|
07/20/2017, 03:04 PM | #26 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glocester, RI
Posts: 3,336
|
Quote:
As a casual observer I had considered it more of a conversation than an argument. No reason to devolve to personal attacks.
__________________
My build thread: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2548422 Current Tank Info: 65 gallon mixed reef, Eshopps sump and HOB overflow, RO-110int skimmer, Reefbreeder 32" photons V1. |
|
07/20/2017, 03:42 PM | #27 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,821
|
Quote:
From wikipedia; Anti-intellectualism is hostility to and mistrust of intellect, intellectuals, and intellectualism commonly expressed as deprecation of education and philosophy, and the dismissal of art, literature, and science as impractical and even contemptible human pursuits. |
|
07/21/2017, 05:48 AM | #28 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 4,460
|
Quote:
|
|
07/21/2017, 08:00 AM | #29 | ||
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glocester, RI
Posts: 3,336
|
Quote:
Quote:
I absolutely believe we can do more to protect this earth, we should start with holding these idiots accountable for their "do as we say not as we do" attitudes.
__________________
My build thread: http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2548422 Current Tank Info: 65 gallon mixed reef, Eshopps sump and HOB overflow, RO-110int skimmer, Reefbreeder 32" photons V1. |
||
07/21/2017, 08:02 AM | #30 | |
Grizzled & Cynical
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stamford, CT
Posts: 17,319
|
Quote:
__________________
Simon Got back into the hobby ..... planned to keep it simple ..... yeah, right ..... clearly I need a new plan! Pet peeve: anemones host clowns; clowns do not host anemones! Current Tank Info: 450 Reef; 120 refugium; 60 Frag Tank, 30 Introduction tank; multiple QTs |
|
07/21/2017, 08:08 AM | #31 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 4,460
|
Quote:
|
|
07/22/2017, 10:37 AM | #32 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LA/Chicago
Posts: 739
|
All things considered imho this thread is pretty measured and relaxed which I appreciate. I just returned from Belize and the damage is extensive. Out near the blue hole things look better but the shallow areas 10'+/- deep are in terrible shape. I'd guess 50%+ of the brain, elkhorn I saw was dead. All browned out. Sea fans galore.
I said in another post we're hobbyists who rely on data testing nitrates, phosphates, alk, calc, mag so I'm perplexed so many of us discount the data about climate change. We need to look at the data about the reefs, climate change and act now. Call me an alarmist. After last weeks trip I plead guilty. BTW so are some of old time dive masters I spoke to. |
07/29/2017, 07:36 PM | #33 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newton, nc
Posts: 68
|
I know this is a reef forum, and we focus mainly on our aquatic friends, but I also have real concerns about our rates of deforestation in the name of progress. I think this may be the single biggest contributor to ocean acidification, as we have leveled millions of acres of rainforest and subtropical forest to make way for city expansion, agriculture, and commerce. All those tress we're able to consume huge amount of contaminants from the atomsphere and reduce co2 levels. No we are becoming more dependant on ocean micro and macro algaes
|
07/31/2017, 12:22 PM | #34 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 4,460
|
Quote:
|
|
08/07/2017, 08:22 PM | #35 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 110
|
Many of us had this very discussion on here many years ago about the same issue. Back then there were still naysayers who simply wrote it off as a cyclical or wonder of nature that would correct itself.
Other would simply just write it off as unproven science, many regardless of how much information is given will absolutely deny it . I think with the amount of data the fact there is a serious problem it at least needs to be looked at. And in regards to one statement alluding to those people aren't doing anything? Many are, the only way they know how or can but when you are faced with deniers who will question every single piece of data because it doesn't coincide with what they believe for whatever reason, the ignorance level becomes very difficult to deal with. When a group of us here were discussing it, much of the die off of the GBR had only had one really big die off (2004 I believe). Since then there have been at last two more and each grew in it's size of impact. Not only that but it has since reached virtually every reef around the world. While some sit around and attribute it to questionable information and data or political whatever and then require further testing which will take years it's not out of the question given what we already know and have seen that a very good portion of the scientists could very well be correct. |
08/08/2017, 11:25 PM | #36 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 170
|
It's interesting that 25-30 years ago there was general scientific consensus that climate change (I think the language was global warming back then) was happening and it was very likely human activity causing it. No controversy. Science and the scientific method, are inherently non-political.
Fast forward 10 years and industry funded "think-tanks" started popping up and engaging in the most effective disinformation campaign in modern times. The true genius was the politicisation of the scientific method and flipping the narrative. The least qualified and most ideologically driven where now the sceptics, not the qualified scientific community using a sceptical model developed over hundreds of years that has driven the greatest period in human advancement in history. Climate sciensce was now a communist plot to redistribute wealth driven by the EU behemoth, or some such frothing delusion. This episode is similar, but on a much grander scale to what the tobacco industry did with cigarettes, the pharmacy industry did with thalidomide and James Hardie did here in Australia with asbestos. I'm interested in some of the comments about the hypocrisy of celebrities on the issue or people who buy a low emission car instead of walking etc. Most data I've seen, certainly in Australia, shows it is individuals, state governments and smaller enterprise (in that order) doing the heavy lifting on emissions reductions. Not Federal government, not industry and not the financial industry who are all failing miserably as leadership goes. As far as celebs go, I'm a bit of an iconoclast. But I am bemused at the tomatoes being thrown in the direction of people who do have something to say on the issue. Let's face it, Di Caprio and others could be sitting around being fed peeled grapes by swimwear models while polishing their Oscars or whatever it is that rich people do. Good on them if they want to use their fame to influence change. There are other celebs living in opulence doing nothing at all. I don't read what they are saying as talking down to plebs, I think they are actually talking up to governments and corporates and trying to influence policy. Nobody is being asked to sit in the dark, stop all travel and turn off their winters in winter. Just do what you can with the resources you have.
__________________
Don't ask me, I'm new here. My tank build: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2647315 Last edited by Punchanello; 08/09/2017 at 12:45 AM. |
08/08/2017, 11:52 PM | #37 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 53
|
Quote:
Anyway, a lot of smoke and mirrors in this whole process but my understanding is there is little empirical evidence that actually links climate change (and higher CO2) to human activity. Lots of conjecture and finger pointing but not much more. |
|
08/09/2017, 12:42 AM | #38 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 170
|
Quote:
If you define the term empirical as hundreds and thousands of little pointers which when viewed in their entirety lead again and again to the same conclusion then that might be a more reasonable expectation in just about any scientific field. On this Malcolm Roberts character, and I'm using him because of his reliance on the term to dismiss anything he doesn't want to hear, one of Australia’s most famous and celebrated scientists Prof Peter Doherty (Nobel prize winner for his research into the immune system) said "I’ve never used the term ‘empirical evidence’, or heard any other working scientist say it. [Roberts] has no understanding of how science works."
__________________
Don't ask me, I'm new here. My tank build: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2647315 Last edited by Punchanello; 08/09/2017 at 12:55 AM. |
|
08/10/2017, 03:23 AM | #39 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 9,555
|
If you compare the consumption of fossil fuels with the CO2 levels over the time it was measured and recorded you will have to be willfully blind to not see the connection.
But CO2 is only one of the greenhouse gasses and not even the worst. Methane is actually several times worse. The main source of that are among other (mostly also man-made factors) the one billion cows (and sheep as well) worldwide we keep for milk, steaks and hamburgers. If you then also factor in the past and ongoing deforestation the human involvement becomes quite clear. The current global warming is clearly man made. And if you doubt that there is even warming going on, just ask someone living in Alaska for long enough. Furthermore, the rate of warming doesn't really allow any other conclusion than humans as cause. All warming periods of the past were rather slow and gradual over thousands of years. It's the denial and "skepticism" that's the scheme and not the climate science. Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
__________________
Pairs: 4 percula, 3 P. kauderni, 3 D. excisus, 1 ea of P. diacanthus, S. splendidus, C. altivelis O. rosenblatti, D. janssi, S. yasha & a Gramma loreto trio 3 P. diacanthus. 2 C. starcki Current Tank Info: 200 gal 4 tank system (40x28x24 + 40B + 40B sump tank + 20g refugium) + 30x18x18 mixed reef + 20g East Pacific biotop + 20g FW +... |
08/10/2017, 05:30 AM | #40 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 4,460
|
Well I guess the way to control methane is control the human population, but no one wants to hear or do that in this country. And although I do love my fellow Americans, I wish they would stop moving to Texas, we are already busting at the seams. Darn Ex-Governor Perry and his big mouth.
|
08/10/2017, 07:23 AM | #41 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 170
|
Quote:
I think our perhaps blinkered focus on fossil fuels comes from the concerted and unethical campaign of the coal and petroleum industries against the science. As has been rightly pointed out, farming and logging (clearing) are also areas of real concern.
__________________
Don't ask me, I'm new here. My tank build: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2647315 Last edited by Punchanello; 08/10/2017 at 07:28 AM. |
|
08/10/2017, 09:37 AM | #42 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 4,460
|
Quote:
|
|
08/10/2017, 02:45 PM | #43 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,661
|
Quote:
You cannot reduce your environmental footprint to zero, but you can do everything in your power to reduce it if you choose to. Personally I am not vegetarian, but do use a lot less meat than I used to. It helps that I happen to like a lot of vegetarian or near vegetarian meals.
__________________
Advice is like a firehose. Be careful how you drink. |
|
08/10/2017, 03:06 PM | #44 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: northern CO
Posts: 502
|
edit
Last edited by JZinCO; 08/10/2017 at 04:56 PM. |
08/10/2017, 07:48 PM | #45 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 170
|
Quote:
On the population topic, it's interesting that in Europe broadly, populations are falling or holding steady. Economists have the view that this is a natural market correction. People are waiting longer to have kids because they can and they prioritise career and it doesn't make economic sense for individuals to have 5 kids any more. They theorise that this will happen in all developed economies.
__________________
Don't ask me, I'm new here. My tank build: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2647315 |
|
08/15/2017, 10:17 PM | #46 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 110
|
Wow, a decade later on here and not much has changed despite the evidence. Luckily their number has shrunk.
|
08/16/2017, 11:20 AM | #47 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,821
|
Quote:
Plus the potential for additional "massive" methane releases from defrosting and rotting of tundra permafrost, and the release of under-ocean methane due to ocean heating. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|