Ocean Acidification -- can you see it happening?

[Lostdiver71]

Remember we have very little in the way of actual climate measurements past 150 years, which is a very tiny blip on the timescale of the planet. Other methods including but not limited to ice cores, tree rings, and soil cores can give us an idea of the past climate but not actual temperatures. During Roman times the data shows that the Earth had a 4-5 degree higher average temperature than we have now and it did not lead to mass extinctions.
The Asian countries which are releasing the majority of CO2 into the atmosphere have actually agreed to do nothing different from what they were already doing. What this means is that if the U.S. and other western countries reduced their CO2 emissions it would actually accomplish nothing! The same models that say that humans are creating global warming also say that it is too late for us to do anything to stop it! The big problem that we should be concentrating on is the actual pollution of the environment! Plastic is polluting everything and dangerous chemicals are showing up throughout the food chain and everywhere in the environment! This is the real danger! Stop spending money on implementing "green technology" that is not ready and often causes unintended consequences for the environment. We need to spend the money and effort on making sure that alternative energy is ready and causes no damage to the environment BEFORE we require the public to adopt it not after we realize that it is actually worse for the environment (ethanol)! Remember your electric car is actually worse for the environment over its full lifetime than an old fashioned gas or diesel burning vehicle! That problem will probably be solved in the next few years with alternative technology that is being researched right now just as our energy problems will be solved by several technologies that are also being researched including the Tokamak fusion reactor.

 

[KenGordon]

I was being facetious, kinda... There's too many people. If the climate changes and kills billions of people, that will reduce the amount of emissions being produced. So, self correcting.

The people who will be displaced or killed are not the ones doing the polluting. Bangladesh, for example has about 5% of the per capita co2 emissions of the US and maybe 2% of Montana https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/pdf/stateanalysis.pdf. Indeed the first up against the wall in the US seem to be the least culpable. New York State has emissions which wouldn’t completely shame a European country.

 

[tursiops]

Which primary sources? And how does one check those for bias?

Always better to read the original reports, like from NOAA or NASA, rather than from somebody's attempt to explain it or, worse, spin it. In the media, stay away from the sides of this graph and stick to the middle, preferably reading several to check for factual consistency.
The Chart, Version 3.0: What, Exactly, Are We Reading? - Ad Fontes Media

 

[lexvil]

I wonder when people say “there are to many people” how many of those mean there are to many “other” people? Because each of them has the opportunity to reduce that number by one without trampling on anyone else’s rights.

How many of these said people pro choice?

How many reject science when diving, dive deep, no gauge or computer and no tables?

How many if gripped by chest pains tune into a TV show to decide what happened where no one with any medical training and in fact are drop outs, offer diagnosis?

This is sort of like hearing smoke alarms going off in your home but refusing to get out of bed because it’s your day off and you don’t want to get up yet.

 

[tursiops]

How many if gripped by chest pains tune into a TV show or internet forum to decide what happened where no one with any medical training and in fact are drop outs, offer diagnosis?

ftfy

 

[lexvil]

ftfy

 

[WeRtheOcean]

One thing is for certain, I'd rather live on a warmer planet than a colder one, and I think for most humans, that is why they really don't care about the planet warming. Cold temps have probably killed a lot more people than hot temps in the history of humans. So, if you live in Montana, never seen the ocean, and the government says if you don't reduce your fossil fuel consumption your climate is going to get 2 degrees warmer in 100 years doesn't really register. In fact it may be a welcomed change.

Look at it this way: where did fossil fuels come from? Maybe you have seen artists' conceptions of the Carboniferous age, also known as the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian geological periods? The reason the earth had a warmer climate back then was because those coal swamps were still live plants and animals, circulating the carbon in the atmosphere. The formation of fossil fuel deposits was, in fact, carbon sequestration, as the carbon in those organisms was taken out of circulation by being buried. This is why we see evidence of a cooler climate after the Carboniferous period ended. It is only logical, then, to hypothesize that returning that carbon to circulation would also return the climate to what it was then. Why don't deniers ever address this?

So anyway, I just want to get clear on something. Is the good news that with global warming the coral reefs will be moving up to the Florida and California coasts, so we can dive them easily instead of flying Frontier and doing a bag drag?

No. There have been people who think that global warming means rainforests will grow in what is now the Lower 48, but, again, no. Rainforests are having enough difficulty reclaiming the range they have only recently lost -- it takes seed dispersal into an area, and then time for those seeds to grow into mature trees before the next seed dispersal. Trees migrate generally only 10-20 km or so, on average, per tree generation. Likewise, coral reefs take time to grow -- massive corals max out at 2 cm per year, branching corals at 10 cm per year. So you figure, even if coral larvae disperse up to Florida (on the Gulf Stream) or California (AGAINST the California Current!), there aren't going to be new reefs there anytime soon.

How many if gripped by chest pains tune into a TV show to decide what happened where no one with any medical training and in fact are drop outs, offer diagnosis?

Considering that vaccine denial, AIDS denial, and even chemotherapy denial are only the tip of the iceberg in the demonization of "Big Pharma," I would rather not know the answer to that question.

 

[tarponchik]

Look at it this way: where did fossil fuels come from? Maybe you have seen artists' conceptions of the Carboniferous age, also known as the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian geological periods? The reason the earth had a warmer climate back then was because those coal swamps were still live plants and animals, circulating the carbon in the atmosphere. The formation of fossil fuel deposits was, in fact, carbon sequestration, as the carbon in those organisms was taken out of circulation by being buried. This is why we see evidence of a cooler climate after the Carboniferous period ended.

Not only that. For each carbon atom going into fossil fuels, there was a carbon atom precipitating in the oceans as CaCO3.

 

[FreeFlyFreak]

The Earth's climate has been changing for millions of years and will keep changing.

Im glad I live in a warm period and not an Ice Age.

If you want the governments to keep coming up with BS like carbon taxes then have fun.

You can spend all the money in the world to stop the tide. But its still coming in.

Unfortunately its our tax money and the government people are buying up beach front property.

 

[lexvil]