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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (50797)	5/6/2014 7:22:23 PM
From: Eric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

I know that I'm a bit stubborn on this issue, but I really can't take scientific concern about CO2's role in AGW, until some climate scientists explain the correlation between the 50% increase in CO2 and the 40%+ decline in oceanic phytoplankton since 1950.. We know that ocean phytoplankton are responsible for 50-70% of the total global photosynthesis, yet no one has incorporated this fact into their climate models. Actually it is incorporated into some of the climate models. A friend that is a professor in the school of Oceanography that I first met many, many years (1983 if I remember correctly) ago when I worked on campus at the U of W at KCTS-TV (Seattle's PBS station) is retiring shortly. I attended a lecture where she spoke recently and there were a lot of questions at the end of the lecture about AGW and it's effects on marine life. The decline in oceanic phytoplankton was brought up but she said it was not a big problem. The phytoplankton population varies around the world and goes through cycles that they still do not fully understand. The iron "incident" was brought up and she just shook her head. "Very poor science" she said. There were other reasons for the salmon population "spike" that year. Lots more to learn about our oceans but a number of things are coming together on the subject. Eric