Jump to content


The Environment


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Climate alarmists that predicted the end of the Great Barrier Reef.  That could include all of who you brought up.   

 Climate science is an inexact science.   Is the GBR (Great Barrier Reef not GO BIG RED:B)) in the process of dying?, yes, but maybe not as fast as originally thought. The main issue isn't the timing but the fact that it is happening and if we can do something about it?  The same is true about climate change in general.  Is it happening. Yes.  Can we do something about it?  Yes.  Will we all die next year? No - but if the trend continues and if we don't act, then we speed up the process.    The USA and Europe & other industrialized countries can't do it alone.  Heavy polluters like  China and India have to do their part.  I think climate warming has a lot to do wt the cycles of the sun and the larger solar system dynamics.  We can't change that. But we can affect the part that man plays in it - carbon emissions, etc. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

https://ocean.si.edu/ecosystems/coral-reefs/great-barrier-reef-going-going-gone
 

Sorry It was 2022.   Now everyone is pushing it back to 2040 and 2050.   Prob enough time for the alarmists to die and not face the consequences of being wrong.   

 

If you're actually keeping score, a lot of things have been happening sooner and worse than the alarmists predicted. 

 

There have been some promising recent studies about our ability to restore coral reefs, but it involves intervention by smart people who aren't a$$h@!es. 

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

https://ocean.si.edu/ecosystems/coral-reefs/great-barrier-reef-going-going-gone
 

Sorry It was 2022.   Now everyone is pushing it back to 2040 and 2050.   Prob enough time for the alarmists to die and not face the consequences of being wrong.   

Well as long as portions of the GBR might be around for another 20 years, I guess there is no need to get alarmed about the factors affecting it and surely there is no need for us to limit our emissions that contribute to the bleaching that kills it off. Those darned alarmists, trying to save reefs and stuff…

 

You’ll be able to tell your grandkids about the GBR (Great Barrier Reef and Go Big Red) that used to exist and how the environmental alarmists missed predicting it’s demise by a whole 20 years.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Again, I wish people would stop being morons about this. The things humans are doing that are claimed to cause climate change also cause numerous other problems. If you don't believe in climate change or don't believe humans are a factor or don't think it will happen as quickly as claimed, it doesn't f#&%ing matter.

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

https://ocean.si.edu/ecosystems/coral-reefs/great-barrier-reef-going-going-gone
 

Sorry It was 2022.   Now everyone is pushing it back to 2040 and 2050.   Prob enough time for the alarmists to die and not face the consequences of being wrong.   

The point of the article is that action should be taken. You seem to be ignoring that the statement you're referring to is both a conditional and is only referring to a portion of the GBR (emphasis mine):

Quote

If current trends continue, over 90 percent or more of the living coral will be gone from the central and southern parts of the reef in just 10 years.

 

If you look at the study the article is talking about, you'll see nothing about the "predicted the end of the Great Barrier Reef". Here's the abstract (emphasis mine):

Quote

Abstract
The world’s coral reefs are being degraded, and the need to reduce local pressures to offset the effects of increasing global pressures is now widely recognized. This study investigates the spatial and temporal dynamics of coral cover, identifies the main drivers of coral mortality, and quantifies the rates of potential recovery of the Great Barrier Reef. Based on the world’s most extensive time series data on reef condition (2,258 surveys of 214 reefs over 1985–2012), we show a major decline in coral cover from 28.0% to 13.8% (0.53% y−1), a loss of 50.7% of initial coral cover. Tropical cyclones, coral predation by crown-of-thorns starfish (COTS), and coral bleaching accounted for 48%, 42%, and 10% of the respective estimated losses, amounting to 3.38% y−1 mortality rate. Importantly, the relatively pristine northern region showed no overall decline. The estimated rate of increase in coral cover in the absence of cyclones, COTS, and bleaching was 2.85% y−1, demonstrating substantial capacity for recovery of reefs. In the absence of COTS, coral cover would increase at 0.89% y−1, despite ongoing losses due to cyclones and bleaching. Thus, reducing COTS populations, by improving water quality and developing alternative control measures, could prevent further coral decline and improve the outlook for the Great Barrier Reef. Such strategies can, however, only be successful if climatic conditions are stabilized, as losses due to bleaching and cyclones will otherwise increase.

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

 

You’ll be able to tell your grandkids about the GBR (Great Barrier Reef and Go Big Red) that used to exist and how the environmental alarmists missed predicting it’s demise by a whole 20 years

I’m quite certain the Great Barrier Reef will be around in 20 years.   I’m also quite certain their will still be snow on mountaintops and coastal cities will still exist at that time.   
 

The Earths climate does change.   It’s been changing since the Earth was formed.  Mankind does affect the climate in some small way.  We pollute the Earth in ways I wish we didn’t.   Cleaning up our trash pollution, figuring out how to recycle more is much more important that demanding that in 12-15 years we get off fossil fuels like Dems are advocating for.  That ain’t gonna happen.  
 

@TGHusker…climate science is an in exact science…I agree.    But it’s not climate science to falsely alarm folks to stuff that is not going to happen in a time frame they claim it will happen, that’s climate alarmism not science.  These “scientists” also downplay natures ebb and flow system of natural climate change and blame everything on mankind.   

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Creating less toxic pesticide runoff into the waters is great and well done.   Managing the COTS is also addressing what seems to be the major issue in catastrophic coral reef stripping.  I believe Neither involve climate change or fossil fuels.  
 

Im glad that project is helping an ecosystem.  

  • Plus1 2
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

12 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m quite certain the Great Barrier Reef will be around in 20 years.   I’m also quite certain their will still be snow on mountaintops and coastal cities will still exist at that time.   
 

The Earths climate does change.   It’s been changing since the Earth was formed.  Mankind does affect the climate in some small way.  We pollute the Earth in ways I wish we didn’t.   Cleaning up our trash pollution, figuring out how to recycle more is much more important that demanding that in 12-15 years we get off fossil fuels like Dems are advocating for.  That ain’t gonna happen.  
 

@TGHusker…climate science is an in exact science…I agree.    But it’s not climate science to falsely alarm folks to stuff that is not going to happen in a time frame they claim it will happen, that’s climate alarmism not science.  These “scientists” also downplay natures ebb and flow system of natural climate change and blame everything on mankind.   

So….the things the scientists have done to save the GBR should be ignored and we just label them alarmists because the change in trend would have happened anyway?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

So….the things the scientists have done to save the GBR should be ignored and we just label them alarmists because the change in trend would have happened anyway?

Unless you are a squid or stingray, yeah you can ignore it totally.  And just continue firing off sensitive, alarming tweets from the s#!tter.  :)

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m quite certain the Great Barrier Reef will be around in 20 years.   I’m also quite certain their will still be snow on mountaintops and coastal cities will still exist at that time.   
 

The Earths climate does change.   It’s been changing since the Earth was formed.  Mankind does affect the climate in some small way.  We pollute the Earth in ways I wish we didn’t.   Cleaning up our trash pollution, figuring out how to recycle more is much more important that demanding that in 12-15 years we get off fossil fuels like Dems are advocating for.  That ain’t gonna happen.  
 

@TGHusker…climate science is an in exact science…I agree.    But it’s not climate science to falsely alarm folks to stuff that is not going to happen in a time frame they claim it will happen, that’s climate alarmism not science.  These “scientists” also downplay natures ebb and flow system of natural climate change and blame everything on mankind.   

 

No. They don't. These climate scientists know better than anyone about the Earth's cycles. They are the same folks who came up with the facts about the Earth's violent past, the extinctions that happened long before man got involved, and how a phase of global warming actually allowed the advancement of humans 10 -20,0000 years ago.

 

And because they're not idiots, they are able to run models about the millions of tons of carbon put into the air in the last 150 odd years of the Industrial Revolution, and how that could easily change weather patterns. They ran those models several years ago about de-glaciation, melting polar caps, sea-level rise, coral reef degradation, and the additional carbon release of the ice melt, and many called those findings alarmist. In fact almost everything is happening faster than they predicted.

 

I'm certain everything will be around in 20 years too, near genius. Mostly what they've doing is warning us about a tipping point after which it will become harder if not impossible to stop a chain reaction that may take 100 years or so, a snap of the fingers in geologic time, but long enough for all the deniers and their children to be dead.

 

I'd prefer it if your smug ignorance didn't kill my grandkids. Hope you'll change your mind.

 

 

 

 

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...