Slashdot Mirror
Climatologists: By 2100, the Earth Will Have an Entirely Different Ocean
merbs writes: The ocean is in the midst of radical, manmade change. It can seem kind of crazy that one of the most immense properties on Earth—the ocean washes over 71 percent of the planet—could be completely transformed by a swarm of comparatively tiny, fleshy mammals. But humans are indeed remaking the ocean, in almost every conceivable way. The ocean we know today—that billions swim, fish, float, and surf in—that vast planetary body of water will be of an entirely different character by the end of the century: hotter, higher, trashier, and more acidic.
The oceans are already measurably warmer and more acidic, you fucking idiot.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The term you are looking for is Useful Idiot
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I don't believe you.
Then you're an idiot.
In the 70's it was going to be an ice age,
Nope, never happened. Oooh I see you're confusing journalists in the popular press floundering around with actual science. Do you do that with computer stuff too, or do you only level your skepticism on things you truly don't understand?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Yup, the earth will survive in one form or another, just like life will survive in one form or another.
Conservation of the current environment isn't about preserving life on earth, it is about preserving the ecological niche in which humanity lives.
I don't believe you.
Your beliefs make no difference to reality. Are you hoping to fairy wish climate change away? - "timmy you can do it! you just have to believe!"
In the 70's it was going to be an ice age, now it is going to be a heat wave.
In the 1990's climate deniers told us that the climate wasn't warming.
They were wrong.
Then they told us the warming was because of the sun.
They were wrong.
Then they told us the warming was due to gravitational lensing.
They were wrong.
Then they told us the warming was due to- hey look over there! It's a vast green conspiracy!
They were wrong.
Then they told us the slight dip in the rate of warming was magically a reset of the warming and that this disproved the laws of thermodynamics and model mumble mumble magic happens! Unicorns and Fairies!
They were wrong.
I tell you this in case you feel like comparing your credibility with the credibility of the science again.
Is the data real or manipulated?
I once had a guy here claim that the measured rate of warming was insignificant and posted a link to woodfortrees to prove it. I went and looked. It turns out, he'd carefully selected a narrow band of measures along the equator (where the warming is the least) and excluded the temperate and polar zones to reduce the warming measures. In short he lied.
I pointed this out to him, and he disappeared. Yet I have seen, several times, the same link re-appear.
So: who is manipulating data?
-No, the sun isn't the reason for the seasons. The reason is the earths axial tilt. If there was no tilt, there would be no seasons.
-No, solar flares do not affect climate. They do affect 'space weather' and thus satellites and the upper atmosphere, but not our weather down on the surface.
-No, solar output is not responsible for the warming. If it were, we would be cooling right now, as the sun output has trended downward the last few decades.
-No, Al Gore didn't predict the Arctic would be ice free. He was quoting a study that had just been released at the time.*
-No, the models have not never been right. They have been right, and they're getting stronger over time.
-Your local weather forecasts for 2 weeks from now has squat to do with long term global trends and averages.
-NIPCC is a pile of bull manure written by nonscientists. It'd be like you trying to prove Einstein wrong, when you cant even get 2+2=? correct.
-If you want to know what the IPCC actually says, you should actually read it. It's available to the public after all.
*And just for S&G's: While completely ice-free wont happen for some time yet, the Arctic actually has already been functionally ice free somewhat ahead of their prediction , and shipping is already taking advantage of this, as well oil companies seeking to drill there, particularly during months of minimum extent.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
What I'm saying is that when we create problems, we tend to be pretty well self correcting.
In case you haven't noticed, people like Michael Mann have been predicting environmental doomsday scenarios for a long time now, several of which were supposed to have come true already, only they haven't.
There have been histrionic predictions about disappearing glaciers, extinct polar bears, 50cm+ rising seas, 50 million climate refugees, catastrophic hurricane seasons, ice-free arctic, all which should have come to pass by now.
I agree, 'crying wolf' is a near-perfect way to ruin one's credibility.
Hyperbole sells movies, not science. However, there's precious little hyperbole coming from the scientists themselves.
The predictions you mention really are coming to pass. Jellies have hit their stride, they're filling the oceans. Polar bears really are dying out. Local weather systems really are making landfall with more energy than they used to. Arctic ice really is disappearing very quickly.
I live in New Zealand. Like many tourists to our little country, I to have naughtily stood upon the tongue of the Franz Josef glacier. I did this in 2000 and it looks quite different only fifteen years later, judging by this Herald article.
This is reality. That fact that it is not happening nearly as fast as we were led to believe by our hyperbolous media and silly disaster movies like '2012' should come as a surprise to absolutely no-one.
..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?