I Was Wrong

[jabberwock]

Simple biology, they depend on sea ice to hunt, there will be no sea ice....pretty simple. They will also be absorbed into the Brown Bear population.

Also, as a scientist and geologist I can say there there is absolutely no debate about the cause of climate change. That politicized horse has long since left the barn.

Not a very scientific statement...

 

[jabberwock]

Let's go ahead and start the thread countdown timer...

 

[Reefering1]

Last time was 6 hours

 

[jabberwock]

Last time was 6 hours

I am gonna punch out now. I will check back in a few hours.

 

[Lbrdsoxfan]

Let's go ahead and start the thread countdown timer...

IBTL still exist, lol. Here they just go 'poof', like magic.

 

[Pickle_soup]

Let's not confuse climate change with a strong El Nino, which is what we have this year. The Medieval Warm period was warmed than currently, and everything thrived.

 

[blaxsun]

We're just one massive volcano eruption short of another "dark ages". The irony is that in that scenario, climate change might actually lessen the global impact...

And I agree that El Nino hasn't helped this year.

 

[Dan_P]

Couple weeks back I posted a thread bashing the 101 degree water temperature recorded in the Florida Keys. I blew it off as headlines and thought the corals would be fine in their heavy flow environment. I was wrong. I’ve been diving the last few days in the keys and it’s sad to say there’s a lot of white Coral. More white corals than colored ones. Everything is bleached. The most concerning part is that big corals are bleached. Corals that took years to grow are now dead.

Appreciate the correction

 

[biophilia]

Let's not confuse climate change with a strong El Nino, which is what we have this year. The Medieval Warm period was warmed than currently, and everything thrived.

Probably important to point out that the Medieval Warm period was a period of elevated temperatures across a particular band of latitude and not a period in which global average temps were elevated above the baseline.

 

[rhizotron]

I'm not a climate change denier, but in my view the biggest mistake the environmental movement ever made was to drop all the issues over which there was pretty broad consensus (basic natural resources conservation, wildlife, scenery, clean air & water, etc) to push this idea immediately turned into a political football and with the effect of tuning out 1/2 of the stakeholders involved. Sensationalist news headlines and overreaching claims about climate change have also opened up the rhetorical space for the hardcore anti-environment faction.

More recently the loudest voices discussing climate change have been the most politically polarized. These Left Wing folks prioritize their ideological purity and insider jargon over the real world we live in and frame their treatment of climate change accordingly. This has further degraded wildlife/biodiversity as a value. You can even be a called a racist if you try to advocate for wildlife or nature and I've had this experience more than once.

The dismissal by environmentalists of the rest of the environment as a value also begs the question of the intended goal of climate change mitigation. If the answer is the preservation of "civilization" or "humanity", then unless you live way out in the boonies all you have to do is look out your window to seriously undermine this assumption.

 

[trapphd]

As someone who was also diving in the Keys earlier this summer (mid-June), not surprised by the bleaching reports. Water temps were quite high and I know they've kept rising in the past few weeks. Definitely curious, as already alluded to be a few posters here, if the bleaching events might be more concentrated in certain areas (and at certain depths) rather than being widespread and uniform.

As someone who works in energy law and has graduate-level academic training in the environmental sciences, not touching any of this impromptu climate change debate with a 10-foot pole...

 

[Reefering1]

As someone who works in energy law and has graduate-level academic training in the environmental sciences, not touching any of this impromptu climate change debate with a 10-foot pole...

So what do you propose to control the climate of this planet?

 

[jabberwock]

So what do you propose to control the climate of this planet?

Let's not kid ourselves.

 

[Reefering1]

Let's not kid ourselves.

Looking for the perspective of the "professional". Maybe its something that makes sense

 

[trapphd]

So what do you propose to control the climate of this planet?

The patronizing and anti-scientific tenor of this conversation is weird — I'd have guessed that reef hobbyists would be on the other (empirically proven) side of this.

The truth is that neither side is completely right, or at least that's the stance I adopt given my work experience. Fossil fuels are still vital to industrialized sectors (e.g., transportation, plastics, electricity baseload) but should be gradually scaled back to lower GHG emissions. The proliferation of renewables and EVs is extremely beneficial in its own right and most market segments will achieve economies of scale in the (near) future. However, there are still issues such as mineral supply chains and mining practices, and related to solar + wind, intermittency and the need to pair them with storage facilities for maximum grid penetration if NG and/or coal will be supplanted.

Large-scale coral bleaching events are not normal and a signal that we could be doing things better. It's not really an ideological argument, imo.

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

Multiple reports, multiple posts removed.

Please keep the personal jabs out.

 

[blaxsun]

The truth is that neither side is completely right, or at least that's the stance I adopt given my work experience. Fossil fuels are still vital to industrialized sectors (e.g., transportation, plastics, electricity baseload) but should be gradually scaled back to lower GHG emissions. The proliferation of renewables and EVs is extremely beneficial in its own right and most market segments will achieve economies of scale in the (near) future. However, there are still issues such as mineral supply chains and mining practices, and related to solar + wind, intermittency and the need to pair them with storage facilities for maximum grid penetration if NG and/or coal will be supplanted.

Well, let's not sing the praises of renewables and EVs without also pointing out the shortfalls, namely the massive amount of hazardous and non-recyclable waste in the form of wind blades, discarded solar panels and the incredible environmental destruction that nickel, cobalt and lithium mining are wreaking primarily in the third world.

 

[trapphd]

Looking for the perspective of the "professional". Maybe its something that makes sense

I'm sure I missed it amidst the robust scientific debate here — do you also have experience working with Saudi Aramco? Or getting natural gas pipelines approved by federal agencies? Or lobbying for solar? Or writing major publications on offshore wind? Do you want me to go on... if you haven't had skin in the game, maybe ease up on the ad hominem attacks. Sometimes the professionals actually have the nuanced perspective because we know what companies and governmental bodies do.

Well, let's not sing the praises of renewables and EVs without also pointing out the shortfalls, namely the massive amount of hazardous and non-recyclable waste in the form of wind blades, discarded solar panels and the incredible environmental destruction that nickel, cobalt and lithium mining are wreaking primarily in the third world.

I mentioned 'mineral supply chains and mining practices' especially with artisanal mining in the DRC for cobalt in mind. But I also know what mountaintop removal mining for coal produces, too (and that's a domestic issue).

 

[blaxsun]

 

[Reefering1]

The patronizing and anti-scientific tenor of this conversation is weird — I'd have guessed that reef hobbyists would be on the other (empirically proven) side of this.

The truth is that neither side is completely right, or at least that's the stance I adopt given my work experience. Fossil fuels are still vital to industrialized sectors (e.g., transportation, plastics, electricity baseload) but should be gradually scaled back to lower GHG emissions. The proliferation of renewables and EVs is extremely beneficial in its own right and most market segments will achieve economies of scale in the (near) future. However, there are still issues such as mineral supply chains and mining practices, and related to solar + wind, intermittency and the need to pair them with storage facilities for maximum grid penetration if NG and/or coal will be supplanted.

Large-scale coral bleaching events are not normal and a signal that we could be doing things better. It's not really an ideological argument, imo.

I can find a couple things in that to agree with.., but I believe the "solutions" presented are just as bad, if not worse. But everybody should just blindly be on board? Electric vehicles, for example, what do the mining operations for those batteries look like? How are they charged? What fuel do they use to support it, is it progress? Why isn't natural gas promoted? Wouldn't that run out internal combustion engines run clean without destroying the land? Does that not matter?