« A seasonal tale | Main | Tonight I may be found lying on my back in the middle of a field »

Roll me over, it's vinegar on my fish I should be worrying about.

Charles Clover mocks the "born-again climate sceptic, the kind of man (always a man, almost invariably wearing a tweed jacket) " who doesn't know all about Ocean Acidification.

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution in about 1750, sea water acidity has increased by 30%. The speed and degree of this change are faster than anything that had happened for 55m years.
Projections show that by 2060, given the current rate of fossil-fuel emissions, sea water acidity could have increased by 120%.

OK Charles, you are so clever, what do those figures actually mean? What change in pH equals 120%? How acid is the ocean? You didn't just copy out a load of stuff from a leaflet you were given in Copenhagen did you, because you really understand all this chemistry stuff don't you?

Comments

Interesting that just as the effect on the general public of alarmism concentrated on MMGW appears to be running out of steam, ocean acidification raises its head. Clover is not alone. Arch-warmist and propaganda meister Geoffrey Lean in the Telegraph leaps onto the new bandwagon. Just to ratchet up the alarm, apparently Britain will be directly harmed by this one. Geoffrey forgets that this might be an argument to preserve our wealth (such as it is) at home in order to ameliorate this local threat rather than throwing $1.5 billion at third-world kleptocracies.

Before anyone can pontificate about ocean acidification he/she has to be able to define pH and understand the meaning of pKa.

Anyone want to do the sums on how much CO2 it would take to turn the worlds oceans into dilute Carbonic acid? Clover and Lean won't / can't. Overfishing is more of a threat than CO2.

Surely as the ocean warms up (ahem, well let's just suppose it is, for the sake of argument, OK?), then the solubility of CO2 in the water will decrease?

No?

Well that's only what I learned in my Chemistry degree course; obviously Geoffrey Lean and Louise Gray will know better.

I find that people, without any scientific background, tend to copy-paste anything with a few equations in it to support their own argument. Never mind if the equations actually do support the argument, the only thing that matters is the assumption that the reader will not have studied multi variable partial differential equations which model the flow of greenhouses gases in the southern pacific... and so on. I.e. the only thing that matters is the 'belief' that the author knows what he is talking about.

Sickening when these ad-hoc scientists just copy paste shit and then claim doom and gloom on the basis of writing they were to stupid to understand and learn.

I find that people, without any scientific background, tend to copy-paste anything with a few equations in it to support their own argument. Never mind if the equations actually do support the argument, the only thing that matters is the assumption that the reader will not have studied multi variable partial differential equations which model the flow of greenhouses gases in the southern pacific... and so on. I.e. the only thing that matters is the 'belief' that the author knows what he is talking about.

Sickening when these ad-hoc scientists just copy paste shit and then claim doom and gloom on the basis of writing they were to stupid to understand and learn.

I find that people, without any scientific background, tend to copy-paste anything with a few equations in it to support their own argument. Never mind if the equations actually do support the argument, the only thing that matters is the assumption that the reader will not have studied multi variable partial differential equations which model the flow of greenhouses gases in the southern pacific... and so on. I.e. the only thing that matters is the 'belief' that the author knows what he is talking about.

Sickening when these ad-hoc scientists just copy paste shit and then claim doom and gloom on the basis of writing they were to stupid to understand and learn.

Post a comment