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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (87577)	4/23/2012 6:58:06 PM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

Global warming alarmism cooling off. Soon it will be “global what?” April 23rd, 2012 by Mark Landsbaum orangepunch.ocregister.com It’s time for our periodic check up on the sinking global warming alarmism movement. Let’s begin by noting the fading popularity of this eco-obsessive notion. “Earth Day stands up to the rain,” the Washington Post blared, putting as good a face on as lousy a turn-out as we can remember. The rain “didn’t stop the die-hards,” the report says. The Post didn’t give a crowd count. But Examiner.com, did: “Earth Day Networks, which sponsored the event, expected tens of thousands of people. By midafternoon, about 40 people, including [Frisbee-throwers] Nick, Antonio, and a CNN crew, hovered near the stage awaiting the remainder of a long list of scheduled speakers and bands, including the Reverend Jesse Jackson and R&B singer Ledisi.” That pretty much coincides with the loss of interest in the global warming alarmism, huh? From WattsUpWtihThat.com: FAIRFAX, Va., January 27, 2010—Public concern about global warming has dropped sharply since the fall of 2008, according to the results of a national survey released today by researchers at Yale and George Mason universities. The survey found that he percentage of Americans who think global warming is caused mostly by human activities dropped 10 points, to 47 percent. In line with these shifting beliefs, there has been an increase in the number of Americans who think global warming will never harm people in the United States or elsewhere or other species. Then there’s the relative (un)importance global warming has when ranked among life’s other matters: PRINCETON, NJ — With Earth Day about a month away, Americans tell Gallup they worry the most about several water-related risks and issues among nine major environmental issues. They worry least about global warming and loss of open spaces. Even the faithful and one-time loudest alarmists are back-tracking. Says MSNBC: James Lovelock, the maverick scientist who became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism, has admitted to being “alarmist” about climate change and says other environmental commentators, such as Al Gore, were too. Lovelock, 92, is writing a new book in which he will say climate change is still happening, but not as quickly as he once feared. He previously painted some of the direst visions of the effects of climate change. In 2006, in an article in the U.K.’s Independent newspaper, he wrote that “before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable.” However, the professor admitted in a telephone interview with msnbc.com that he now thinks he had been “extrapolating too far”… =-= Hey, here’s an idea: how about we dramatically dismantle the economic engine that distinguishes us from the Third World, heap all our money into subsidies of nonsensical “alternative” energy and penalize use of cheap fossil fuel to advance global warming alarmism? Yeah, not such a good idea. Nevermind.

To: Land Shark who wrote (87577)	4/24/2012 12:54:38 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 89467

The real problem is nitrates/phosphates coming from runoff. Of course it is A problem.. Told you that before. The coastal areas are being impacted by excessive nutrient runoffs from terrestrial agriculture. However, the vast majority of the ocean has exactly the OPPOSITE problem.. Abundant nutrients and no phytoplankton due to lack of necessary trace elements like Iron. The key to CO2 sequestration is the KIND of phytoplankton that are encouraged to grow.. Diatoms specifically that sink to the ocean floor when they die, not decaying at the surface, resulting in bacteria depleting all the oxygen. That's where the 02 goes.. to digestion of decaying algal matter by bacteria. You must have a PhD (phoney degree), lol. No.. just an oxymoron.. because I approach things with some common sense, which you apparently have never experienced. At least you're not denying that the phytoplankton is declining as the other wingnuts are. Who are these wingnuts? Could you provide some examples? Frankly, I've never heard any informed source make such a claim. Maybe you should advance the quality of your reading material beyond National Enquirer and The Sun.. acidification due to CO2 and changes in pH 2) Isn't an accumulation of CO2 beyond the ability of oceanic flora to absorb it the cause of higher acidity in ocean waters? IF there were greater quantities of phytoplankton absorbing and sequestering CO2, wouldn't that reduce ocean acidity? Hmmmm.... Unless you think of oceanic acidity as sulfuric or hydrochloric.... LOL!! 3) Decline in fish populations as the phyto relies on nutrients from fish poop etc.. You can add all the fish poop that you want, but if there is insufficient Iron to fix those nitrates and foster production of chlorophyll, there will be no photosynthesis. No conversion of CO2 to sugar and O2, and CO2 levels will increase. Try it on your yard.. add nothing but nitrogen with no iron supplements and see how many years it takes until your lawn now longer is green and winds up dying out. PLANTS MUST HAVE IRON TO PRODUCE CHLOROPHYLL.. And plants MUST have chlorophyll to conduct photosynthesis.. End of argument. It's certainly not "rocket science".. In fact, it's Botanical Science.. Hawk