Skip to content
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.

(Ars Technica)   There once was a man studying plankton/Who said in a paper "It's all gone"/But the science was junk/And the paper is bunk/So we can keep dumping trash by the ton   (arstechnica.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Ocean, small sample size, Atlantic plankton, Plankton, surface water, none of his work, scientific profile, liters of water  
•       •       •

641 clicks; posted to STEM » on 19 Jul 2022 at 3:42 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



17 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-07-19 3:13:35 PM  
Plankton will be around long after mankind is gone.

Global warming is not good for multiple reasons, ocean acidification due to CO2 and less mixing of the ocean due to war surface water come up.

But a world to harsh for plankton is a world where we would be extinct.
 
2022-07-19 4:21:24 PM  
That may be the worst limerick I've ever read.
 
2022-07-19 4:27:53 PM  
Bad science reporting? Heavens!

Wake me up when Mars is going to look the same size as a full moon.
 
2022-07-19 4:42:46 PM  
If that paper was bunk, what papers can we trust?  And what is the correct algorithm or set of rules for who or what to trust?

Are you trying to say that the conceptual penis is not the cause and source of global warming?
 
2022-07-19 5:16:48 PM  
You know, convincing people that climate change is a serious problem that deserves as much attention as we can throw at it is difficult enough *without* assholes like these guys doing shoddy scientific work, and then persuading others to write ultra-alarming articles based on said half-assery.
 
2022-07-19 5:23:27 PM  
Well, that's a small relief. At least we aren't facing imminent doom.
 
2022-07-19 5:33:46 PM  

AmbassadorBooze: If that paper was bunk, what papers can we trust?  And what is the correct algorithm or set of rules for who or what to trust?

Are you trying to say that the conceptual penis is not the cause and source of global warming?


Well, start with papers that have been peer reviewed (his wasn't) and published in a recognized journal (his wasn't).

Since about 80% of atmospheric O2 is produced by plankton, losing 90% of them would cut production of O2 to slightly over 1/4 the current rate.  This would be noticeable in a matter of weeks, not decades.
 
2022-07-19 6:22:08 PM  

natazha: AmbassadorBooze: If that paper was bunk, what papers can we trust?  And what is the correct algorithm or set of rules for who or what to trust?

Are you trying to say that the conceptual penis is not the cause and source of global warming?

Well, start with papers that have been peer reviewed (his wasn't) and published in a recognized journal (his wasn't).

Since about 80% of atmospheric O2 is produced by plankton, losing 90% of them would cut production of O2 to slightly over 1/4 the current rate.  This would be noticeable in a matter of weeks, not decades.


The atmosphere's big and it takes a while to change its composition.
researchgate.netView Full Size
 
2022-07-19 7:06:04 PM  

natazha: AmbassadorBooze: If that paper was bunk, what papers can we trust?  And what is the correct algorithm or set of rules for who or what to trust?

Are you trying to say that the conceptual penis is not the cause and source of global warming?

Well, start with papers that have been peer reviewed (his wasn't) and published in a recognized journal (his wasn't).

Since about 80% of atmospheric O2 is produced by plankton, losing 90% of them would cut production of O2 to slightly over 1/4 the current rate.  This would be noticeable in a matter of weeks, not decades.


The government needs to put out a list of acceptable journals.

The conceptual penis was peer reviewed.
 
2022-07-19 7:14:41 PM  
Should we belive all articles published in the lancet?

Or if NASA has a news making scientist with arsenic based life found in mono lake, we can go whole hog, right?  Nasa, as far as I know still had not retracted the arsenic life papers and reports.

Who do we belive?  Our cooperate overlords?  They seem to be the ones that hold sway with the politicians.
 
2022-07-19 7:52:32 PM  
Not to be alarmist, but a counterpoint is that acidification, which is a real thing, will make plankton calcified shells weaker.

We are not just walking one tightrope, people.
 
2022-07-19 7:57:45 PM  
Well, that's great.  The next time I hear the news about our imminent doom, I'll know not to believe it.  After all, THE MEDIA is responsible for most of this panic.
 
2022-07-19 8:10:38 PM  
They found one...his name is Sheldon

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-07-19 9:53:14 PM  
Incidentally, it does seem that whether or not we're in for imminent doom, we sure got doom on the way at a slightly slower pace - the not disputed statistics in the article are "we've lost 50% of marine life in the past 70 years and are losing 1% per year".
 
2022-07-20 12:43:10 AM  

adamatari: Incidentally, it does seem that whether or not we're in for imminent doom, we sure got doom on the way at a slightly slower pace - the not disputed statistics in the article are "we've lost 50% of marine life in the past 70 years and are losing 1% per year".


Will the doom come in my lifetime?

I have learned frim the boomers to only care about things that effect me.
 
2022-07-20 1:18:22 AM  

LurkerSupreme: You know, convincing people that climate change is a serious problem that deserves as much attention as we can throw at it is difficult enough *without* assholes like these guys doing shoddy scientific work, and then persuading others to write ultra-alarming articles based on said half-assery.


That's a lot of words to type out "this is as bad as propoganda met out by energy companies".
 
2022-07-20 1:48:58 AM  

2fardownthread: Not to be alarmist, but a counterpoint is that acidification, which is a real thing, will make plankton calcified shells weaker.

We are not just walking one tightrope, people.


To be pendactic most plankton have silica shells

/Like diatomaceous earth which is made from their fossils.

Polyps like corals use calcium
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  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.