Search results

Change in pH is recorded in the surface waters. If the source of the surface water acidification is deep sea volcanoes, then there would have been a noted change in the benthic community from the deep ocean up towards the surface waters where we now measure the dropping pH. Such is not the case...

Because trees are carbon neutral? They suck up carbon dioxide to make sugars, and then respire carbon dioxide when they consume oxygen during darkness. It only becomes a source of carbon dioxide when you stress the physiology of the trees.

Yes. That's what the science tells us.

Only if the acidification rates are higher next to active volcanoes. Nobody has found evidence of that. And we know the increasing atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide should be driving down the pH of the ocean. It's pretty basic science. The partial pressure of the gas in the atmosphere...

Yes. Warming, and acidifying.

I'm not suggesting. The ocean is acidifying. If you add carbon dioxide to water it forms a weak acid. The pH drops as protons are proliferated. Now, what's your beef with the endangerment finding? Have you read it? Have you read the commentary?

Increasing carbon dioxide lowers the carbonate compensation depth in the ocean. In the past, the geologic past, this has been associated with huge mortality, especially amongst shallow sea corals, indeed shallow sea species in general. That is pollution. If it were acid rain causing the same...

You did say on earth. The crust is on the earth, as are the oceans. The core is in the earth. Regardless, carbon is not even close.

Well, no matter how I read that, and no matter how you meant that, it's wrong. You can't even get that right...CO2 is a molecule, made up of a single carbon atom, and two oxygen atoms, both of which are elements. And if you meant carbon is the most abundant element, again, wrong. Oxygen is the...

Well, considering this is the internet, you'd have to be off your meds to interpret that as a request. So what if you don't? Are you some kind of Solipsist? Do yourself a favour and google carbonate compensation depth. In scholar you should find papers on that issue. This maybe instructive for...

Dance? Anna got it. But then she has a sharp wit. So, you don't think that the carbon dioxide we're emitting is building up because the sinks can't keep pace? Yes, you've shown why your interpretation is stupid. Effectively everything can be polluting if you are in a sealed room with far too...

In the same interview he said it's a positive trend over the last 15 years, but it's not significant because, well to explain that to you, you would need to know some statistics, and you've proved time and again that you are very weak when it comes to statistics. No cooling. Let's have a...

Wholly crap, seriously? You still don't get what I'm saying? No, I am not saying that oil isn't a by-product of life. Now follow the bouncing ball... Clearly you are insinuating that the pollution aspect is contrived. Because life is carbon based, how could a molecule that contains carbon be...

You didn't get the point, see Annas post below yours and maybe the light bulb will turn on... :lol:

You need to think some more about this. Crude oil also contains carbon, a lot of it. I guess the folks living in Louisiana and neighbouring states will be happy to hear your thought provoking deconstruction of what is and is not pollution...

Environmentalist wackos may have blown up oil rig to head off more oil drilling. What a loon. Black helicopters, and environmentalist frog men...:roll::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

The physical mechanism is radiative transfer.

Good place for the senior folk to retire to. :smile:

Global warming science explained by cranks, more like it.

LRT? Did that not replace a mode of transportation that uses oil? Technologies exist to use far less energy, not just oil. On balance, oil isn't even the worst, but they are some of those fighting hardest against responsible use of resources.