I Was Wrong

  • Thread starter Thread starter willy69
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None
The WIKI page is actually not bad.
Ok, I’m done. I grew up in Canada & have lived in the US for over 30 yrs & for as long as I can remember experts in both countries have warned of what would happen if we didn’t change our behaviors. And here we are. Maybe you can’t blame it all on man made decisions but IMHO you can’t totally discount it either.

The WIKI page is not bad:
 
Ok, I’m done. I grew up in Canada & have lived in the US for over 30 yrs & for as long as I can remember experts in both countries have warned of what would happen if we didn’t change our behaviors. And here we are. Maybe you can’t blame it all on man made decisions but IMHO you can’t totally discount it either.
That's fine, but again - you're preaching to the converted. Just because I believe we are experiencing climate change doesn't mean I automatically subscribe to the "Just Stop Oil" idiots/zealots.
 
That's fine, but again - you're preaching to the converted. Just because I believe we are experiencing climate change doesn't mean I automatically subscribe to the "Just Stop Oil" idiots/zealots.

… I see both sides (or try to)
.Problem is neither side acknowledges the blatant kookiness within their own ranks…
 
… I see both sides (or try to)
.Problem is neither side acknowledges the blatant kookiness within their own ranks…
As I said, I'm in my own camp and quite happy here. Lunatics to the left of me, fringes to the right - here I am stuck in the middle again...
 
I honestly don't think he was ignorant to grade school math rather he didn't want to concede and attempted some mental gymnastics in an effort to prove the counter point right.
It's really the inability to tell the difference between a change in concentration and the addition of some small amount, in regards to the argument that the additional co2 is not that much compared to the totality of the system when that additional co2 is being measured as a concentration within that total system that sets me off.
 
As I said, I'm in my own camp and quite happy here. Lunatics to the left of me, fringes to the right - here I am stuck in the middle again...
Some people say shooting your own toe off is bad for you, others say you've got too much blood and it's bad for you because there could be blood demons in there so you should shoot it just in case. I'm going to remain neutral on this issue because 3 of the people in the "don't fire a gun at your foot" camp are annoying to me, personally.
 
…. Coyotes are not, you can thank the removal of red wolves for that
… Armadillos are native since by definition they are supposedly just late comers of the “Great Faunal Interchange”, which is another great study subject
I got to see Red Wolves at the Ashville Nature Center 10 years ago. They are probably all gone now.

I am curious about the armadillos. Thanks for the lead.
 
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.
Of course as always in these polarizing threads things get off track and sometimes personal … my small rant:

its never a crisis until it is one, and nobody really gives a darn about corals going extinct so long as the deniers evoke emotions that any regulation cost jobs…

…and OTOH entire regions of the country or world depends on energy jobs, but who is willing to pay for a replacement economy? Who is willing to do their part?

Nobody has noticed the threatened species quietly being “delisted” because we are distracted by laptops and UFO’s

I’m keeping it real, the news becomes news because its only “News” when the “News” says its “news”
 
Let us put it in another way that you probably understand better

Let us say you have an income of $1,000,000 - your tax is 28 % -> $280000 The government rise it to 42 % -> $420000 - have you get a tax rise with 50% or14% ???.
I do understand, but I don't agree. On a planatary scale, the percentage of the impact is what is important.

One drop of pee in the ocean vs 2 drops of pee in the ocean. A 100% increase that is meaningless.
 
I got to see Red Wolves at the Ashville Nature Center 10 years ago. They are probably all gone now.

I am curious about the armadillos. Thanks for the lead.
Off track …
but part of the issue is in part from reintroduction of apex predators and perceived Federal “over reach” (from the usual suspects) …
Also playing a parts is that to the amerature poacher, Red Wolves are hard to tell apart from coyotes
 
Off track …
but part of the issue is in part from reintroduction of apex predators and perceived Federal “over reach” (from the usual suspects) …
Also playing a parts is that to the amerature poacher, Red Wolves are hard to tell apart from coyotes
I think the main factor in the demise of the Red Wolf was the "ability" to cross breed with coyotes. That makes them hard to distinguish.
 
It's really the inability to tell the difference between a change in concentration and the addition of some small amount, in regards to the argument that the additional co2 is not that much compared to the totality of the system when that additional co2 is being measured as a concentration within that total system that sets me off.
The change in concentration is minute... 0.014%
 
… I see both sides (or try to)
.Problem is neither side acknowledges the blatant kookiness within their own ranks…
Imagine what we could accomplish if we stopped fighting each other & found a way to fight the ‘problem’ together. Kind of like we used to when we knew how to compromise.
 
Imagine what we could accomplish if we stopped fighting each other & found a way to fight the ‘problem’ together. Kind of like we used to when we knew how to compromise.
This is mostly a fantasy, and a lot of the rhetoric against progress has been the same.

There are a few examples where this isn't the case, mostly during high labor action. If you only pay attention to party line, prior to the southern strategy it may look like there was a broader base of support cross party, but it is largely due to the fact that there had not been consilidation for a long while.
 
I do understand, but I don't agree. On a planatary scale, the percentage of the impact is what is important.

One drop of pee in the ocean vs 2 drops of pee in the ocean. A 100% increase that is meaningless.

We inverse the problem

Ca = 420 ppm = 0.042%
Ca = 280 ppm = 0.028 %

Your way of calculation its only a decrease with 0.014 % - does this "minor" thing matter for stony corals or not?

Alkalinity 7.0 dKH (125 mg CaCO3/L = 125 ppm CaCO3) = 0,0125%
Alkalinity 4,66 dKH (83 mg/L CaCO3 = 83 ppm CaCO3 = 0,0083%

Your way of calculation its only a decrease with 0.0042 % - does this "minor" thing matter for stony corals or not?

Natural saltwater Copper concentration 1-3 µg/L = 1-3 ppb = 0.001-0.003 ppm = 0.000001-0.000003 %
Toxic Copper concentration in saltwater for corals - around 20-50 µg/L = 20-50 ppb = 0.020 - 0.050 ppm = 0.00002 - 0.00005 %

Your way of calculation its only a increase with around 0.000047 % - does this "minor" rise matter for stony corals or not?

Even if you rise Cu concentration to 1-2 ppm (kill ich) Your way of calculation its only an increase with 0.000197 % - is it harmfull or not?

Concentration is a good way to measure potential harmfull (or beneficial) compounds - the outcome is Independent regardless of whether the current concentration (expressed as ppm, ppb, mg/l, % or so on) is in a liter or in the entire ocean (or a room compared with the atmosphere).

I honestly don't think he was ignorant to grade school math rather he didn't want to concede and attempted some mental gymnastics in an effort to prove the counter point right.
I´m sorry to say - but I think it is more worse than that. He/she knows all of this things but his/hers post is an attempt to create fog curtains around the real question - does a concentration of 420 ppm CO2 cause the damage that a largely unanimous body of active scientists claims or not?

This post is interesting - my bold - by the way - I found this post with help of research of the R2R website :)
I see this word thrown around all the time. I want to open a discussion on the reality of this word in order to better understand what people know about the scientific method. My wife is currently "researching" kitchen counter tops... I am a scientist by education and profession (my wife is a freshwater biologist and certified emeritus ecologist).

The question is:
What is "Research"?

Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:
That's fine, but again - you're preaching to the converted. Just because I believe we are experiencing climate change doesn't mean I automatically subscribe to the "Just Stop Oil" idiots/zealots.
Do you know what Greta did the 24 of July? 17 of June she was carried away by the Police from the entrance of the oil harbor in Malmö. On the morning of July 24, she was sentenced to day's fine by Malmö District Court for disobeying the police. After the verdict, she went down to the same oil port again and sat down with 9 others in the middle of the road. 1 hour later the police took her away again.

1691570138005.png

I am 73 years old - but I take my hat off
1691570521799.png
because we still have youngsters like her.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top