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

[The_Paradox]

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

I’m in Florida, and the new curriculum simply states they were both pros and cons.

 

[Lebowski_]

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.

Why not both?

I believe in both limiting obvious impacts of habitat degradation but also the longer game which is impact of climate and the unnatural acceleration of warming.

There is no reason to ignore one. Both are backed by science. The “man or no man” part ignores the hard work being done by the scientific community working in this discipline.

 

[MoshJosh]

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

I think it would be hard to say exactly without knowing how the climate would be behaving without human interaction. That said, and given the scope of temperature extremes the earth has gone through, probably not a lot. That's not to say that small changes can't have big effects. For me the fear is more about throwing off equilibrium that the earth and it's "compensatory mechanisms" can't over come. I alluded to it earlier, but I don't think these means the earth becomes a fireball and we all die in a matter of moments, rather that we could set in motion events the earth and the life on it, would struggle with. . .

an example, while flawed, I have used in the past is: a blood alcohol level of 0.30% to 0.40% can be fatal. That's a change of less than 1% (not accounting for other fluids/"things" that make up your body) and it has fatal consequences.

 

[The_Paradox]

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

I meant just the word. Some of the posters here seem the type to be “triggered”.

 

[Doctorgori]

Slight left turn, but IMHO what scares me is we got our hands tied as ordinary citizens to help… I mean who here wouldn’t jump at the chance to raise frags of Caribean corals for reef repair?
What is the northernmost Atlantic reef anyway? Anyone?

 

[MnFish1]

Anyone wanna lay odds this thread survives until tomorrow…

Besides I can guess which news channel the assorted posters watch with 100% accuracy and no thread on this topic is gonna change anyone’s mind (or will any science, stats or data)

BTW see Younger Dryess if you believe corals or animals can quickly adapt to climate change…. OTOH OR if you don’t believe fast climate changes don’t occur naturally anyway…

Disclaimer I was a “coal miners daughter”

Come on. You're lumping multiple people into a group. And - that means you're prejudiced to a degree (not attacking merely stating a fact) - IMHO - if people are going to discuss this issue - seems to me - they need to discuss. Judging R2R - IMHO - not appropriate. BTW - your comment - saying 'the assorted posters watch with 100% accuracy' - is probably statist. You have no clue what 100% of people do. (Nor do i)

 

[MnFish1]

I meant just the word. Some of the posters here seem the type to be “triggered”.

IMHO - if someone say's they are triggered -IMHO -grouping people you don't know is not correct

 

[The_Paradox]

Slight left turn, but IMHO what scares me is we got our hands tied as ordinary citizens to help… I mean who here wouldn’t jump at the chance to raise frags of Caribean corals for reef repair?
What is the northernmost Atlantic reef anyway? Anyone?

There are tons of volunteer opportunities in my area to work on reef restoration and beach restoration. I like the think global approach you have. That not withstanding, I’m not sure how much good would come from ten of thousands of packages being mailed to restore one acre of reef.

 

[Lebowski_]

Slight left turn, but IMHO what scares me is we got our hands tied as ordinary citizens to help… I mean who here wouldn’t jump at the chance to raise fragsof Caribean corals for reef repair?
What is the northernmost Atlantic reef anyway? Anyone?

I originally posted a very interesting interactive map which included coral densities going all the way up the eastern seaboard but ended up deleting it when I realized that people just couldn’t help but turn this isn’t another “man doesn’t impact it” style soapbox thread.

Thread has lost its purpose and spiralled into exactly what I expected it would but wanted to avoid, given the nature of the internet. There are a zillion threads on people arguing mans impact.

Would have been nice to have one specifically about reef impact.

 

[The_Paradox]

IMHO - if someone say's they are triggered -IMHO -grouping people you don't know is not correct

“some” AND “seem”.

 

[MoshJosh]

There are tons of volunteer opportunities in my area to work on reef restoration and beach restoration. I like the think global approach you have. That not withstanding, I’m not sure how much good would come from ten of thousands of packages being mailed to restore one acre of reef.

I just don't want to be the guy that signs up and kills the coral. . .

 

[BeanAnimal]

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

And yet somehow you are OK with the countless (not an exaggeration) number of "scientists" caught manipulating data, cherry picking data and hiding contradictory data, or outright making data up, to support their climate crisis opinion or other environmental causes.

The ozone hole nonsense was made up to secure a grant for the following year because funding was running out and they had nothing. It only took 2 decades to learn the truth...

Micheal Mann and his silly hockey stick model built with cherry picked tree ring data and fitted further with falsified data.. when the tree rings examined in whole actually contradicted much of his hypothesis. To this day, used as a basis for much of the conclusions being drawn about climate and the models that drive the conclusions.

The IPCC and the several times they have been caught making crap up or covering up exculpatory or discrediting data. then the investigations that said they didn't lie, getting caught covering up that they did lie... Peer reviewed lies, but the means justifies the end we are told.

NOAA and EPA, etc. discarding low "anomaly" buoy and land based temperature data while keep high "anomaly" buoy and land based temperature data, so as to nudge up averages.

The "consensus" lists of scientists and non-qualified people similar to what you indicated above, but tied to "green" funded initiatives, investments and startups.

We can cite examples on both sides, almost endlessly.

The point being that there is always an agenda, and often very little truth. Be careful what you consume as science, because very little of it really is.

 

[bushdoc]

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!

"my tank uses less energy than a TV does"
I can clearly say that :

1. you don't have Apex Aquacontroller, therefore you are unable to monitor your Tank Energy Consumption
2. you are watching your TV 24/7
3. You have pico tank (5 gal)

"Avarage TV uses 58.6 watts when running and 1.3 watts while in standby mode"-per Mr Google

 

[MnFish1]

You are making assumptions. I don’t know anyone who thinks celebrity wastefulness is ok.

Unfortunately, just stopping rich peoples yachts is not going to do much. I’d still love to see them get dinged for it, though.

The celebrities do. . Right or wrong. (btw - I'm not in the camp believing that celebritiy xxx using a jet is a hypocrite)

 

[bushdoc]

And yet somehow you are OK with the countless (not an exaggeration) number of "scientists" caught manipulating data, cherry picking data and hiding contradictory data, or outright making data up, to support their climate crisis opinion or other environmental causes.

The ozone hole nonsense was made up to secure a grant for the following year because funding was running out and they had nothing.

Micheal Mann and his silly hockey stick model built with cherry picked tree ring data and fitted further with falsified data. To this day, used as a basis for much of the conclusions being drawn about climate and the models that drive the conclusions.

The IPCC and the several times they have been caught making crap up or covering up exculpatory or discrediting data. then the investigations that said they didn't lie, getting caught covering up that they did lie... Peer reviewed lies from a report funded by an organization aimed at the global transfer of wealth.

NOAA and EPA, etc. discarding low "anomaly" buoy and land based temperature data while keep high "anomaly" buoy and land based temperature data, so as to nudge up averages.

The "consensus" lists of scientists and non-qualified people similar to what you indicated above, but tied to "green" funded initiatives, investments and startups.

We can cite examples on both sides, almost endlessly.

The point being that there is always an agenda, and often very little truth. Be careful what you consume as science, because very little of it really is.

"countless (not an exaggeration) number of "scientists" caught manipulating data, cherry picking data and hiding contradictory data, "
And many ordinary citizens and Valuable Members of Reef2Reef Forums are doing the same.

 

[MnFish1]

Who is denigrating people who live in trailers?

The earth has cycles, yes. It doesn’t take a genius to reach this conclusion. Doesn’t mean we aren’t accelerating processes which have been much, much slower before we arrived.

Anyways, this is a thread for discussing something that is happening and it’s effects on an ecosystem we all love. If you want to discuss your personalize conspiracies, I am sure you could make your own thread for that.

Except it seems the topic you wanted here to be discussed was human induced climate change - however that was not mentioned in your initial post. Maybe I'm wrong?

 

[The_Paradox]

"countless (not an exaggeration) number of "scientists" caught manipulating data, cherry picking data and hiding contradictory data, "
And many ordinary citizens and Valuable Members of Reef2Reef Forums are doing the same.

3? Did I win?

 

[jabberwock]

I have been a scientist for 20 years by trade and education. I work on environmental remediation, flood studies, waters of the state, threatened and endangered species, and energy transition. I can assure you that the climate is the least of your worries.

 

[MnFish1]

You are making assumptions. I don’t know anyone who thinks celebrity wastefulness is ok.

Unfortunately, just stopping rich peoples yachts is not going to do much. I’d still love to see them get dinged for it, though.

Then - as compared to your neighbors without a reef tank - should be dinged as well? Correct?

 

[Reefering1]

Let's get down to ther brass tacks people, we can solve this;-) How much of the human population needs to "expire", and how do we decide who?