Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (29313)	6/18/2010 12:11:58 PM
From: Hawkmoon	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Dumping iron in the oceans is just that. The "GW" community, as you may call it, or I prefer to refer it as the scientific community (in this case marine biologists), want a thorough study on the effects of dumping iron. And what about the lack of research regarding how our soil conservation efforts have PREVENTED natural "iron dumping" into the oceans? Look at the research that was done after the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo in the Phillippines: bbm.me.uk Now with warming of the upper strata, this upwelling has diminished creating massive dead zones. That's BS and John Martin and his followers proved it. Those HNLC (high nutrient, low chlorophyll) areas are IRON DEFICIENT. earthobservatory.nasa.gov csa.com SOIREE and other experiments definitely PROVED that augmentation of dissolved iron in HNLC areas has resulted in large phytoplankton blooms, THEREBY DISPROVING your argument that surface warming prevents phytoplankton growth. If your theory were correct, no amount of iron augmentation would have resulted in phytoplankton growth. The warmer water would have inhibited it. Iron is CRITICAL to the production of chlorophyll in flora, both oceanic and terrestrial. You can possess every other vital nutrient, or growing condition (light, water, and temperature) and flora will not thrive because they cannot produce chlorophyll. But let's say your argument has some merit.. THERE IS NO REASON TO PREVENT FURTHER RESEARCH ON THE MATTER. Iron fertilization is reversible. Halt the addition of iron and the area of ocean in question will return to it's previous norm. ADDITIONALLY, such phytoplankton plumes can be salted with Oceanic Salps, which are phytoplankton grazers. The nature of their life-cyles and metabolism makes them excellent candidates for ensuring that CO2 that is sequestered is deposited on the ocean floors as organic matter. They deny warming is happening and they deny the obvious side-effects. Just as y'all deny the sun's role in global warming. Next thing we know, you'll be blaming mankind for the ice caps melting on Mars: news.nationalgeographic.com GW has been evident at various times in earth's history and had NOTHING to do with anthropogenic causes. If you're looking for some form of climatic stagnation, you're a fool. We have "climate change" at least 4 times a year (except in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho where we only have winter and summer.. ;0) Life goes on. Hawk