Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Nature World News)   Good news, everybody. There are 10x the number of mid-depth fish in the sea as we thought. That means there is a possible mate for everybody, except Zoidberg, who will die alone in a non-Dumpster brand garbage bin. And of course, TotalFarkers   (natureworldnews.com) divider line 8
    More: Spiffy, Zoidberg, water column, global ocean, Spanish National Research Council, Nature Communications, garbage bins  
•       •       •

4446 clicks; posted to Main » on 08 Feb 2014 at 4:57 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2014-02-08 04:57:15 PM  
3 votes:
UNLEASH THE TARTAR SAUCE!
2014-02-08 05:08:50 PM  
2 votes:
fc02.deviantart.net
2014-02-08 07:46:42 PM  
1 votes:

2.bp.blogspot.com

Fishy Fish, where is the Fish?

2014-02-08 06:07:33 PM  
1 votes:

common sense is an oxymoron: That Guy...From That Show!: Suckit global warming deniers, now that we suddenly have many more fish removing CO2 from the atmosphere you'll see this explains why what we're saying is true because of weather changes that will keep happening.

A poor troll using even worse science, but someone might actually believe it...

The fish have always been there; we just discovered them recently. One piece of the carbon cycle is more significant than we thought, but the rates at which atmospheric carbon and oceanic acidity are increasing haven't changed because of this discovery. What has changed is that the effects of depleted fish populations can be expected to be more severe than previously forecast, the forecast having to be adjusted to account for the loss of more carbon-shiatting fish than we previously thought existed.


EXACTLY.  Before this the global warming deniers argued that our evidence about there being less fish wasn't valid because there were thought to be more fish.  But now, we've got em because we say that more fish than less means it's worse anyway.   No matter which, less fish or more fish, the deniers lose.
2014-02-08 05:05:50 PM  
1 votes:

Boojum2k: whistleridge: Wait, I'm confused. So does this still mean we're on track for salt-water fish extinction by 2040, or not?

Probably not. The nice thing about science is that when you come across evidence disproving a hypothesis, you discard the hypothesis, not the evidence. Religion works the other way around.


Oh, aren't you clever.
2014-02-08 05:01:21 PM  
1 votes:
Oh, there's plenty of fish left but they're mostly ugly fish.
2014-02-08 03:12:35 PM  
1 votes:
So have we reached peak fish or not?
2014-02-08 03:05:22 PM  
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 8 of 8 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report