Ocean heating has doubled in the past 18 years

a reply to: forkedtongue
One must assume then, that you don't know what "anacdotal" means.
That's ok, it is a four syllable word after all.

Post bans will be handed out here rather quickly if there is anymore snarky posts or posts that are Off Topic.

Off Topic is posting about other members.

Post about the topic of the OP, or do not post at all.

Do not reply to this post.

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: autopat51
it has been my experience that many people seem to live in "mr rogers neighborhood"
where nothing EVER happens.
they will be here soon to tell you nothing is wrong.

I am here to tell you the obvious!

Life was meant and made to adapt!

It will, or it will die!


Stop crying Nancy, this is how nature works!

Cool, let's all die! Seriously, even if 0% of global warming/climate change/ ecological effects have anyghing to do with human activity, does it matter in order to admit there's some serious problems degrading our planet, and which could ultimately lead to our extinction?

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: autopat51
it has been my experience that many people seem to live in "mr rogers neighborhood"
where nothing EVER happens.
they will be here soon to tell you nothing is wrong.

I am here to tell you the obvious!

Life was meant and made to adapt!

It will, or it will die!


Stop crying Nancy, this is how nature works!

Cool, let's all die! Seriously, even if 0% of global warming/climate change/ ecological effects have anyghing to do with human activity, does it matter in order to admit there's some serious problems degrading our planet, and which could ultimately lead to our extinction?

Good point.

Although, I'm under the impression that at least some of the deniers (perhaps most?) believe there is no problem what so ever, rather than simply denying that humans have any sort of influence on the matter

originally posted by: forkedtongue

Simple actually, just name one time Co2 caused " out of control warming?

Right now - in our oceans, which are dying from it...

....You should know that once the oceans can no longer support adequate life, a domino effect begins -

- ecosystem by ecosystem (they are all linked) - the entire planet loses the ability to support 'sufficient' life to enable the highest lifeforms (particularly humans) to survive.

In other words: Dying oceans (or even just very 'ill' ones) are detrimental to the survival of the human race...and yes, all the oceans are connected - one goes, they all go...

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: forkedtongue

originally posted by: autopat51
it has been my experience that many people seem to live in "mr rogers neighborhood"
where nothing EVER happens.
they will be here soon to tell you nothing is wrong.

I am here to tell you the obvious!

Life was meant and made to adapt!

It will, or it will die!


Stop crying Nancy, this is how nature works!

Cool, let's all die! Seriously, even if 0% of global warming/climate change/ ecological effects have anyghing to do with human activity, does it matter in order to admit there's some serious problems degrading our planet, and which could ultimately lead to our extinction?

Good point.

Although, I'm under the impression that at least some of the deniers (perhaps most?) believe there is no problem what so ever, rather than simply denying that humans have any sort of influence on the matter

I am not sure what a denier is in your mind but corals are affected by heat and acidification of the oceans, I guess you have not heard of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation which caused the 2004/2005 storms according to USGS which were the worse Atlantic storms on record. Scientist examine Caribbean brain coral to map previous AMO's.

a reply to: glend

I am not sure what a denier is in your mind but corals are affected by heat and acidification of the oceans

A denier would be one who refutes data without reading the subject matter.

originally posted by: glend
I am not sure what a denier is in your mind but corals are affected by heat and acidification of the oceans, I guess you have not heard of the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation which caused the 2004/2005 storms according to USGS which were the worse Atlantic storms on record. Scientist examine Caribbean brain coral to map previous AMO's.

I mentioned the case in the OP

As phage said, "A denier would be one who refutes data without reading the subject matter."

a reply to: Phage

I don't deny warming isn't killing corals. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation accounts for that warming. Its a natural event which cycles every 70 years, Has nothing to do with CO2 Alarmism.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Phage

I don't deny warming isn't killing corals. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation accounts for that warming. Its a natural event which cycles every 70 years, Has nothing to do with CO2 Alarmism.

However, we see a direct correlation of increased heat with the industrial revolution, which is what the article in the OP is getting its information from.

Link

a reply to: Ghost147

Indeed.
Cycles in a trend of increasing temperatures. Bumps and dips on a slope.

a reply to: Ghost147

That paper is published by a federal research facility describing a computer model which is not proof of anything. According to NASA deep ocean temperatures have not risen, But we are getting a bit off subject, Wasn't we concerned about the corals.

Great new species will evolve and the world will adapt as it always does.

The question is will we?

a reply to: glend

According to NASA deep ocean temperatures have not risen,

Demonstrating, once again, that you did not read the source material.

But we are getting a bit off subject, Wasn't we concerned about the corals.

Demonstrating, once again, that you did not read the source material.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Ghost147
That paper is published by a federal research facility describing a computer model which is not proof of anything.

Actually, the scientific article states:

We examine changes in global OHC occurring since the industrial revolution, comparing observational estimates of global surface–bottom OHC changes with results from a recent suite of state-of-the-art climate model simulations

They are using both direct observations as well as the simulations.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: Ghost147
But we are getting a bit off subject, Wasn't we concerned about the corals.

The concern was of the water temperature rise. Don't worry, this is all on topic I was using the corals as an additive to the seriousness of the situation, and a visual depiction of the effects of a rise in water temperature.

a reply to: Ghost147

The concern was of the water temperature rise. Don't worry, this is all on topic I was using the corals as an additive to the seriousness of the situation, and a visual depiction of the effects of a rise in water temperature

Fair enough. Personally I am not too worried because temperature isn't outside long term variability to say one way or another, if humans are really affecting the earth, temperature wise. But I don't see that as a reason to ignore the footprint we leave on our planet and that of nature.

a reply to: glend
You know that chart ends at 1855, right?
You know it's just Greenland, right?

a reply to: Phage

You wish. Put your glasses on 2000AD