Our starving oceans ~ the cause of mass coral bleaching & global warming?

[Aquabucket]

Here is a link to some interesting articles regarding coral bleaching and the overall health of our oceans as it may relate to global warming:

http://www.fisherycrisis.com/coral1.html

Here are some quotes for you to ponder:

"High water temperature and high light exposure are not adequate explanations for the coral bleaching phenomenon"

“The rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that is currently occurring on the planet is, to significant extent, a direct consequence of human removal of life from the sea."

"Many scientists maintain that the only real way to save the corals is to reverse global warming.......a closer look reveals the insight that the only way to solve EITHER problem may be to REVERSE FISHING!"

[davidryder]

Just curious, why would you start another global warming debate? It's been beaten to death here and nobody is every going to change their mind - whatever their views are.

[sunfish11]

If you looked at the article you would see that it isn't really a GW article. It does have a lot of interesting information.

Interesting reading Aquabucket. Thanks.

Lisa

[Kalkbreath]

I think you might find that this authors take on Co2 and how the Ocean plays the greatest role is well documented and needs to be heard.
She feels mankind has removed too much Carbon (fish and whales) from the seas. and this has created an imbalance which causes the ocean to release more Co2 then it has in the past.
The author explains how the increase in Co2 began before year 1900 and how this was before man made Co2 even started.
How the yearly increased build up in the atmosphere (2.5) has remained about the same each year since 1880,(except during WW2) regardless of mankind's increased out put with fossil fuels.
We increased man made Co2 by 2000 percent since 1880 and even doubled the amount of man made Co2 since 1960 yet the increase in the atmosphere is about the same as it was in the early 1900s?
(about 2.5)

This seems to fly in the face of current agendas.

[davidryder]

Originally posted by sunfish11
If you looked at the article you would see that it isn't really a GW article. It does have a lot of interesting information.

Interesting reading Aquabucket. Thanks.

Lisa

You're kidding me, right?

Originally posted by Aquabucket
Here is a link to some interesting articles regarding coral bleaching and the overall health of our oceans as it may relate to global warming:

And did YOU read the article?

"It may be reasonable to assume that the effects of global warming would be felt approximately uniformly in the Bahamas."

"Case 3 - Reefs that are in very remote locations (e.g. mid-Pacific atolls?), so as to have always been relatively inaccessible to fishermen. They may experience “global warming” but be healthier and more resistant to bleaching due to the fact that not only have they been spared the “runoff,” but they are co-existing with relatively robust fish populations(?) These reefs would be the best examples to serve as the unfished “controls” in the investigation of the effects of fishing on reefs. "

"“..numerous reef-building coral species have endured three periods of global warming, from the Pliocene optimum (4.3-3.3 million years ago) through the Eemian interglacial (125 thousand years ago) and the mid-Holocene (6000-5000 years ago), when atmospheric CO2 concentrations and sea temperatures often exceeded those of today....(also)...an increase in sea warming of less than 2 C would result in a greatly increased diversity of corals in certain high latitude locations.” (Glynn, 1996)"

"“Marine photosynthesizing and shell-forming organisms tie up carbon dioxide that would otherwise intensify global warming.” (WRI)"

Last line on the conclusion page:

"Many scientists maintain that the only real way to save the corals is to reverse global warming.......a closer look reveals the insight that the only way to solve EITHER problem may be to REVERSE FISHING! "

Yes, Lisa, interesting article - and I'm not sure if you know my views on global warming or not; nonetheless this is an inappropriate place to discuss them. If you have seen the way any of the other dozen threads regarding global warming have gone than you would understand why this isn't an appropriate place to discuss global warming.

[sunfish11]

Davidryder,

Ok you are right. I will give you that, it is a GW but what I should have, or meant to say, was that it isn't the usual GW stuff.

Why do you have to be the thread police anyway? If you don't think it is appropriate than don't participate and don't open the thread. I don't know your views on the issue, but I have read the other threads on GW on this forum and I think debate is healthy. If you don't like it than don't participate.

[nsreefer]

Originally posted by sunfish11
Davydrider,

Ok you are right. I will give you that, it is a GW but what I should have, or meant to say, was that it isn't the usual GW stuff.

Why do you have to be the thread police anyway? If you don't think it is appropriate than don't participate and don't open the thread. I don't know your views on the issue, but I have read the other threads on GW on this forum and I think debate is healthy. If you don't like it than don't participate.

Ditto

[davidryder]

Originally posted by sunfish11
Davydrider,

Ok you are right. I will give you that, it is a GW but what I should have, or meant to say, was that it isn't the usual GW stuff.

Why do you have to be the thread police anyway? If you don't think it is appropriate than don't participate and don't open the thread. I don't know your views on the issue, but I have read the other threads on GW on this forum and I think debate is healthy. If you don't like it than don't participate.

You're right - I'm not the thread police... it's just that with these hot button issues it always turns into an 'us vs them' debate where everybody on both sides are vehemently defending their position. There is a 100% closure rate on these threads. That being said, IBTL!!

[Caleb Kruse]

Originally posted by Aquabucket

"High water temperature and high light exposure are not adequate explanations for the coral bleaching phenomenon"

Ding Ding Ding give that man a prize!

[michaeldaly]

In my personal opinion Global warming is over rated. many scientists beleive that is is atually non exsistant and just part of earths natural temperature fluctiotions over time.

Anyways Macdonalds cows farts cause more damage to the earths ozone layer that the exhaust air fumes from all the aeroplanes int the world

[Caleb Kruse]

Wow, I actually agree with alot of your views on global warming. On another forum, they all disagreed with me.

[sunfish11]

You're right - I'm not the thread police... it's just that with these hot button issues it always turns into an 'us vs them' debate where everybody on both sides are vehemently defending their position. There is a 100% closure rate on these threads. That being said, IBTL!!

Yes, you are correct, but so what, let them go if they want to. If everybody doesn't play nice than the thread will be closed and what skin is it off of any of our backs.

I don't usually get involved in these because it is like debating if there is a god or not. (But I like to see the other points of view out there). We don't really know the answer.

Sometimes it is good for people to actually verbalize or in this case type their postition on a controversial issue because it gives them a chance to really think about the merits of their beliefs, why they believe what they believe,and it also encourages more research. Not a bad thing no matter what position you wind up taking. I know I have taken a side of an issue before, but then when I actually put it on paper (or verbalized it) my justifications have sounded silly to me when I went back thought about them. That would in turn cause me to reformulate my hypothysis through some actual research.

That beings said, no hard feelings Davidryder.

Lisa

[Peter Eichler]

I think it's a good think that these posts are made and just because it is a hotly debated topic doesn't mean we should avoid posting articles such as this. It does relate to our hobby and the animals we love. People just need to learn to have a healthy debate and not take things personally when someone doesn't agree with their thinking. The problem isn't the topic of the debate, it's the participants.

[10" Red Devil]

“The rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that is currently occurring on the planet is, to significant extent, a direct consequence of human removal of life from the sea."

This statement does not make sense. How does removal of a small percentage of life from the seas contribute to the build up of co2 levels in the atmosphere?

[nsreefer]

Originally posted by 10" Red Devil
“The rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that is currently occurring on the planet is, to significant extent, a direct consequence of human removal of life from the sea."

This statement does not make sense. How does removal of a small percentage of life from the seas contribute to the build up of co2 levels in the atmosphere?

I do not understand the science behind that either.. hopefully someone will elaborate.

[Peter Eichler]

Originally posted by 10" Red Devil
“The rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels that is currently occurring on the planet is, to significant extent, a direct consequence of human removal of life from the sea."

This statement does not make sense. How does removal of a small percentage of life from the seas contribute to the build up of co2 levels in the atmosphere?

I haven't read the whole article yet nor do I understand the science behind all the quotes in this thread. However, just consider how delicate ecosystems can be. Remove one important organism in great enough numbers and it can throw off the whole balance and in extreme cases destroy that ecosystem.

[reverendmaynard]

We should probably start dosing kalkwasser then.

[Rhodesholar]

Originally posted by Peter Eichler
I haven't read the whole article yet nor do I understand the science behind all the quotes in this thread. However, just consider how delicate ecosystems can be. Remove one important organism in great enough numbers and it can throw off the whole balance and in extreme cases destroy that ecosystem.

I have a story to back this statement up. This is paraphrased and to the best of my recollection.

My brother in law lived in Alaska for many years and for many years the King Crab fishing was phenominal. He said the bottom would be littered with crabs. Then slowly they became more and more rare. No one could figure out what was happening. It turned out after several years of research that the Goverment had changed the rules on Cod fishing (he thinks it was Cod though could be some other) in the 70s and moved our territorial waters from 30 miles to 200+ miles out, and thus the international pressure on Cod fishing ceased. With less Cod being caught their population balloned, and in turn, they decimated the crab population.

[kslick]

You could go furture and bring up that Polar Bears are on a decline. The ice caps are melting away, in which the PBs' need in order to hunt, very depressing. CO2 levels, from what I understand collect in the atmosphere, which causes holes in the ozone layer. This causes chain reaction. Explaination in a nut shell.

[Aquabucket]

What I find most interesting about the article is not the whole global warming issue but with mans inability to adequately harvest sustainable natural resources with-out depleting them. The warning signs are there for a catastrophic failure with regard to our oceans complex ecosystems. The real question is can man do anything to reverse the current trends? What can be done to control over fishing? The problem is governments tend to be reactive rather than pro-active. When the time finally comes that legislative action is taken it may be far too late.

[db_triggerfish]

Here are two links on GW.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5O1...related&search

http://www.schnittshow.com/globalwarming.html

[Aquabucket]

Originally posted by db_triggerfish
Here are two links on GW.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5O1...related&search

http://www.schnittshow.com/globalwarming.html

What's different about this article is not your typical global warming scenario in which fossil fuels are the cause. This article is all about overfishing and its possible impact on a global level. I think we can all agree that something needs to change with regard to overfishing in order to preserve our oceans valuable and complex ecosystems.

[db_triggerfish]

AQUABUCKET, i am honest i didn't read the article. Started it at work and will finish it at home later tonight. Good article so far, you are right it is NOT your typical the the sky is falling GW article. Thanks for posting the original thread.

[washingtond]

I was taught not to discuss religion, politics and now you can add GW in an open forum. People simply will not change their positions on these topics but will only dig in.

The article is just information and we should take it for just that.

[Kalkbreath]

To understand this authors position on warm water bleachings, you must first read her work on the Co2 Ocean connection http://www.fisherycrisis.com/strangelove.html
She shows how the Ocean releases 100 mega tonns of Co2 per year and all the worlds man made Co2 only amounts to 10.
Because all ocean life is basically made up of Co2 (carbon)
She feels that currently the oceans are so devoid of life that there is a marked decrease in the number of organisms soaking up the oceans Co2.
This lack of uptake leads to all this unused Co2 simply out gassing into the atmosphere.
Co2 levels are higher over the Ocean then even here in the middle of America?
Makes you wonder if we should be looking at the waves instead of our tailpipes.