Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

lol

Quote:What's the average pH of the ocean? What's the pH range of an "acid?"


 

Do you know this, or are you just parroting someone else's talking points without actually understanding the science?

 

It's something of a trick question. The ocean can become more acidic without it becoming officially an acid. All it takes to become "more acidic" is for the PH level to drop any, which it has since the beginning of the industrial revolution, by .1 PH units. That calculates to a 30% increase in acidity, which adversely affects the development of shellfish (oysters, mollusks, etc.) and coral, important links in the food chain. There is evidence these things are happening.

 

Source

Quote:It's something of a trick question. The ocean can become more acidic without it becoming officially an acid. All it takes to become "more acidic" is for the PH level to drop any, which it has since the beginning of the industrial revolution, by .1 PH units. That calculates to a 30% increase in acidity, which adversely affects the development of shellfish (oysters, mollusks, etc.) and coral, important links in the food chain. There is evidence these things are happening.

 

Source

 

There is also evidence that things like ocean acidification have occurred in our planet's history without human intervention.  No global warming taxes were needed to bring the ocean PH levels back up. 

Quote:There is also evidence that things like ocean acidification have occurred in our planet's history without human intervention.  No global warming taxes were needed to bring the ocean PH levels back up. 

 

I was only commenting to the question at hand, not whether or not human intervention has been a factor. I personally believe human intervention has affected our climate, but I don't see anything effective being done about it. 

 

To quote the great Alfred E. Neuman...

 

Quote:There is also evidence that things like ocean acidification have occurred in our planet's history without human intervention. No global warming taxes were needed to bring the ocean PH levels back up.

Sure has.


Read all about it you want.

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification'>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification</a>

4 billion year old planet.... Assuming that we know within .14 ph units what the pH was in 1751, the only thing more absurd than thinking a 250 year cycle as a divergent trend is the idea that raising taxes will have an affect.

Quote:It's something of a trick question. The ocean can become more acidic without it becoming officially an acid. All it takes to become "more acidic" is for the PH level to drop any, which it has since the beginning of the industrial revolution, by .1 PH units. That calculates to a 30% increase in acidity, which adversely affects the development of shellfish (oysters, mollusks, etc.) and coral, important links in the food chain. There is evidence these things are happening.

 

Source

 

If the pH of the ocean decreased by 0.1 I'd say it has become less caustic, since it's still very alkaline.


 

As far as adversely affecting development, the pH of an ecosystem can change by 0.3 over the course of a day, so sea life is used to various levels of the pH. I might add that the whole claim that corals will be harmed if the pH is slightly lower is ridiculous. Corals have existed on Earth since before the dinosaurs, and the pH and CO2 levels have varied a whole lot more than the result of any man-made CO2 increase will ever achieve.

Quote:If the pH of the ocean decreased by 0.1 I'd say it has become less caustic, since it's still very alkaline.


As far as adversely affecting development, the pH of an ecosystem can change by 0.3 over the course of a day, so sea life is used to various levels of the pH. I might add that the whole claim that corals will be harmed if the pH is slightly lower is ridiculous. Corals have existed on Earth since before the dinosaurs, and the pH and CO2 levels have varied a whole lot more than the result of any man-made CO2 increase will ever achieve.

In regards to the rate of change:


One of the first detailed datasets to examine how pH varied over a period of time at a temperate coastal location found that acidification was occurring much faster than previously predicted, with consequences for near-shore benthic ecosystems. Thomas Lovejoy, former chief biodiversity advisor to the World Bank, has suggested that "the acidity of the oceans will more than double in the next 40 years. This rate is 100 times faster than any changes in ocean acidity in the last 20 million years, making it unlikely that marine life can somehow adapt to the changes. It is predicted that, by the year 2100, the level of acidity in the ocean will reach the levels experienced by the earth 20 million years ago.


Current rates of ocean acidification have been compared with the greenhouse event at the Paleocene–Eocene boundary (about 55 million years ago) when surface ocean temperatures rose by 5–6 degrees Celsius. No catastrophe was seen in surface ecosystems, yet bottom-dwelling organisms in the deep ocean experienced a major extinction. The current acidification is on a path to reach levels higher than any seen in the last 65 million years, and the rate of increase is about ten times the rate that preceded the Paleocene–Eocene mass extinction. The current and projected acidification has been described as an almost unprecedented geological event. A National Research Council study released in April 2010 likewise concluded that "the level of acid in the oceans is increasing at an unprecedented rate." A 2012 paper in the journal Science examined the geological record in an attempt to find a historical analog for current global conditions as well as those of the future. The researchers determined that the current rate of ocean acidification is faster than at any time in the past 300 million years.


...


Wow, that sounds wonderful. Thank goodness you are here to supply your folksie, homespun pseudo science or else we might actually get worried.

Quote:In regards to the rate of change:


One of the first detailed datasets to examine how pH varied over a period of time at a temperate coastal location found that acidification was occurring much faster than previously predicted, with consequences for near-shore benthic ecosystems. Thomas Lovejoy, former chief biodiversity advisor to the World Bank, has suggested that "the acidity of the oceans will more than double in the next 40 years. This rate is 100 times faster than any changes in ocean acidity in the last 20 million years, making it unlikely that marine life can somehow adapt to the changes. It is predicted that, by the year 2100, the level of acidity in the ocean will reach the levels experienced by the earth 20 million years ago.


Current rates of ocean acidification have been compared with the greenhouse event at the Paleocene–Eocene boundary (about 55 million years ago) when surface ocean temperatures rose by 5–6 degrees Celsius. No catastrophe was seen in surface ecosystems, yet bottom-dwelling organisms in the deep ocean experienced a major extinction. The current acidification is on a path to reach levels higher than any seen in the last 65 million years, and the rate of increase is about ten times the rate that preceded the Paleocene–Eocene mass extinction. The current and projected acidification has been described as an almost unprecedented geological event. A National Research Council study released in April 2010 likewise concluded that "the level of acid in the oceans is increasing at an unprecedented rate." A 2012 paper in the journal Science examined the geological record in an attempt to find a historical analog for current global conditions as well as those of the future. The researchers determined that the current rate of ocean acidification is faster than at any time in the past 300 million years.


...


Wow, that sounds wonderful. Thank goodness you are here to supply your folksie, homespun pseudo science or else we might actually get worried.

 

By all means, get worried. It's what they expect of you.

Quote:If the pH of the ocean decreased by 0.1 I'd say it has become less caustic, since it's still very alkaline.


 

As far as adversely affecting development, the pH of an ecosystem can change by 0.3 over the course of a day, so sea life is used to various levels of the pH. I might add that the whole claim that corals will be harmed if the pH is slightly lower is ridiculous. Corals have existed on Earth since before the dinosaurs, and the pH and CO2 levels have varied a whole lot more than the result of any man-made CO2 increase will ever achieve.

 

The science in the article I sourced disagrees, but once again I was merely making a point regarding semantics.

"The moon passed between NASA's Deep Space Climate Observatory and the Earth."

South Park right as they usually are:


https://news.vice.com/article/canada-adm...ewstwitter


Blame Canada! Blame Canada! At least most of the rest of us our on pace.

Quote:


"The moon passed between NASA's Deep Space Climate Observatory and the Earth."

 

Next week Al Gore will be telling us that's the hole in the Ozone Layer.

 

Fantastic picture though, really beautiful.

Quote:There is also evidence that things like ocean acidification have occurred in our planet's history without human intervention. No global warming taxes were needed to bring the ocean PH levels back up.

You should understand the context of this but you'd need a basic understanding of marine ecology. Processes like climate change and ocean acidification have occurred throughout Earth's history, however mankind is accelerating these processes and many species (especially Corals) are unable to adapt quickly enough to the changes. I know science is a difficult topic for conservatives, and it's usually a waste of time even arguing with them. The write off science. They ask for some evidence of changes and you direct them to a journal article, and either the words are too big or they just write the article off citing one author out of thousands who disagrees with the community. You cannot win, ever.

Quote:You should understand the context of this but you'd need a basic understanding of marine ecology. Processes like climate change and ocean acidification have occurred throughout Earth's history, however mankind is accelerating these processes and many species (especially Corals) are unable to adapt quickly enough to the changes. I know science is a difficult topic for conservatives, and it's usually a waste of time even arguing with them. The write off science. They ask for some evidence of changes and you direct them to a journal article, and either the words are too big or they just write the article off citing one author out of thousands who disagrees with the community. You cannot win, ever.

Please save your "I'm smarter than you" speech for somebody who cares.

Quote:Please save your "I'm smarter than you" speech for somebody who cares.

To be fair, it's rather obnoxious to be ridiculed or made fun of for heeding what the scientists say. That used to be common sense.

I think the problem is when science contradicts a key part of your belief syst you will tend to dismiss it in other aspects...

Quote:To be fair, it's rather obnoxious to be ridiculed or made fun of for heeding what the scientists say. That used to be common sense.

 

Not when the self-proclaimed 'scientists' act like religious fanatics.


 

When Einstein proposed his theory of relativity, he made two predictions, either of which would refute his theory if found to not be true. If anthropogenic CO2-induced global warming is actually a scientific theory (or even a scientific hypothesis) then tell me the test(s) that would refute it.

Quote:I think the problem is when science contradicts a key part of your belief syst you will tend to dismiss it in other aspects...

 

That's what the 'climate scientists' do, ignore any data that contradicts the dogma.

Quote:That's what the 'climate scientists' do, ignore any data that contradicts the dogma.

All of them? Where do you get this from?