• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

King Crabs are about to take over Antarctica, courtesy of AGW

Lord of Planar said:
Did that com from here:

Southern Ocean warming impact on Antarctic Ice Sheet and global sea level rise | Climate Citizen

It's the only blogspot I find with that image.

A 2012 blog using a 2002 image representing data, cherry picked from data like this:

392632.fig.002.jpg
Click to expand...

Why? Are we back to arguing that AGW isn't real?
 
Threegoofs said:
Like I said, go to the article, click the links.

Love how you are now the resident expert on this topic now. Surprised PNAS didn't ask you to edit this paper, which is founded on the basic premise that the seafloor is and will warm.
Click to expand...
You are incorrect, the premise is that the seafloor has already warmed, and will continue to warm.
My issue is there is little evidence, beyond his few local measurements of a trend in warming.
It is an interesting marine biology paper, but the tie in to AGW is thin at best.
 
Threegoofs said:
You look at wholesale ecosystem destruction, and you translate that into 'product'.

Point grasping. Try it sometime.
Click to expand...




I look at an industry once over fished so much that there are severe limits to how many one can catch.


You see despair, I see opportunity.


Fish more crab, less "ecosystem destruction", Capitalist solutions to todays problems! :pimpdaddy:
 
Threegoofs said:
King Crabs Are About to Take Over Antarctica | Smart News | Smithsonian

Another good article here:
King Crabs Arrive in Antarctic, with Claws Out for Biodiversity



Just another datapoint to show the massive loss of biodiversity that AGW is leading us to.






Notice how both of these scienttific publications take dramatic and significant global warming as a fact. A simple, scientific fact. Thats because there is an overwhelming consensus.
Click to expand...

Not if the price of King Crab falls and we get to eat a plate full of them for $10.99 instead of $23.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Maybe. Does that have anything to do with arguing that Antarctica is or is not getting warmer?
Click to expand...
I don't know if it is getting warmer over the long term. It probably is. I don';t know how much of that would be natural or AGW. I assume most of it is natural, because from what i have read, the conclusions of studies show everything around the "Ring of Fire" is getting warmer. the pundits are always speaking of these areas warming, and conveniently not mentioning that eastern Antarctica is getting colder.

Now the eastern area might just be a cyclical low, but who really knows?

I asked if you has straw in your ears, because it looks like you have some leftover from trying to build a strawman to tear down. Asking me if we are back to arguing if AGW is real or not.

For the umteenth million time... AGW is real!

My complaint isn't about people claiming AGW. My complaint is the exaggeration of its effects.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I don't know if it is getting warmer over the long term. It probably is. I don';t know how much of that would be natural or AGW. I assume most of it is natural, because from what i have read, the conclusions of studies show everything around the "Ring of Fire" is getting warmer. the pundits are always speaking of these areas warming, and conveniently not mentioning that eastern Antarctica is getting colder.

Now the eastern area might just be a cyclical low, but who really knows?

I asked if you has straw in your ears, because it looks like you have some leftover from trying to build a strawman to tear down. Asking me if we are back to arguing if AGW is real or not.

For the umteenth million time... AGW is real!

My complaint isn't about people claiming AGW. My complaint is the exaggeration of its effects.
Click to expand...

The world changes, a lot. It's the one constant. Change.
 
Lord of Planar said:
I don't know if it is getting warmer over the long term. It probably is. I don';t know how much of that would be natural or AGW. I assume most of it is natural, because from what i have read, the conclusions of studies show everything around the "Ring of Fire" is getting warmer. the pundits are always speaking of these areas warming, and conveniently not mentioning that eastern Antarctica is getting colder.

Now the eastern area might just be a cyclical low, but who really knows?

I asked if you has straw in your ears, because it looks like you have some leftover from trying to build a strawman to tear down. Asking me if we are back to arguing if AGW is real or not.

For the umteenth million time... AGW is real!

My complaint isn't about people claiming AGW. My complaint is the exaggeration of its effects.
Click to expand...
And showing that the southern ocean is getting warmer is exaggerating its effects, how again?
 
calamity said:
The world changes, a lot. It's the one constant. Change.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

So is it right for a 2012 blog to be used, that cherry picks 2002 data to make a claim, when the data year to year is all over the place with no trending pattern?
 
Dittohead not! said:
And showing that the southern ocean is getting warmer is exaggerating its effects, how again?
Click to expand...

Is it getting warmer outside of out statistical error of measurements?

Is it cherry picking?

Consider this:

392632.fig.008a.jpg


392632.fig.008b.jpg


392632.fig.008c.jpg


392632.fig.008d.jpg


We have from these four graphs representing four southern regions around Antarctica, a slope of 0.02, -0.04, -0.02, and 0.02 for a sum of -0.02. Right?

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/392632/

It looks like this region of the globes waters is actually on a cooling trend. But then, in my opinion, we don't have enough quality data to really make that assumption.
 
longview said:
You are incorrect, the premise is that the seafloor has already warmed, and will continue to warm.
My issue is there is little evidence, beyond his few local measurements of a trend in warming.
It is an interesting marine biology paper, but the tie in to AGW is thin at best.
Click to expand...

Yet it underpins the foundation of the paper.

I can see why you wouldn't be considered to edit PNAS.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Is it getting warmer outside of out statistical error of measurements?

Is it cherry picking?

Consider this:

392632.fig.008a.jpg


392632.fig.008b.jpg


392632.fig.008c.jpg


392632.fig.008d.jpg


We have from these four graphs representing four southern regions around Antarctica, a slope of 0.02, -0.04, -0.02, and 0.02 for a sum of -0.02. Right?

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/392632/

It looks like this region of the globes waters is actually on a cooling trend. But then, in my opinion, we don't have enough quality data to really make that assumption.
Click to expand...

Oh, look! Expert #2 has now been christened since he just did an extensive Google search.

He 'knows' there's no quality data because he spent SEVERAL minutes looking for it on the Google.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I look at an industry once over fished so much that there are severe limits to how many one can catch.


You see despair, I see opportunity.


Fish more crab, less "ecosystem destruction", Capitalist solutions to todays problems! :pimpdaddy:
Click to expand...

To summarize:

Crab yummy! Capitalism good! Ecosystem liberal plot.
 
Threegoofs said:
To summarize:

Crab yummy! Capitalism good! Ecosystem liberal plot.
Click to expand...



That's a dumb retort.


Proper summary:

King Crab has fishing limits.

if there are too many king crabs, increase or remove the limits.

Supply and demand, demand for king crab is high which is why $30 bucks per lb is not unheard of. (snow crab, which has higher limits, is $9.00 per lb).

I said nothing about the cause, dubious or not as to why these crabs may or may not be affecting the ecosystem. I am pointing out, simply, that this chicken little article fails to consider the market solution for the immediate theorized problem.
 
Threegoofs said:
They do. Its called 'scientific credibility' and its a critical thing for scientists to maintain.
Click to expand...

That maybe. But the main thing we talked about, when I was doing research was about getting new projects. And there is nothing better than an Angst theme to pull in the cash.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Agreed.

So is it right for a 2012 blog to be used, that cherry picks 2002 data to make a claim, when the data year to year is all over the place with no trending pattern?
Click to expand...

Depends on what the argument is that's being made. Some people sill site Al Gore's mooovie, which I think is a great source for proving he is full of hot air. :)
 
Threegoofs said:
Again, the reference to the paper on warming on the shelf, which has to do with changes in currents, is referenced within the article in the OP.

And yet again, people who study this stuff for a living know more than the bozos who just started googling 'antarctic ocean temperatures' five hours ago. Really.
Click to expand...

It is comically stupid.
 
Dittohead not! said:
It has been my experience that snow and ice tend to melt where it's warmer, rather than colder.
Click to expand...

I was wondering about the blue spots and whether it was the melt runoff that was cooling the ocean.
 
joG said:
That maybe. But the main thing we talked about, when I was doing research was about getting new projects. And there is nothing better than an Angst theme to pull in the cash.
Click to expand...

And there's nothing worse in getting grants than losing scientific credibility.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Is it getting warmer outside of out statistical error of measurements?

Is it cherry picking?

Consider this:

392632.fig.008a.jpg


392632.fig.008b.jpg


392632.fig.008c.jpg


392632.fig.008d.jpg


We have from these four graphs representing four southern regions around Antarctica, a slope of 0.02, -0.04, -0.02, and 0.02 for a sum of -0.02. Right?

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2013/392632/

It looks like this region of the globes waters is actually on a cooling trend. But then, in my opinion, we don't have enough quality data to really make that assumption.
Click to expand...

Well, if AGW is real, as you said, and if the Arctic and Antarctic are a part of the warming world, then it follows that warming in the polar regions is real.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Well, if AGW is real, as you said, and if the Arctic and Antarctic are a part of the warming world, then it follows that warming in the polar regions is real.
Click to expand...

With global warming, there can be regional cooling. Not everywhere has to be warming for the global net effect to be warmer.
 
joG said:
I was wondering about the blue spots and whether it was the melt runoff that was cooling the ocean.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. The melt runoff would be fresh water. Salt water in that area, in contrast, is often below the freezing point of fresh water.
 
Lord of Planar said:
With global warming, there can be regional cooling. Not everywhere has to be warming for the global net effect to be warmer.
Click to expand...

Good point.

Cold weather in a particular part of the world does not disprove AGW.
Warm weather in a particular part of the world doesn't prove it, either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom