The Climate Change thread - news about the changing climate and the effects on reef ecosystems.

[MoshJosh]

I definitely see the logic @MnFish1, calling an opposing idea a "conspiracy theory" right out the gate seems a bit counterproductive (. . . even if I agree with the sentiment haha).

That said from my reading (skimming) in this thread the argument does not seem to be: humans don't/can't effect climate change VS humans do/can effect climate change (the former, in my opinion, is without enough evidence that I would consider it at least conspiracy theory adjacent haha)

Rather it seems like the disagreement is how great an effect humans have, and is it enough to make a legitimate impact one way or the other. What value should be assigned to the change and how much effort should be spent on changing it.

I guess what I am saying is I can see why some ideas about climate change could very well be labeled conspiracy theories, but it doesn't seem doing be doing OP any favors here as it doesn't really apply to the arguments or idea I am seeing in the thread (even if I disagree with them).

 

[The_Paradox]

Genuine question, I'm not as smart or educated as yourself so if it's stupid please don't be afraid of saying so.

This year we saw Nordstream 1 and 2 blow up. This was the biggest release of methane ever in the planets history, methane is 80 times more warming than CO2.

Is this likely the cause of the heatwaves this year rather than CO2?

First you would have to define heat wave and set boundary conditions before performing a true retrospective analysis.

 

[Lebowski_]

Do you think you're helping the climate by importing rocks and bags of water from halfway across the planet to slowly watch them die in your living room?

How do you think this stuff gets here? It's not by bicycle.

Then you're using all this extra energy to keep this ecosystem alive inside your home.

If you actually care about the fragile eco systems out there you wouldn't be supporting an industry that profits from ripping it up and sending it around the world.

Be honest about the hobby, we are not helping the reefs. We value having coral or fish in our homes over having coral or fish in the reef, we all do this every time we buy a coral or fish.

All of my coral are aquacultured, rock is man made in 40 km away, my tank uses less energy than a TV does in any given day (we don’t really watch tv).

It’s not perfect, but there are a lot of improvements and gains in efficiency that are allowing us to slowly reduce the costs of the hobby.

It’s better to keep pushing for better science and better tech than to not. Maybe our decedents will look back on this hobby and think we were selfish morons!

 

[MnFish1]

And maybe the guy living in a hut, baking in the sun thinks you should ditch the computer and aquarium or get "dinged for it" because middle class waste-fullness is not ok.

Wow

This - is actually what many think is the issue with climate change - from my reading. If everyone in third world countries had the same 'luxury' that we have in the west - the cost to the environment would be enormous. So - rightly so - why should some rich Americans and europeans and asians have these special aquariums, etc - when people in subsaharan Africa are still building fires.

 

[MoshJosh]

Genuine question, I'm not as smart or educated as yourself so if it's stupid please don't be afraid of saying so.

This year we saw Nordstream 1 and 2 blow up. This was the biggest release of methane ever in the planets history, methane is 80 times more warming than CO2.

Is this likely the cause of the heatwaves this year rather than CO2?

The question is valid (if true, but I know nothing about it), but missing a few key elements to come to any sort of conclusion. Namely how big is the "biggest release"? How does that compare to previous releases (1 is technically bigger than 0.999999999999999)? And how does that number compare to CO2 admission (for example if it is 80 X less than the amount of CO2 released by a single city. . . I don't know). Also how quickly does methane degrade/interact with other things in the atmosphere, etc.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Genuine question, I'm not as smart or educated as yourself so if it's stupid please don't be afraid of saying so.

This year we saw Nordstream 1 and 2 blow up. This was the biggest release of methane ever in the planets history, methane is 80 times more warming than CO2.

Is this likely the cause of the heatwaves this year rather than CO2?

I would be curious as to the source of your numbers and context.
Maybe the single larges once time concentrated release.. yes.

Methane is (and has been) liberated naturally since the formation of our planet. All decaying matter creates methane. It comes from deep within the earth and is liberated in numerous ways, from glaciation to volcanoes, from cow burps to rotting leaves, from cracks in the crust to hot springs.

 

[MnFish1]

Leave it to a reefing forum to deny climate change - so unfortunate

I have not read 1 single post denying climate change. Please quote the posts you're talking about?

 

[The_Paradox]

All of my coral are aquacultured, rock is man made in 40 km away, my tank uses less energy than a TV does in any given day (we don’t really watch tv).

!

I doubt that. TVs only use 60-100w on average. Even if you watch a lot of TV it’s not on 24/7. I’m not judging. I’m literally idling a diesel generator right now just keep it oiled. It’s cool though. Ill buy offset credits tomorrow.

 

[Tangs-A-Lot]

and My take? its all a drop in the bucket until you get the 1 billion Chinese and 1 billion Indians on board

That was my thought earlier today. We can cut our (partner countries) emissions to near zero, do 5000% better than we do now. Let’s say we all buy horses & bicycles and have zero cars. All that will do is make China stronger while they make a massive army and then conquer Europe and the Americas and turn our countries into their mineral mines, furnaces, etc. to run their empire. Your children will be slaves mining those minerals.

 

[MnFish1]

I would be curious as to the source of your numbers and context.
Maybe the single larges once time concentrated release.. yes.

Methane is (and has been) liberated naturally since the formation of our planet. All decaying matter creates methane. It comes from deep within the earth and is liberated in numerous ways, from glaciation to volcanoes, from cow burps to rotting leaves, from cracks in the crust to hot springs.

Kind of reminds me of the 'Disaster' formerly known as the oil spill in the gulf (BP?). - There was initial damage, it's now a non-issue.

 

[The_Paradox]

Your children will be slaves mining those minerals.

I think the common consensus now is that slavery is bad. Tsk tsk

 

[Lebowski_]

Exactly, he still doesn’t understand he is being rude by calling my perspective a conspiracy. I am not here bashing anyone for their thoughts, just posted some other ideas.

1,200 Scientists and Professionals Declare: “There is No Climate Emergency” – The Daily Sceptic

First we had the Great Barrington Declaration, challenging the 'settled' scientific consensus about lockdowns. Now comes the World Climate Declaration, challenging the computer models predicting environmental catastrophe.

dailysceptic.org

The two main Dutch actors behind the declaration are Guus Berkhout, a retired geophysicist who has worked for oil giant Shell, and journalist Marcel Crok.

Both have been accused of receiving money from fossil fuel companies to finance their climate-sceptic work. They deny the allegations,

When looking closer at the list of signatories, there are precisely 1,107, including six people who are dead. Less than 1% of the names listed describe themselves as climatologists or climate scientists.

Eight of the signatories are former or current employees of the oil giant Shell, while many other names have links to mining companies.

One of the signatories is Ivar Giaever, a joint winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973 for work on superconductors. However, he has never published any work on climate science

Fact check: Did 1,200 climate experts sign viral misinformation?

A document claiming that 'there is no climate emergency' has been circulating on social media. #TheCube

www.euronews.com

 

[HomebroodExotics]

So - this planet:

Was once mostly molten

Then mostly ice.

All of the land was once one giant super continent.

The magnetic poles have changed countless times.

Massive swaths of Life have been wiped out and renewed several times due to not so massive impactors.

Impactors and volcanoes have regularly plunged the world into dusty cold darkness that alters weather for hundreds, if not thousand year spans.

There are fish fossils high upon mountain peeks

There are plant and animal fossils MANY thousands of feet deep in coal and shale beds, often UNDER mountains comprised of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rock.

There are inland lakes nearly 1000 feet deep gouged out by glaciers that receded millions of years ago.

Plates collide and push mountains from below sea level to 20,000 or more feet into the air, buckling the earths crust like it were tinfoil being crumpled.

Our moon has been moving away from us since it was formed after a collision with us sometime in the ancient past... all the while its gravitational effects on our tides and our tidal bulge in our crust lessening with each passing moment.

Our sun cyclically and sometimes randomly bombards us with massive amounts of solar radiation, sometimes in extended spurts that wreak havoc with our "stable" climate patterns.

One day in actual relative short time compared to the planets age, that sun will grow just a little bit larger before it grows massively larger... but even that little bit will cook everything on the planet, billions of years before it actually gets large enough to consume us.

In all of that, our ocean depths, currents, topography, locations, temperatures and chemistry have drastically and constantly changed.

The oldest known reef fossils are around 500 million years old (yep in the mountains and coal beds, thousands of feet up and down with the oldest I think being in Vermont).

However, as far as I know the oldest known "living" coral beds are around 4000 years old. The rest of them are long gone....due to the ever changing planet.

So yes - the Atlantic current will go away at some point and be replaced by some other current. The effects will be grand on "our" minuscule timescale. But are they really grand on the timescale of even 5,000 years or 10,000 years let alone a million or two, which is minuscule in relation to the planets age and life? Is "our" time the ideal time, or was that some other age past or future? Who knows. I am sure the dinosaurs and various hominid and pre-hominid life forms thought things were grand too...

Don't look toward the sky too much, for that next impactor or pulsar may be coming straight at us and get you before parts of yellowstone are ejected to the moon....

Sure but it's not supposed to happen in a span of 10 years. I don't know how yall can't comprehend this.

 

[The_Paradox]

The two main Dutch actors behind the declaration are Guus Berkhout, a retired geophysicist who has worked for oil giant Shell, and journalist Marcel Crok.

Both have been accused of receiving money from fossil fuel companies to finance their climate-sceptic work. They deny the allegations,

When looking closer at the list of signatories, there are precisely 1,107, including six people who are dead. Less than 1% of the names listed describe themselves as climatologists or climate scientists.

Eight of the signatories are former or current employees of the oil giant Shell, while many other names have links to mining companies.

One of the signatories is Ivar Giaever, a joint winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973 for work on superconductors. However, he has never published any work on climate science

Fact check: Did 1,200 climate experts sign viral misinformation?

A document claiming that 'there is no climate emergency' has been circulating on social media. #TheCube

www.euronews.com

 

[MnFish1]

You're not wrong.

It's just so different here in North America...gotta walk on eggshells I tell ya.

No - you don't this makes no sense (to me) - what eggshells are you walking on?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Maybe he’s right, to be honest. I’ve thought a lot about that myself.

Anyways, any chance we can get back to the topic of the thread? If you don’t want to accept climate change/global warming etc than you have that right, but I was hoping for a thread where we could keep an eye on the impact it’s having on reefs.

Again - I never said the climate wasn't changing. In fact, I pointed out that it most certainly has, is and will continue to change, often drastically, man or no man.

I also contributed by saying there isn't ANYTHING that you can do to stop it or slow it down. The models that you base your opinion on (all of them) indicate that there is no amount of regression that will fix or slow the issue in your or your great grand children's lifetimes.... Likewise, if it is all mother nature - well enjoy the ride.

My advice was to concentrate on things that you can control (not kidding, move into the mini house if you feel you must) but helping to curb the outright destructive commercial (most of it not US based) fishing practices an will do more for the reefs than any "climate" direct action that you can think of. Strive to do something about the chemical and sewage dumping that destroys local beaches and shallow reefs, that will do more than any direct "climate" action that you can think of.

 

[HomebroodExotics]

Again - I never said the climate wasn't changing. In fact, I pointed out that it most certainly has, is and will continue to change, often drastically, man or no man.

I also contributed, but saying there isn't ANYTHING that you can do to stop it or slow it down. The models that you base your opinion on (all of them) indicate that there is no amount of regression that will fix or slow the issue in your or your great grand children's lifetimes.... Likewise, if it is all mother nature - well enjoy the ride.

My advice was to concentrate on things that you can control (not kidding, move into the mini house if you feel you must) but helping to curb the outright destructive commercial (most of it not US based) fishing practices an will do more for the reefs than any "climate" direct action that you can think of. Strive to do something about the chemical and sewage dumping that destroys local beaches and shallow reefs, that will do more than any direct "climate" action that you can think of.

Majority of our pollution is created by corporations. It's most important to vote for politicians who put regulations on pollution and create positive policies for the environment. I mean worse case scenario we have a nice place to live, I don't get the problem.

 

[Doctorgori]

Absolutely not what I’ve done but I wouldn’t expect anything more from you to be honest.

People who prefer to ignore man made climate impact are more than welcome to make a thread on it. This thread is meant to discuss its impacts.

You are the OP and you have some inherent right to define the scope of the discussion, but you can’t expect to define the scope of the answers otherwise it becomes just a “Blog” of like opinions …
But to your point, admittedly it can/will get off track debating climate change in the 1st place…problem is by unofficial definition “climate change” = “CO2 emissions” = Anthopogenic

The answer IMHO - the change in climate is affecting reefs in a negative way. The discussion portion (which you have kind of banned in a small way) - is 'why' is the climate change happening. ? Or am I misunderstanding

Exactly…

I think the common consensus now is that slavery is bad. Tsk tsk

Slavery is bad? you are obviously not from the Current landmass called “Florida” which defines its own definitions and will soon be underwater anyway

 

[MnFish1]

But I don't think anyone is saying that changes to the earths climate are 100% man made. Rather that humans can contribute to changes in the climate and theoretically those changes could occur too such an extent and at such a rate that they cause irreversible damage...

I would be curious - which percentage (you don't have to provide science) - is related to human issue? No debate wanted

 

[Tangs-A-Lot]

I think the common consensus now is that slavery is bad. Tsk tsk

Hmmmm, you really didn’t take away from my comment that slavery was bad. <yikes> reading comprehension, much !?!