Red Shirt Blues: So the fish are going to scale themselves back?
bestie1: At least some kind kind of sense with these claims. Warm temperatures mean bigger not smaller animals.
WelldeadLink: Despite the results of the computer simulations in TFA, salmon in a tank of water sometimes grow bigger in warmer water.Link
taurusowner: Yet another baseless scaremongering prediction that will not come true and will be forgotten about in 5 years. How's all that flooding of New York and other coastal cities that was supposed to have happened by the 1980's working out? Oh you mean it didn't happen? Gotcha.
bestie1: Warm temperatures mean bigger not smaller animals.
common sense is an oxymoron: Warmer water holds less oxygen
Smackledorfer: 14% to 24% over fifty years of climate change and no mentio n of what temperature change model the scientists used to estimate an x degree change over those fifty years./meh
SevenizGud: common sense is an oxymoron: Warmer water holds less oxygenIs that like warm air holds more moisture, which is why we get heavier snow...AND drought?
SevenizGud: FTFA:Fish species are expected to shrink in size by up to 24% because of global warming, say scientists.What global warming?[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]
Baryogenesis: Smackledorfer: 14% to 24% over fifty years of climate change and no mentio n of what temperature change model the scientists used to estimate an x degree change over those fifty years./mehActually, it says under a high emission scenario.and even includes a link.
common sense is an oxymoron: SevenizGud: common sense is an oxymoron: Warmer water holds less oxygenIs that like warm air holds more moisture, which is why we get heavier snow...AND drought?No.Face it, global warming causes nothing but bad. If you think there is a single good thing about global warming, you should kill yourself.The sky is falling!!There are localized benefits associated with global warming. Anyone who denies that is a fool, or has an agenda.There are far greater and more generalized harms associated with warming. Anyone who denies that is a fool, or has an agenda.This is true regardless of the cause of the warming. Whether it's our fault or not, when you pit inexorable climate change against immovable infrastructure, something's going to give way, and it won't be the climate.
HighZoolander: With enough derp, anything is possible.
WizardofToast: It's the extreme overfishing many countries do that end up favoring smaller and smaller fish when it comes to being caught in nets.
HotWingAgenda: Whales are NOT smaller now because the air temperature in heavily industrialized areas rose a fraction of a degree.
dready zim: Implied in headlines that say `X may do Y` is the possibility that X may NOT do Y and it is not decided whether it will. The language used need more certainty.Take this example, the higgs boson. Tests were done until a certainty of something like 99.999% was obtained and at that point the scientists involved said "It`s possible we have found it but we have to do more tests" and it was only when a sigma 5 certainty (99.99997%) was established that they said "We have found it!" IT`S (very likely to be) REAL!Compare that to what we get told with climate `science`"The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing it", the science is settled, IT`S REAL DENIER!so there is up to 10% chance that we are NOT causing it? I`ll wait until people are a bit more sure before I tout it as fact.Think of the sort of things people have to assert are real and get angry at people who say they don`t agree.HeavenWhite supremacy (male supremacy, whatever, basically any pre-existing right to be more important than another person allowing you to treat them badly)AGW/ACCetc etc etcMost of them are some attempt to control someone elses behaviour though perceived power derived from moral right. If you ignore the particular thing they are hung up on, they all seem to say the same thing, "You have to do what I want because it is the ethical and moral thing to do. I am right. Don`t question any of my beliefs"something smells fishy.
WizardofToast: It's not mainly global warming. It's the extreme overfishing many countries do that end up favoring smaller and smaller fish when it comes to being caught in nets.[www.thezigzagger.com image 615x409][www.thezigzagger.com image 615x409][www.thezigzagger.com image 615x409]The documentary "Darwin's Nightmare" looks a bit into this.
unamused: TFA title:Climate change 'may shrink fish'Climate change 'MAY make my dick bigger'Climate change 'MAY make pussy taste like grape jelly.'Climate change 'MAY cause a giant lizard to stomp Tokyo.'Climate change 'MAY cause gold to sell for $100,000/oz.'Climate change 'MAY cause Sofia Vergara to f**k my brains out.'Climate change 'MAY give me a pony.'Climate change 'MAY...'
/There's this little thing science has, it's called falsifiability.//When science is wrong, it works to correct it.///When religion is wrong, it's wrong forever
common sense is an oxymoron: bestie1: At least some kind kind of sense with these claims. Warm temperatures mean bigger not smaller animals.Read the article. Warmer water holds less oxygen, while at the same time boosting the metabolic rates of cold-blooded animals living in it.Less oxygen + faster metabolism = smaller animals, not larger.
GeneralJim: Yep. That's why warmer alarmism is a religion.
RedVentrue: Scaremongering articles like this make me snerk.
GeneralJim: It's too bad fish don't have any method of, you know, MOVING to a place where the temperature is just right for them. Jesus - they don't even have to PACK.
gulogulo: RedVentrue: Scaremongering articles like this make me snerk.What's scaremongering about it?
RedVentrue: They didn't come right out and say it like the "Mail" would, but the implication was; "If the world gets warmer, all the fish will die!" Same trope with many AGW articles.
gulogulo: However, I'll acknowledge the global climate change deniers belong to a old breed of deniers. In 1940's, a smarter man than I will ever be wrote the following:"One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds. Much of the damage inflicted on land is quite invisible to laymen. An ecologist must either harden his shell and make believe that the consequences of science are none of his business, or he must be the doctor who sees the marks of death in a community that believes itself well and does not want to be told otherwise."And it's as true today as it was then.
gulogulo: RedVentrue: They didn't come right out and say it like the "Mail" would, but the implication was; "If the world gets warmer, all the fish will die!" Same trope with many AGW articles.No. If you want to read it like that you can. It was if the oceans get warmer there's good evidence that over all biomass will be reduced. Which has implications for our food supply. Should we not be reporting that evidence? Is it better to just not talk about it?
RedVentrue: We have been hearing the drum beat of doom for a long time now, and give it the same credence as other prognosticators.
RedVentrue: Talk about it, but provide hard evidence that can be validated by anyone, and if making assumptions about the causes/ drivers of your theory, don't get all bent out of shape when someone questions the assumption.Not speaking about you, but others.
GeneralJim: Yep. That's why warmer alarmism is a religion.That's a load of bullshiat. You know what people like you don't get? This article here represents. .01% of all the climate change research and its impacts to the environment out there. MOST of it doesn't make it outside of the scientific sphere because scientists are petrified of public when they know their results are controversial. I've had numerous colleagues receive death threats, have their results skewed by people with agendas, and their names dragged through the mud. MANY when approached by reporters now decline to talk because idiots like you don't get it and don't WANT to get it.
GeneralJim: It's too bad fish don't have any method of, you know, MOVING to a place where the temperature is just right for them. Jesus - they don't even have to PACK.Christ, you're an idiot. I suppose you believe that because a bird can fly it could live just about anywhere it wants, right? Temperature is the only factor, after all, that's necessary for life. Jesus, the system is complex. Why do you sit here and pretend it's simple?
GeneralJim: Not a single one of my scientist friends fits in that category.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jul 21 2017 13:34:37
Runtime: 0.491 sec (491 ms)