If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Blogger.com)   Why Seattle Times' explosive claim that atmospheric CO2 is killing Northwest shellfish is busted, according to scientist who believes AGW is real   (cliffmass.blogspot.com) divider line 100
    More: Interesting, carbon dioxide, Seattle Times, Pacific Northwest, atmospheric carbon dioxide, ocean acidification, Miami Heat, upwelling, industrial society  
•       •       •

1941 clicks; posted to Geek » on 13 Oct 2013 at 2:33 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-13 02:39:44 PM
Your Blog....is not that bad.
 
2013-10-13 02:43:32 PM
This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.
 
2013-10-13 02:50:27 PM
"Trying to scare folks by blaming current problems on atmospheric CO2, without strong evidence, ruins the credibility of the scientific community.  And credibility is a precious thing."

He is a deeply confused man. The only reason one spends credibility is to shape the present; in the long run we are all dead. Most people struggle to plan for Saturday night and yet he thinks anyone gives hoot about what happens in 2020. Dumbass.

The media's job is to sell ads. They don't say sell ads by scaring people about what happens 20 years down the line. The get click-throughs but scaring people RIGHT THE fark NOW
 
2013-10-13 02:55:09 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.


Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.
 
2013-10-13 03:00:30 PM
His conclustion that the study claims elevated CO2 levels right now are decimating shellfish right now is dumb. That's not what it said at all. What is happening to ocean species right now is the result of elevated CO2 levels over the past couple of decades. It stands to reason that continued, or increasing, elevated levels will have similar, if not worse, detrimental effects in the future.

Or did I read a different study?
 
2013-10-13 03:05:18 PM
The Seattle Times has asked other scientists to review their series, including an actual chemical oceanographer (Cliff Mass is not by any stretch). The general verdict? Yeah, they got it right. The key takeaway is that the .1 increase in acidity means that on average the water is twice as acidic as it was prior to industrialization, and that conditions were already generally marginal before this.
 
2013-10-13 03:08:52 PM
The Pacific North West is one area where climate change does not seem to be having much effect. This is not surprising. In the past this area has been a refuge during geological and historical periods of extreme warming. Even when the rest of the United States was suffering from extreme heat and drough in 2012, it was cooler and wetter. Washington State (and southern BC) were suffering from floods instead of record droughts.

So it is possible that the shellfish are not suffering from heat or sea level rise, although the sea level is rising at about the rate mentioned. A couple or three millimeters a year would add up to a couple of inches over a couple of decades. There are 25.4 millimeters per inch. Unsurprising.

But perhaps acidification is playing a role as well.

The more CO2 goes into the upper layer of the oceans, and the more heat that is absorbed by water, the more acidificaton occurs and the harder it is on bony and shellfish, even where air temperatures do not change much.

All the same it is not surprising that AGW believers might criticize overblown journalism. Except in the delusional conspiracy theories of climate change deniers, these scientists are highly critical of each other's work and of popular misconceptions. They are honest and speak up against errors and misinterpretation of facts and theories.

You might not notice if your head is to the grindstone of anti-climate change propaganda, but there is a lot of critical and precise thought and measurement involved in climate science and the certitudes are modest, while the hedging against error and exageration are often great, especially if you go back to sources instead of believing what you read in articles, and worse still, headlines.

This guy seems well-informed and cautious. But personally I think it is not entirely wrong to connect current events to climate change, if not as cause and effect, then at least as examples of the effects to be expected.

They may not be easy to link to causes (the system is much too chaotic, with too much noise to be certain that event x is produced by cause c), but it is easy to see that events conform to the predictions made by models ad other evidence. At some point in the future, the frequency of "extreme" events will be so high that they become "normal" events, and then the evidence allowing us to link the causes to effects will be stronger.

Acidification is real and measurable. Experiments have shown that adding CO2 to air and water has effects like these and those. They have entire test wood lots where they can pump CO2 into the air and observe a whole forest change as a result. They can do the same with aquaria or extrapolate effects from the geological record.

In short, a loaded dice rolls more sixes, say, but it is still subject to chance, so you can't distinguish a "loaded" six from a "natural" or "honest" six without some sort of litmus test. We do have some of those for acidification, naturally. You can distinguish the carbon isotopes C12, C13, C14 and thus tell "natural" carbon, from living things from "stored" carbon from rocks and coal, etc. The isotope levels are different, even in different types of animals and plants. You can find fingerprints at the scene of the crime, so to speak.
 
2013-10-13 03:09:16 PM

captainktainer: The Seattle Times has asked other scientists to review their series, including an actual chemical oceanographer (Cliff Mass is not by any stretch). The general verdict? Yeah, they got it right.


This just in: scientists who all benefit from the same source of funding scratch each other's back. More at 11.
 
2013-10-13 03:10:15 PM

majestic: His conclustion conclusion that the study claims elevated CO2 levels right now are decimating shellfish right now is dumb. That's not what it said at all. What is happening to ocean species right now is the result of elevated CO2 levels over the past couple of decades. It stands to reason that continued, or increasing, elevated levels will have similar, if not worse, detrimental effects in the future.

Or did I read a different study?


I think I have a conclustion from drinking too much yesterday.
 
2013-10-13 03:14:17 PM

worlddan: captainktainer: The Seattle Times has asked other scientists to review their series, including an actual chemical oceanographer (Cliff Mass is not by any stretch). The general verdict? Yeah, they got it right.

This just in: scientists who all benefit from the same source of funding scratch each other's back. More at 11.


You really don't know how the competitive grant process works, do you? Or how scientists are funded? Jesus.
 
2013-10-13 03:21:27 PM
Where is Private James?
 
2013-10-13 03:23:48 PM

crab66: Your Blog....is not that bad.


Yep, Cliff Mass is all sorts of awesome when it comes to atmosphere science. His book on PNW weather is second to none.

http://www.washington.edu/uwpress/search/books/MASWEA.html
 
2013-10-13 03:47:10 PM
captainktainer:

You really don't know how the competitive grant process works, do you? Or how scientists are funded? Jesus.

Actually, far more than you do since i have actually worked for the NASA approving scientific grants.

/yes willing to bite the hand that once fed me.
 
2013-10-13 03:49:01 PM
Oh good, we're overdue for one of these. GeneralJim was so overflowing with derp that he escaped containment, and contaminated a thread in the politics tab.
 
2013-10-13 03:53:37 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.


Added to my favourites. Any person who can say this on fark is a friend of mine.
 
2013-10-13 03:54:32 PM

captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.


Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?
 
2013-10-13 03:55:04 PM

Repo Man: Oh good, we're overdue for one of these. GeneralJim was so overflowing with derp that he escaped containment, and contaminated a thread in the politics tab.


VS the hallucinogenic ravings of the sno and the chimp?

Get a life.
 
2013-10-13 03:57:48 PM
I killed the shellfish.
 
2013-10-13 04:05:46 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.

Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?


Well, the NOAA website is down, but, IIRC, the sea level has been rising about 1mm/year and we're currently back to the sea level of 1 CE.
 
2013-10-13 04:12:07 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.

Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?


Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

www.psmsl.org

/guess they didn't get the memo
 
2013-10-13 04:19:22 PM

SpdrJay: I killed the shellfish.


He killed all the Husnock.
 
2013-10-13 04:23:10 PM
Sea levels been rising for 10,000 years.
Laurentide ice sheet melting.
Process is ongoing.

Things happened like the Chesapeake Bay formed.
Study it out.
Wiki isn't closed by the .gov shoutdown:
"The bay was formed starting about 10,000 years ago when rising sea levels at the end of the last ice age flooded the Susquehanna River valley. "
 
2013-10-13 04:34:46 PM

captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?

Here you are, moron. And more.

Do you need me to be your personal Google more, or is that enough for you?DesertDemonWY: HotIgneous Intruder: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.

Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?

Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

[www.psmsl.org image 350x140]

/guess they didn't get the memo

You asshole. Neah Bay is in an uplift area.


That's pretty cool.

Interglacial warming is awesome, innit?

I mean, 12,000 years ago, there used to be a mile of ice above Albany, NY.
Conditions are much improved since then.
 
2013-10-13 04:34:52 PM
No no no...any claim made that CO2 is hurting something is true whether it is true or not, and no matter who is countering the claim.

And submittard would know that if he just read the IPCC report, page 221, paragraph 11, entitled "Why CO2 will kill shellfish, but the claim will be countered by AGW believers, only demonstrating that the shellfish were really being killed."

This is EXACTLY what was predicted by the computer models, except that it is worse than we thought.
 
2013-10-13 04:39:14 PM

captainktainer: You really don't know how the competitive grant process works, do you? Or how scientists are funded? Jesus.


You wanna know how I know it is YOU who don't understand the grant process?
 
2013-10-13 04:39:24 PM

DesertDemonWY: Here's Neah Bay in Washington:


Q: Gee, why did you choose that among the 7 Washington stations?

captainktainer: Neah Bay is in an uplift area.


A: Because you're dishonest
 
2013-10-13 04:44:05 PM
AGWers are like the Christians who claim to be persecuted.
Everybody needs a flag to carry.

/Hey AGWers, get laid or get a hobby or something.
 
2013-10-13 04:48:07 PM

jaytkay: DesertDemonWY: Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

Q: Gee, why did you choose that among the 7 Washington stations?

captainktainer: Neah Bay is in an uplift area.

A: Because you're dishonest


Q: Did you see any acceleration in SLR in any of the other Washington stations?

A: No

Q: What do alarmists do when confronted with actual data that doesn't fit their preconceived notions of global warming?

A: Stomp feet, resort to name calling
 
2013-10-13 04:50:16 PM
It seems to me that a decline in shellfish would more likely caused by a lack of food than anything else.
 
2013-10-13 04:52:29 PM
Add the climate change alarmists to my list of communities that I ask, WHERE IS YOUR MARTIN LUTHER?

/The other is Islam.

//Now I'm done.
 
2013-10-13 04:56:05 PM

DesertDemonWY: jaytkay: DesertDemonWY: Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

Q: Gee, why did you choose that among the 7 Washington stations?

captainktainer: Neah Bay is in an uplift area.

A: Because you're dishonest

Q: Did you see any acceleration in SLR in any of the other Washington stations?

A: No

Q: What do alarmists do when confronted with actual data that doesn't fit their preconceived notions of global warming?

A: Stomp feet, resort to name calling


Your dishonesty is obvious to normal people, whining more isn't changing the facts.
 
2013-10-13 04:58:14 PM
either you can disprove the hypothesis that CO2 has IR-active vibrational modes... or you can STFU and EABOD
 
2013-10-13 05:00:20 PM

DesertDemonWY: jaytkay: DesertDemonWY: Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

Q: Gee, why did you choose that among the 7 Washington stations?

captainktainer: Neah Bay is in an uplift area.

A: Because you're dishonest

Q: Did you see any acceleration in SLR in any of the other Washington stations?

A: No

Q: What do alarmists do when confronted with actual data that doesn't fit their preconceived notions of global warming?

A: Stomp feet, resort to name calling


i42.tinypic.com

Not acceleration, but definitely a rise.

DesertDemonWY: Q: What do alarmists do when confronted with actual data that doesn't fit their preconceived notions of global warming?

A: Stomp feet, resort to name calling


Calling you dishonest isn't much of a stretch. What would you call cherry-picking of the sort that you've done here?
 
2013-10-13 05:01:03 PM

simplicimus: It seems to me that a decline in shellfish would more likely caused by a lack of food than anything else.


Occam's Crab Shack.

Excellent crab cakes there.
 
2013-10-13 05:08:27 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Sea levels been rising for 10,000 years.
Laurentide ice sheet melting.
Process is ongoing.

Things happened like the Chesapeake Bay formed.
Study it out.
Wiki isn't closed by the .gov shoutdown:
"The bay was formed starting about 10,000 years ago when rising sea levels at the end of the last ice age flooded the Susquehanna River valley. "



You really need to get the simple idea down that there can be more than one cause of sea level rise. Naturally-driven change and anthropogenically-driven change are in no way mutually exclusive.

I'm sure you've had a similar analogy given to you before, but the fact that fires started by lightning exist does not mean that arson does not exist.
 
2013-10-13 05:11:11 PM

DesertDemonWY: HotIgneous Intruder: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.

Thanks for the name calling, derpity.

"Several inches during the past decades."
Data please.
Proof.
Data?
Anyone?

Here's Neah Bay in Washington:

[www.psmsl.org image 350x140]

/guess they didn't get the memo


Flabbledopbleeblopbeep.
 
2013-10-13 05:13:04 PM

Damnhippyfreak: HotIgneous Intruder: Sea levels been rising for 10,000 years.
Laurentide ice sheet melting.
Process is ongoing.

Things happened like the Chesapeake Bay formed.
Study it out.
Wiki isn't closed by the .gov shoutdown:
"The bay was formed starting about 10,000 years ago when rising sea levels at the end of the last ice age flooded the Susquehanna River valley. "


You really need to get the simple idea down that there can be more than one cause of sea level rise. Naturally-driven change and anthropogenically-driven change are in no way mutually exclusive.

I'm sure you've had a similar analogy given to you before, but the fact that fires started by lightning exist does not mean that arson does not exist.


Newp.
I'm not saying it's one or the other.
That's your bipolar projection system at work.

I'm saying if one is already going like a freight train, turning off my [insert quality of life noun here] probably won't stop it.

Also, sending my money to men in suits won't stop that freight train, either.
So you keep waving your arms like a windmill.
Your type comes and goes.
 
2013-10-13 05:25:14 PM
Oceanic acidification is iffy... Dissolved CO2 means more carbonate which means fast shell development. Some of the lab experiments have adjusted the pH with hydrochloric and other lab acids, mainly because it's hard to force carbonic acid into water without making club soda in large volumes. A large scale experiment that covers the whole life cycle of clams and and shellfish would require a hearty degree of atmospheric control.

Hmm, I wonder if they have club soda at Sams.
 
2013-10-13 06:00:07 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Newp.
I'm not saying it's one or the other.
That's your bipolar projection system at work.

I'm saying if one is already going like a freight train, turning off my [insert quality of life noun here] probably won't stop it.

Also, sending my money to men in suits won't stop that freight train, either.
So you keep waving your arms like a windmill.
Your type comes and goes.


I assume you talking about the silliness of expecting our global ecosystem to stop on a dime and turn around? As far as my thinking on AGW, the rise in sea level is measurable and thus empirically provable. So there's that. As to the cause, there are many factors, probably many we don't take into account. All I know is that many centuries after I've died, my house will be underwater, if the trend continues, which is not a given.
 
2013-10-13 06:20:42 PM

simplicimus: HotIgneous Intruder: Newp.
I'm not saying it's one or the other.
That's your bipolar projection system at work.

I'm saying if one is already going like a freight train, turning off my [insert quality of life noun here] probably won't stop it.

Also, sending my money to men in suits won't stop that freight train, either.
So you keep waving your arms like a windmill.
Your type comes and goes.

I assume you talking about the silliness of expecting our global ecosystem to stop on a dime and turn around? As far as my thinking on AGW, the rise in sea level is measurable and thus empirically provable. So there's that. As to the cause, there are many factors, probably many we don't take into account. All I know is that many centuries after I've died, my house will be underwater, if the trend continues, which is not a given.


No doubt about sea levels rising. That's settled science. Warming is settled science.
That the seal level varies is settled science. Underwater structures in the Med. Sea are fact, not fiction.
Human myths describing floods are circumstantially supporting.
Cyclical warming and cooling and glaciation and deglaciation are pretty much settled science if you study paleoclimatology.

The trend will not and cannot continue indefinitely, but will swing the other way. Systems seek equilibrium (which is a good latinate word from another fallen civilization meaning equal balance) and will oscillate. The reasons are myriad and the Earth is a complex open system in thermodynamic terms.
The vagaries of the solar system and cosmic influences probably play a gigantic role in the cycling, but certain humans have built careers on saying IT'S US, IT'S US.

Occam's Cab Shack reasoning points to NOT us.
But human psychology demands that people are at the center of all mythologies and causes and effects, whether it's religion or science or whatever.
Heisenberg approves of this species-centric myopia.
 
2013-10-13 06:32:45 PM

Repo Man: Oh good, we're overdue for one of these. GeneralJim was so overflowing with derp that he escaped containment, and contaminated a thread in the politics tab.


*snert*
 
2013-10-13 06:33:34 PM
Ah yes ... the ubiquitous Fark anthropogenic climate change thread, where idiot denialists who've never set foot in a college-level science classroom post why PhDs who've made it their life's work to study anthropogenic climate change are wrong.

Interesting fact: In nations that have better math and science educations than the US, climate change isn't an issue.  But here in the US, the electorate is so dumbed down and gullible that they'll parrot the Heritage Foundation's talking points for them.
 
2013-10-13 06:36:25 PM
Also, whatifwecreateabetterworldfornothing.jpg
 
2013-10-13 06:47:17 PM

IntertubeUser: PhDs who've made it their life's work to study anthropogenic climate change are wrong


They'd never admit to being wrong for obvious reasons.
 
2013-10-13 07:42:38 PM
Fun weather stuff aside, Cliff Mass is pretty crap when it comes to AGW. He's at times stated the common denier myth that "hey, it could turn out good for us!", that there's nothing to the glaciers receding in the Cascades, cherrypicking date ranges to show less warming, and has very stalwartly defended his friend Mark Albright when the latter was fired for being a putz in regards to global warming.

And his recent blog post is the same bad science. Basically, he's saying that since the rate of acidification in local waters is greater than worldwide ocean acidification, that means that they're not related. This is an embarrassngly stupid argument to make.
 
2013-10-13 07:43:50 PM

majestic: majestic: His conclustion conclusion that the study claims elevated CO2 levels right now are decimating shellfish right now is dumb. That's not what it said at all. What is happening to ocean species right now is the result of elevated CO2 levels over the past couple of decades. It stands to reason that continued, or increasing, elevated levels will have similar, if not worse, detrimental effects in the future.

Or did I read a different study?

I think I have a conclustion from drinking too much yesterday.


No you just read what he said wrong. He said that the waters that are upwelling now have been deep in the ocean for 10 or 20 years, and that the records show that the water had a lower PH because it was from the deep where it was colder and had decomposing stuff drifting through it. The upwelling water caused PH shifts that were many times greater than the 0.1 change that can be attributed to the rise in atmospheric CO2. The Native shelfish were doing just fine through all that PH shifting, while the imported shellfish in the hatcheries weren't, because the imports were from Japan were the PH doesn't have a habit of changing. So the conclusion that PH changes caused by higher atmospheric CO2 can have an effect on shellfish in the future is certainly possible, it is not the dire warning that Seattle Times claimed it to be.
 
2013-10-13 07:55:46 PM

captainktainer


HotIgneous Intruder: This right here ... "Global warming due to anthropogenic CO2 has caused sea level to rise several inches during the past decades." ... is where I stopped reading because this person is a nutter.

Your difficulty with the concept of basic thermodynamics and the effect that higher temperatures demonstrably have had on glaciers and ice caps does not make someone a nutter. It just makes you a moron.
No, your inability to use a farking yard-stick makes you one.
 
2013-10-13 08:07:15 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: No doubt about sea levels rising. That's settled science. Warming is settled science.
That the seal level varies is settled science. Underwater structures in the Med. Sea are fact, not fiction.
Human myths describing floods are circumstantially supporting.
Cyclical warming and cooling and glaciation and deglaciation are pretty much settled science if you study paleoclimatology.

The trend will not and cannot continue indefinitely, but will swing the other way. Systems seek equilibrium (which is a good latinate word from another fallen civilization meaning equal balance) and will oscillate. The reasons are myriad and the Earth is a complex open system in thermodynamic terms.
The vagaries of the solar system and cosmic influences probably play a gigantic role in the cycling, but certain humans have built careers on saying IT'S US, IT'S US.

Occam's Cab Shack reasoning points to NOT us.
But human psychology demands that people are at the center of all mythologies and causes and effects, whether it's religion or science or whatever.
Heisenberg approves of this species-centric myopia.


Well I am not going to lose sleep over this. The class of crustaceans we're probably talking, Malacostraca, has only been around since the Cambrian era, so a mere 500 or so billion years. I think they'll survive a little longer.
 
2013-10-13 08:08:11 PM
Sorry, million years, not billion.
 
2013-10-13 08:10:18 PM
Cliff Mass posts some good meteorology, but this post doesn't seem well-reasoned ... perhaps not surprising, since it's well outside his expertise.

He starts out with some irrelevant grumbling about the definition of "corrosive", before admitting that declining pH does affect shell formation.

Then he makes the argument that seasonal variability is larger than the trend, therefore the trend doesn't matter.  This is the same silly argument made by climate skeptics about surface temperature.  Yeah, the seasonal cycle may be tens of degrees (or X pH units), but that doesn't mean that a mean shift on top of that seasonal cycle has no important effects.

Next he says that the local trend is bigger than the global trend, therefore the local trend doesn't have anything to do with CO2 uptake.  This is completely specious.  (And also analogous to skeptic arguments about regional surface temperature trends.)  Like the seasonal cycle, you have variability (in this case spatial) superipmosed on a mean shift; the existence of variability doesn't mean there isn't an underlying trend with a common cause.
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report