‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleached

[ludin]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Is that why my car gets those funny spots.

Man...

We have to stop AGW immediately!

I'm pissed now!

i thought it was a good analogy.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Well, I dont really know the determinants of coral stress. Its really not an area I googled for three minutes like you did.

I'd just like to point out that you have opinions that differ from the experts on paleoclimate, surface temperature recording, the physics of CO2 and other GHG feedback, glacier and ice monitoring in polar areas, and now coral reefs. In each and every instance, you differ from the experts by saying AGW cannot be a significant factor.

Doesnt it make you reconsider your position a little bit? How armies of experts with are lining up with masses of data and well formed opinions on the impact of AGW, and meanwhile, you are sitting pretending you are David with a slinghsot with a libertarian stone, thinking you can make all of it disappear by flinging your free market stone at the masses?

You're missing the equalization aspect of the various carbon molecule ions, which are self buffering and the end pH is determined by salinity, temperature, calcium, and other factors.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Do you honestly believe that Scientists are "automatically" blaming AGW now? Especially given a very recent history of these exact same scientists doing their due diligence and researching the cause back to sunscreen?

How many scientists are actually blaming CO2?

I want names!

Most of their papers are too ambiguous to blamed CO2. It's the pundits that blame CO2, when they read what they want to see out of papers.

Sure, you can find a few papers, especially from authors who want to join the IPCC bandwagon. However, the majority of works out there only mention AGW as another variable.

Don't believe me?

Start reading climate journals.

 

[MrT]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

They only claim AGW is part of the problem.

Would 1% of the problem be part of it?

What about this:

What did we do before 1750 to cause that ocean acidic swing?

They are blaming the lowering of the pH to man's activity. Right?

You and I both know that citing to an event before 1750 as using that as evidence to dismiss current human activity would be akin to saying that evidence of a previous natural forest fire in the area is evidence to dismiss whether this new fire was caused by humans.

But you are correct to note that they only place part of the blame on AGW. I have no idea what percentage they might assign probably because that would be a highly questionable statement from a scientific standpoint.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

It's all a giant conspiracy!

Strawman alert!

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

i thought it was a good analogy.

LOL...

It was good for a laugh, besides being accurate.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

You and I both know that citing to an event before 1750 as using that as evidence to dismiss current human activity would be akin to saying that evidence of a previous natural forest fire in the area is evidence to dismiss whether this new fire was caused by humans.

But you are correct to note that they only place part of the blame on AGW. I have no idea what percentage they might assign probably because that would be a highly questionable statement from a scientific standpoint.

I am simply ashamed of our scientific community and pundits when they misrepresent scientific facts.

The climate science have become a branch of political science.

 

[VanceMack]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Well, I dont really know the determinants of coral stress. Its really not an area I googled for three minutes like you did.

I'd just like to point out that you have opinions that differ from the experts on paleoclimate, surface temperature recording, the physics of CO2 and other GHG feedback, glacier and ice monitoring in polar areas, and now coral reefs. In each and every instance, you differ from the experts by saying AGW cannot be a significant factor.

Doesnt it make you reconsider your position a little bit? How armies of experts with are lining up with masses of data and well formed opinions on the impact of AGW, and meanwhile, you are sitting pretending you are David with a slinghsot with a libertarian stone, thinking you can make all of it disappear by flinging your free market stone at the masses?

CLASSIC 3G posting. "I don't really know what I'm talking about and don't really have something someone else has written that I still don't understand but can post as an authoritative reply to counter your position."

Religious folk........

:lamo

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

CLASSIC 3G posting. "I don't really know what I'm talking about and don't really have something someone else has written that I still don't understand but can post as an authoritative reply to counter your position."

Religious folk........

:lamo

Yep.

A true beta.

 

[yankintx]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

I am simply ashamed of our scientific community and pundits when they misrepresent scientific facts.

The climate science have become a branch of political science.

I agree, science and politics do not mix, oil and water. Yes we have done damage to our environment, and its up to us to act as caretakers of earth. Does that mean global warming and all hosts of environmental damage can be traced back to our irresponsibility? I have serious doubts, climate changes naturally, goes in cycles, the last Ice Age happen without any aid from man.

 

[ludin]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Yep.

A true beta.

the more I research this the more I find that these people ignore historical data.
they did a research dig in the artic.

they found through that the artic at one point never had ice on it.
in fact they also found that it was +8 degree's warmer than we are today.

they found that it was a lush forest area will with tree's etc ...
which then also means wildlife and everything else.

so if it was +8 at the poles it would have to be way higher at the lower regions.
so much of the earth was very tropical. in fact it was highly tropical.

then something happened. that cause a global glacier event.
and I bet it had nothing to do with man or SUV's.

what we see today is still left over of that event which never existed before.
so if we are actually transitioning into another tropical climate there is little we can do about it.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

then something happened. that cause a global glacier event.
and I bet it had nothing to do with man or SUV's.

Maybe it was Thor's Chariot?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

I agree, science and politics do not mix, oil and water. Yes we have done damage to our environment, and its up to us to act as caretakers of earth. Does that mean global warming and all hosts of environmental damage can be traced back to our irresponsibility? I have serious doubts, climate changes naturally, goes in cycles, the last Ice Age happen without any aid from man.

The biggest problem is the Climate community has allowed pundits to lie to us for so long, that if they ever do have a true, valid concern, nobody important will believe them. They have lost all credibility, except for their dogmatic faithful flock.

I wonder if they ever read "The Boy who Cried Wolf?"

 

[yankintx]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

The biggest problem is the Climate community has allowed pundits to lie to us for so long, that if they ever do have a true, valid concern, nobody important will believe them. They have lost all credibility, except for their dogmatic faithful flock.

I wonder if they ever read "The Boy who Cried Wolf?"

There may be some truth in what you say, and it's a shame. It detracts from the real environmentalist and the work they do to preserve and protect. We do have an obligation to look after our environment, but lets keep it in prospective.

 

[ludin]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Maybe it was Thor's Chariot?

thought maybe a bird pooped in the wrong spot.
that or it was a squirrel and a acorn.

 

[ludin]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

There may be some truth in what you say, and it's a shame. It detracts from the real environmentalist and the work they do to preserve and protect. We do have an obligation to look after our environment, but lets keep it in prospective.

I don't think I have ever heard anyone say not do anything to develop better technology.
however the difference is there is a pragmatic approach and then you have zealotry that has taken over
this issue.

 

[yankintx]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

I don't think I have ever heard anyone say not do anything to develop better technology.
however the difference is there is a pragmatic approach and then you have zealotry that has taken over
this issue.

Yup

We only have one planet, and it's shared with lots of other species. The nuts have taken over the environmental cause.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

thought maybe a bird pooped in the wrong spot.
that or it was a squirrel and a acorn.

That's right.

It was that silly squire who caused climate with his acorn.

 

[longview]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Yup

We only have one planet, and it's shared with lots of other species. The nuts have taken over the environmental cause.

I have read a lot of History, and lived quite a bit also.
While we cannot predict what people will do, their actions do follow a pattern.
People will almost always do what is best for themselves personally.
They will seldom be willing to give up any luxury, they have become used to,
and when they can, will increase their own comfort and convenience level.
With these factors in mind, there are only a few paths forward.
The one I see, is that fossil fuels will be replaced by man made fuels,
The oil company refineries can store surplus electricity as man made hydrocarbon fuels
compatible with existing needs and distribution infrastructure.
As the technology improves, it will allow every Human alive access to 1st world energy levels.
The carbon neutral feature will stop any future CO2 emissions, weather it is an issue or not.

What we need to be doing is planning the alternate electrical energy capacity to supply not just
our home needs, but the enough surplus to displace fossil fuels.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

I have read a lot of History, and lived quite a bit also.
While we cannot predict what people will do, their actions do follow a pattern.
People will almost always do what is best for themselves personally.
They will seldom be willing to give up any luxury, they have become used to,
and when they can, will increase their own comfort and convenience level.
With these factors in mind, there are only a few paths forward.
The one I see, is that fossil fuels will be replaced by man made fuels,
The oil company refineries can store surplus electricity as man made hydrocarbon fuels
compatible with existing needs and distribution infrastructure.
As the technology improves, it will allow every Human alive access to 1st world energy levels.
The carbon neutral feature will stop any future CO2 emissions, weather it is an issue or not.

What we need to be doing is planning the alternate electrical energy capacity to supply not just
our home needs, but the enough surplus to displace fossil fuels.

Man made fuels do seem the most likely to me as well, unless we have some paradigm shift in technology. Unlike a battery, they don't lose their storage once stored. I would like to see solar replacing burnt fuel, but we would need a world wide HVDC infrastructure and world wide solar so we don't kneed power storage. I don't see that happening this century.

 

[longview]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Man made fuels do seem the most likely to me as well, unless we have some paradigm shift in technology. Unlike a battery, they don't lose their storage once stored. I would like to see solar replacing burnt fuel, but we would need a world wide HVDC infrastructure and world wide solar so we don't kneed power storage. I don't see that happening this century.

I think we will need the HVDC infrastructure regardless, but we may not need it to just do solar to fuel.
The area necessary to replace our fuel needs is within the physical range of our existing grid.
The question is could the existing grid support the capacity?
There will be quite a bit of offset, if we get to say 50% solar homes, but that could be years away.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Yup

We only have one planet, and it's shared with lots of other species. The nuts have taken over the environmental cause.

We owe the other species nothing, this is one place where I break with Zen. We should do our best to transform the Earth into the perfect human carrying planet. The lifeforms that work towards that interest should stay, the ones that dont should continue to be put to death.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

I think we will need the HVDC infrastructure regardless, but we may not need it to just do solar to fuel.
The area necessary to replace our fuel needs is within the physical range of our existing grid.
The question is could the existing grid support the capacity?
There will be quite a bit of offset, if we get to say 50% solar homes, but that could be years away.

Yes, I see a continental HVDC as a must, regardless.

HVDC has the ability to transfer power large distances with little loss. Just add more cables for more gigawatts. It is however, expensive to build. I simply mention world-wide because the sun is always shining somewhere. When it's dark where I live, I could be getting my power from Europe for example. Something like that would reduce the necessity for storage of power, though we would still need to convert power to some storage medium.

Did you know that they stopped building windmills on Oregon and Washington?

There is no place to send the extra power. We generate more power than can be used. The HVDC we have from The Dalles, to Los Angeles can only handle 3.1 gigawatts. It's being upgraded to handle more power. If we expanded that to San Francisco and other large cities, we could generate even more power and ship it.

As is stands now... Windmill farm construction is on hold.

I actually think it's a good think. I hate wind power. I see nothing but problems 15-20 years from now when they need near complete rebuilds. I have a suspicion better green power will be used, and the windmills will be left to rot.

 

[longview]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

Yes, I see a continental HVDC as a must, regardless.

HVDC has the ability to transfer power large distances with little loss. Just add more cables for more gigawatts. It is however, expensive to build. I simply mention world-wide because the sun is always shining somewhere. When it's dark where I live, I could be getting my power from Europe for example. Something like that would reduce the necessity for storage of power, though we would still need to convert power to some storage medium.

Did you know that they stopped building windmills on Oregon and Washington?

There is no place to send the extra power. We generate more power than can be used. The HVDC we have from The Dalles, to Los Angeles can only handle 3.1 gigawatts. It's being upgraded to handle more power. If we expanded that to San Francisco and other large cities, we could generate even more power and ship it.

As is stands now... Windmill farm construction is on hold.

I actually think it's a good think. I hate wind power. I see nothing but problems 15-20 years from now when they need near complete rebuilds. I have a suspicion better green power will be used, and the windmills will be left to rot.

I think the world wide power grid is a bit further away, but I agree about the windmills, unless a better design is found.
Maintenance will be a problem, it could be a material science sort of problem, but no moving parts will always be better.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: ‘And then we wept': Scientists say 93 percent of the Great Barrier Reef now bleac

CLASSIC 3G posting. "I don't really know what I'm talking about and don't really have something someone else has written that I still don't understand but can post as an authoritative reply to counter your position."

Religious folk........

:lamo

Really?

Considering expert opinions on the face of a complicated topic is somehow bad?

I believe the religious folk are the ones that have a fixed belief despite contrary evidence....which describes you to a tee.