've increased the carbon going into the atmosphere.

The capacity of the planet to process the amount of carbon that naturally gets tossed into the atmosphere has been decreased, and we're adding to the mix.

Fleas typically don't harm a dog. But they can kill it if there are enough of them or they are carrying the right diseases.

No one thinks we end the planet. But don't for a minute think we can't end it's ability to support us. We level mountains in months that have taken hundreds of thousands of years to form. Forrest that take thousands of years to form, and which are filled with trees that take a hundred years to grow lose thousands of acres a year.

We are more than capable of making this planet unable to support ourselves.

 

[AfterDark]

OK your right we're all going to die a horrible death from climate change. The oceans are going to boil and the atmosphere is going to turn in a mass of CO2. And it's all MY fault because I've not believed until now.:shocked2:

 

[dkktsunami]

I'm a bit dubious. Assuming that global warming is a reality, (and that is debatable), most estimates predict the temperature rising a few degrees over a period of a century or so. So if the ocean temperatures get too warm for coral reefs in their present location, I would imagine that new reefs would develop in regions that are currently too cold for them. In all likelihood, global warming should extend the range of coral, not decrease it.

A far better case can be made for coral being threatened by increased concentrations of carbolic acid than by warming ocean temperatures.

The following is offered as my opinion only. The article should more aptly be entitled "Science and Politics". For me to accept any of the global warming philosophy I would want the following conditions: 1) the scientists involved in this research should be free of political agenda 2) the existence of global warming would have to be proven over a long period of time, a century or more 3) that, if global warming was found to exist, that it is necessarily a bad thing 4) that human activity is the cause.

I am all for the preservation of our environment, I just don't think that immediate destruction of capitalism is the answer. A gradual reduction of human population would be helpful.

 

[AfterDark]

The following is offered as my opinion only. The article should more aptly be entitled "Science and Politics". For me to accept any of the global warming philosophy I would want the following conditions: 1) the scientists involved in this research should be free of political agenda 2) the existence of global warming would have to be proven over a long period of time, a century or more 3) that, if global warming was found to exist, that it is necessarily a bad thing 4) that human activity is the cause.

I am all for the preservation of our environment, I just don't think that immediate destruction of capitalism is the answer. A gradual reduction of human population would be helpful.

All that has happened and it's time for all of us to beat our cars into planters, shut off our home heating units, give any spare change and all our material goods to the UN org. to fight climate change. If these aren't done NOW we will be doomed and it'll be YOUR fault for doubting such mental giants like Al Gore.

You need to get your mind right on this point. Preservation of the environment cannot take place until capitalism is destroyed, and we all turn the clocks back to the middle ages and become global serfs and live not for ourselves but for our planet.

How'd I do Kingpatzer? I BELIEVE IN GW I DO, I DO, I DO