Extreme heat in oceans ‘passed point of no return’ in 2014 | Oceans | The Guardian
Our Oceans may not recover from climate change it seems.
Our Oceans may not recover from climate change it seems.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Extreme Ocean Heat
- Thread starter The Hammer
- Start date
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Unfortunately we only have this planet to call home, and humans have destroyed it within a few hundred years due to polution, and not understanding the consequences of our actions
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Ocean can always recover:
1) Humans totally pollute the earth + oceans
2) Humans die
3) Oceans recover (might take a century, millennium or more)
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Those who pollute most, do know the consequences of it
But they don't care enough; their mindset is:
"after me the deluge"
Last edited:
exchemist
Veteran Member
There is actually no evidence, or argument, in this report to support the claim of passing a point of no return. I've read the abstract and skimmed the article and can find no reference to a point of no return there either.
The abstract is badly written but it seems the researchers looked at the max 2% of temperatures reached in each area of the world's oceans during the period 1870-1919. They called these maxima "extreme heat events". When they compared the same areas in 2019 they found that 57% of them had had temperature excursions up to these levels, thus indicating that what was extreme a century ago has become normal today.
But nowhere, so far as I could see, was there a claim that these levels represent a threshold in the operation of any feedback process, which is what you would need in order to pass a point of no return. They seem to be just arbitrarily chosen levels that show that ocean warming has arrived.
Audie
Veteran Member
Pop science gives actual science a bad name.
Audie
Veteran Member
exchemist
Veteran Member
Haha, a bogus climate disinformation site. How typical. I never know with you whether you are a real person or some kind of troll employed by the Chinese or Russian governments
.
Nimos
Well-Known Member
Yeah the oceans seem to be going to hell to be honest.
While 40% of the reef remained untouched, 25% experienced severe bleaching, and 35% was moderately bleached. The southern section of the Great Barrier Reef, which stayed mostly intact during the events of 2016 and 2017, got hit very hard this year.
The Great Barrier Reef has not been added to the Unesco list of World Heritage Sites that are "in danger", following strong lobbying from Australia.
A report from Unesco, the UN's scientific and cultural body, had said that not enough was being done to protect the reef from climate change or to meet water quality targets.
But Unesco's World Heritage Committee has decided to give Australia more time.
But recent mass bleachings of coral and other problems have accelerated its deterioration.
“Bleaching isn’t necessarily fatal, and it affects some species more than others,” Morgan Pratchett, a professional research fellow at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, said in a statement. “A pale or lightly bleached coral typically regains its colour within a few weeks or months and survives.”
While some color and vitality can return within a few weeks, it can take a decade or longer for corals to fully recover, Hughes said. The corals living in the Great Barrier Reef haven’t been given that much time between major bleaching events.
If the trend continues, the Great Barrier Reef may not have a chance to recover.
“There’s really no time to lose to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the Australian government is not pulling its weight in that regard,” Hughes said. “The state of Queensland, where the reef is, and the Commonwealth government are still both promoting fossil fuels, new coal mines and more fracking for gas, and that’s a real policy failure in terms of their responsibilities for stewardship of the Great Barrier Reef.”
Im not really sure how Australia is going to prevent the reef from heating, as far as I know the water is connected to the rest of the ocean.
But once again, making money is more important... so screw the reef.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Actually I think the majority has now got there, in their heads at least. What is depressingly slow is turning that into action. Too many politicians still treat the issue as a bolt-on extra.
Nimos
Well-Known Member
Yeah, good movie when you just have to kill a few hours.
I think the biggest issue with climate change is that its global and forces everyone to work together and given humans ability to do this, it looks pretty damn bad to be honest
Audie
Veteran Member
Haha, a bogus climate disinformation site. How typical. I never know with you whether you are a real person or some kind of troll employed by the Chinese or Russian governments
Call me an influencer.
I knew you would spot the source as being
sponsored by oil co.
I dont suppose you would, like, check the info?
Chinese or Russian?
Definitely real, and for sure one or the other.
Last edited:
exchemist
Veteran Member
Seeing as I don't actually work for Snopes for a living, I've got better things to do than pore over the detail of stuff from disinformation sites in order to disentangle the truth from the lies and misrepresentation.
Send me a link from a reputable source and I'll read that, no problem.
Audie
Veteran Member
exchemist
Veteran Member
I've told you I"m not interested in sifting through the stuff on a disinformation site. But, as it happens the job has been done for me by Rationalwiki. I quote:
The website, friendsofscience.org, contains a listing of discredited denialist talking points. Their primary position is that the sun is the main driver of climate change,[1] despite the fact that solar activity has been inversely correlated with the recent warming trend.[2] In 2014, the organization launched a billboard campaign based on this talking point.[3] The site also contains a list of alleged climate "myths." For example, they claim that the "hockey stick graph" has been "debunked" by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick.[4]
From: Friends of Science - RationalWiki
So, nope, I'm not wasting my time reviewing whatever they are dishing up.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Life will adapt. It's not the first time the planet had warm oceans in its history.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Life will. At a cost. But that has never been the issue.
Audie
Veteran Member
exchemist
Veteran Member
A few.