Slashdot Mirror
Increased Carbon Emissions Creating Giant Crabs
An anonymous reader writes "A lot of things in America are supersized: our portions, our drinks and now, apparently, our crabs. New research reveals that crabs can grow much faster and larger when water is saturated with carbon.This means that as greenhouse gas emissions grow, so will these crustaceans."
I for one welcome our steel pincered overlords.
Game over for the human race as we are eaten by the giant global warming crabs.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
City defense teams should be ready with butter...
I, for one, enjoy large Alaskan King Crab legs on a barbeque. I will enjoy super-sized Alaska King Crab legs the size of my forearm in the near future.
sudo make me a sandwich
Arte they really sure it's the carbon dioxyde, and not the radioactivity from all the nuclear power stations? Usually CO2 just suffocates stuff, it's the radiation that makes the critter bigger!
Mmmmmm crab cakes.....drooool
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
It's ok, we can attack their weak point for massive damage.
Nothing spoils the joy of having an original idea more than discovering it's actually a basic concept of another field.
So here's this giant enemy crab! We'll be fine so long as we find a weak point to attack for massive damage!
I used to say that climate change was a bad thing. But as a Marylander, now I say bring it!
Larger crabs == win.
Also, I tried to track down the original article from the Post and it didn't sound like it lined up with this article:
Under conditions with lower levels of carbon, two mud crabs polished off 20 oysters in six hours. But in the aquariums with higher levels of carbon, the mud crabs seemed confused.
They went over to the oysters, but they didn’t eat as many — sometimes fewer than half of what other crabs ate under normal conditions. Dodd scratched his head. “Acidification may be confusing the crab,” he said. The situation, he concluded, “is more complicated than you’d be led to believe.”
Ries said crabs might be getting loopy from all that carbon in their systems, depriving them of oxygen and putting them in a fog.
They're right about the Chesapeake being in trouble though ... a growing "dead zone" coupled with overfishing. Man, in the past six years fishing trips on that body of water have gotten very sorry. We're now going up to Delaware Bay ... it's a shame, I've donated to Save the Chesapeake but people around here are stubbornly against the EPA or any government regulation. There goes those natural resources I guess.
My work here is dung.
The future is crab people!!!!
The link points to page two of the article. For those that wonder why it started in the middle here is the proper link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/2013/04/07/a0c29f48-972f-11e2-b68f-dc5c4b47e519_story.html
Silence is a state of mime.
Next there will be dinosaurs roaming the earth due to increased carbon.
Ok so they grow faster, nice. They grow bigger? Awesome.
How about flavor? Are they more tasty when they grow bigger and faster? Why is nobody asking the important questions?
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I didn't just RTFHeadline but read the whole story and nowhere does it mention CO2 influencing the size of crab growth. In fact, quite the opposite, the article says that crabs don't feed as well under higher CO2. The article barely mentions CO2 and is really about conservation efforts of oysters and crabs.
Another histrionic headline about global warming. Here's the actual report, which documents the change in calcification of a variety of marine animals under increasing levels of CO2 dissolved in the water. Nothing in there at all about "giant crabs". Critters with hard shells -- crabs, lobsters, etc. -- will develop thicker shells as you increase the levels of CO2. News at 11.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
The Crab people will rise up and take over the Earth. Time to buy a Prius. Oh, wait, the lithium ion batteries create more carbon from manufacturing them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV5wmDhzgY8
Doh!!
We're going to need giant tubs of melted butter.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I propose to include these larger crabs in the climate models. Larger crabs --> more carbon fixed (or eaten) --> less CO2 --> less global warming.
Higher levels of carbon in the ocean are causing oysters to grow slower, and their predators — such as blue crabs — to grow faster
versus
Under conditions with lower levels of carbon, two mud crabs polished off 20 oysters in six hours. But in the aquariums with higher levels of carbon, the mud crabs seemed confused. They went over to the oysters, but they didn’t eat as many — sometimes fewer than half of what other crabs ate under normal conditions.
A recursive sig
Can impart wisdom and truth
Call proc signature()
Pretty sure this is the work of the Plutonians and the Bad Replicant. They were already seen working on crustacean enlargement and training... Emory: Okay, look, if you see him, could you just tell him to get going on the crab-training project? And he'll know what you're talking about. It's cool. Frylock Okay, we'll pass that on. Oglethrope: Danke. Emory: Hey, uh, do you know anything about crustacean enlarging or training? Oglethrope: Oh, forget it, Emory! Your pathetic fanged mouth has ruined my plans once again!
You don't eat crackers in the bed of your future or you get all...scratchy! - The Tick
For crab lovers, bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better. Carbon-absorbing crabs put all their energy into upgrading shells, not flesh — like a mansion without much furniture. So diners might be disappointed years from now when they crack open huge crabs and find little meat.
Stop saying that.
I thought the carbonated water was supposed to eat their shells and kill them dead. I guess the giant crabs and sea scorpions of the Dino ages had the same aquasphere...
What next? Jumbo shrimp?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Think of the oysters!
Let's henceforth push forward the POOPA (Poor Old Oysters Protection Act).
Before jumping at a "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacy, how have other possible causes been eliminated?
There are a lot of new nasties in agricultural- and municipal wastewaters the mudbugs like living in.
Various growth hormones, for one, might be expected to have some effect, as might antibiotics and other drugs. For all we know, BPA might be good for crustaceans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gridlock_%28Doctor_Who%29
Whenever a player quits EVE to go play WoW, the Average IQ of both games increase.
FAT Crab People.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
In teh futar, diners will wear powerarmor instead of bibs. "Dangerous Catch" will look like the lost scenes from Starship Troopers.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Other crustaceans too? I'd love me some giant shrimp or lobster!
The title is a total misreading of the results and yet one more example of a journalist, who is so incapable of understanding science that they get it completely bass akward.
Crabs are getting any bigger or "super-sized" rather ocean acidification confuses crab foraging behavior. Consequently, in Chesapeake Bay, where there are efforts to conserve oysters and thus clean the bay and increase oyster production, more oysters means more crabs under high carbon regimes.
The moral of the story is not that global warming will somehow give us giant crabs, but rather that with ocean acidification, oysters and those who cultivate them may be at a disadvantage because it takes spat much longer to grow, even though they obtain a slight advantage in that their crab predators can be become confused with increasing ocean acidification.
None of this is particular good news, since there is a upper limit as to how much extra carbon dioxide both oysters and crabs can tolerate and still produce their shells. Most don't realize it, but this problem is also true for fish, who must calcify their bones in order to grow and mature. With significant ocean acidification that means less and less fish, which is not good for humans, since we obtain about 50% of our protein from the ocean. The problem with ocean acidification is that unlike carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, where the cycle turns over about once every thirty years, natural pH changes needed to counteract human induced pH lowering only takes place over 100,000's or millions of years. So once we get there, we are more or less permanently there. Not to bright a prospect for mankind.
you would recognize that you would be incredibly stupid to do so. Its just that a journalist can't tell the difference between larger crabs and a larger crab population.
Sig Hansen has to replace the Northwestern with an Arleigh Burke class destroyer.
The Mole People will have something to eat.
http://aqua-teen-hunger-force.wikia.com/wiki/Unremarkable_Voyage
I'm sure the source was something else.
if you had, you would see this is , sadly, all to typical of mainstream journalism - totally un warranted sensationalizim of a modest, very modest, scientific finding.
The idea that the paper in geology
http://www.unc.edu/~jries/Ries_et_al_09_Geology_Mixed_Responses_to_Ocean_Acidification_full.pdf
has anyting to do with supersized blue crabs is total BS
really sad: don't any of you people bother to read ???
don't any of you people bother to check sources >??????
oh, wait, this is slashdot
Crap! We're already TOO LATE!
https://www.google.com/search?q=coconut+crab
Bonus: they drop coconuts on your head before they jump down and eat.
This was a Doctor Who story!
I'm going to restore the balance to the for...I mean carbon table by hitting up Joe's Crab Shack.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I was thinking of something completely different...
You would recognise that what I proposed is obviously the latter.
why not zoidberg?
Good people go to bed earlier.
It's /., so someone always reads it for me.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
They might need to run more shifts on the Old Bay conveyor belt.
I would like (quite seriously, not black humor) to know whether these larger crabs taste as good as the smaller ones. Bigger crabs would mean more crab meat volume compared to the work of shelling them. The shelling is fun, but it's also tedious and can be hard on the fingers. And the best thing about a cut incurred at a Maryland style crab feast is the way that particles of pepper, celery salt, paprika, etc, are embedded in the wound.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
We were warned !!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQdoFv7qE5w
OH Lordy_Lordy. Will they make industrial strength RID soon too.
From America's finest news source;
http://www.theonion.com/video/experts-agree-giant-razorclawed-bioengineered-crab,14318/
That was worded that way intentionally.
When travelling, it's ok if the airlines lose your emotional baggage.
"This means that as greenhouse gas emissions grow, so will these crustaceans."
The problem with this scenario is that carbon emissions in the U.S. have gone down, not up.
Seriously.
And no, sodium also is not the same as sodium chloride.
So, it must not have been a mythical creature after all... this means that there may really have been some of these things in ancient Japanese history! Now I want to take a vacation and find one of these things, to flip it over onto its back and attack its weak point for MASSIVE DAMAGE.
No I did not read the article; yes I know what was meant by "crabs." Now get off my lawn!
I know the crab lobby is behind this.
they sell it by weight.
More shell + less meat = profit?
Something smells fishy here.
No brain, no pain.
Last future scene in The Time Machine, anyone?
I'm sure our succulent overlords will need a nice warm bath and a relaxing massage. I'll draw the bath and start melting the butt.... er.... warming the massage oil.
If one RTFA, one sees that there are no actual *reports* of "larger than normal crabs" being found in the wild....the report is about crabs in CO2-charged aquariums growing larger and acting oddly. There's no actual data regarding increased CO2 in nature causing any abnormally large crabs.
That would seem a logical next step, to see if the experiment matches reality--but that's a misleading headline.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
Dr. Zoidberg. It should be interesting by the 31st century.
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
This is about Al Gore's giant mansion, and jet flights, etc. etc. etc. right?
or is he not one of the selfish fucks you are railing about?
The paper by Ries was published in 2009. Not that the topic isn't interesting but come on, here is what I wrote about it back in 2009:
The paper's main message is that the sweeping warnings about dying oceans by climate change doomsayers are most certainly wrong. Nature will respond to changes in atmospheric CO2 in unexpected and unpredictable ways. Earth's oceans have done quite well when CO2 levels were ten times the current level. Combine that with other research work that reveals greater resilience among ocean life forms than previously known by scientists or admitted to by eco-advocates, and I have little fear of oceanic ecological collapse in the future.
For further discussion about the impacts of CO2 on crabs etc. see http://resilientearth.com/?q=content/ocean-absorption-co2-not-shrinking
How did Doctor Who know??
(See Gridlock, season 3, ep 3, for reference of giant crabs created by excessive vehicle emissions.)
Further "confusion" arises when we think about previous stories and research that scream about oceanic acidification. Their line is that with increasing carbon emissions,the CO2 is causing increased acidity in the oceans. According to these sources, the acid levels are such that they are impeding the growth of calcium carbonate creatures like coral, shelled mollusks(clams) and crustaceans(crabs). They cite smaller animals as clear present evidence and pose alarming extrapolations of these acidic oceans stripping away the calcium carbonate shells completely, one day.
So, I'm confused how the carbon is creating monster crabs when it is at the same time causing smaller crabs and thinning shells. Or are we to believe that we are going to have monstrous crabs with no shells at all?
on deadliest catch.
So why are carbon levels increasing in sea water? Is there so much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that it's being /forced/ down into the water?
Something doesn't sound right, here.
...for washing your dick after you had carnal knowledge in the car park behind the bar. A case of crabs is bad enough without.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
I thought warmer oceans held less CO2?
...would like to welcome our new crab overlords.
The old 1950s B-grade science fiction films were wrong. It isn't radiation that creates giant, monstrous crabs...it's carbon!!!
Ok, I have to say it, Giant Enemy Crab! Based on japanese history....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g1fr5vk72M
Looks like the Deadliest Catch just got a bit deadlier!
I predict a spate of new "giant/mutant crab" movies approximately six months from now.
So does this mean, as time moves on and we oversaturate our oceans with carbon, we'll have more and bigger crabs? If that's the case, then I expect the prices at Red Lobster to come down!