Reef Central Online Community

Home Forum Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences View New Posts View Today's Posts

Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Reefkeeping ...an online magazine for marine aquarists Support our sponsors and mention Reef Central

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community > General Interest Forums > Responsible Reefkeeping
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
Thread Tools
Old 07/20/2017, 03:04 PM   #26
sde1500
Registered Member
 
sde1500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glocester, RI
Posts: 2,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod1404 View Post
Wow, we have nothing to argue here after this much of anti-intellectualism. If someone didn't sit and watched how mold was growing, people would still be dying from bacterial infections.


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.
sde1500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/20/2017, 03:42 PM   #27
Tripod1404
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 744
Quote:
Originally Posted by sde1500 View Post
As a casual observer I had considered it more of a conversation than an argument. No reason to devolve to personal attacks.
It was not a personal attack, I didn't call anyone not-intellectual or ignorant. But a statement like "climate scientist are a bunch of people who just look at the thermometers" is clearly an anti-intellectual statement. A person can be very intellectual but support anti-intellectualism.

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.


Tripod1404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/21/2017, 05:48 AM   #28
alton
Registered Member
 
alton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod1404 View Post
It was not a personal attack, I didn't call anyone not-intellectual or ignorant. But a statement like "climate scientist are a bunch of people who just look at the thermometers" is clearly an anti-intellectual statement. A person can be very intellectual but support anti-intellectualism.

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.
What I meant was since I am 57 years old I have seen winters here in south Texas with a seven degree winter day. From getting snow every few years, to no measurable snow in 32 years at my home. From reading as a child that the earth is cooling to now read and know the earths temps are increasing. What I have an issue with is people who claim and scream Global warming and then do nothing themselves to help fix the problem. It disgust me everyday when I see the amount of trash on our city, county, and state roads and highways. Or going to the beach and see a pile of trash not 10' from a trash can because of lazy idiots. Humans, we are our own best and worst enemy at messing up our World. The Great Barrier Reef is an Awesome site, I love watching videos and TV shows showing it. But like someone stated just like Hawaii how much of the demise is do to Pollution and the laziness of our government to properly clean the water before dumping it in our ocean? A bunch of the sewer lines here where I work are in creek beds, every time there is a flood manhole covers pop off and raw sewage finds its way into the creek, then to the rivers and finally the Gulf of Mexico. You are right about one thing, "Trust" is hard to come by these days.


alton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/21/2017, 08:00 AM   #29
sde1500
Registered Member
 
sde1500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Glocester, RI
Posts: 2,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod1404 View Post
It was not a personal attack, I didn't call anyone not-intellectual or ignorant. But a statement like "climate scientist are a bunch of people who just look at the thermometers" is clearly an anti-intellectual statement. A person can be very intellectual but support anti-intellectualism.
Personal attack may have been the wrong way to put it sorry. But I didn't take what he said as an attack on climate scientists, more along the lines of what he further elaborated on below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alton View Post
What I meant was since I am 57 years old I have seen winters here in south Texas with a seven degree winter day. From getting snow every few years, to no measurable snow in 32 years at my home. From reading as a child that the earth is cooling to now read and know the earths temps are increasing. What I have an issue with is people who claim and scream Global warming and then do nothing themselves to help fix the problem. It disgust me everyday when I see the amount of trash on our city, county, and state roads and highways. Or going to the beach and see a pile of trash not 10' from a trash can because of lazy idiots. Humans, we are our own best and worst enemy at messing up our World. The Great Barrier Reef is an Awesome site, I love watching videos and TV shows showing it. But like someone stated just like Hawaii how much of the demise is do to Pollution and the laziness of our government to properly clean the water before dumping it in our ocean? A bunch of the sewer lines here where I work are in creek beds, every time there is a flood manhole covers pop off and raw sewage finds its way into the creek, then to the rivers and finally the Gulf of Mexico. You are right about one thing, "Trust" is hard to come by these days.
I absolutely agree. It blows my mind how some people have managed to become the face of the Climate change crusade, all the while being nothing more than glaringly obvious hypocrites. Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio telling us peasants to consume less, scolding us for our polluting ways, and talking down to us as if everyone is so dumb. All the while flying around on private jets, living in huge mansions using absurd amounts of electricity, and being photographed hanging out alone on 200+ foot yachts.

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianD View Post
Me too.



__________________
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.
sde1500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/21/2017, 08:02 AM   #30
ca1ore
Grizzled & Cynical

 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Stamford, CT
Posts: 16,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThRoewer View Post
But just to be clear here the fault is equally with those that acknowledge man made climate change and then hop into their new two ton Tesla instead of taking the bicycle or walk... or turn on the AC when it's getting hot...
..... or run an energy-hog of a reef tank . Though in my 'defense' I don't burn incandescent bulbs anymore, rarely run the A/C and make my kids grow their own food .....


__________________
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: 265 Reef; 120 refugium; 60 Frag Tank, 30 Introduction tank; multiple QTs
ca1ore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/21/2017, 08:08 AM   #31
alton
Registered Member
 
alton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tripod1404 View Post
This is a big urban legend. Very little money is donated to academic researchers from private sector. Any company rich enough to have money for science will either have its own R&D department or it is some type off a "Technology" company that makes money out of research (like many pharma and biotech companies).

Most of research money for academic institutions comes from government grants. I am a professional scientist and it is quite funny that people think we swim in money. You need to work on proposals for years to get even the smallest amounts of grant money. And no, we dont personally get any part of the grant money. Our salaries are set by the academic institution. Even if you get a $50 million dollar grant, your salary will not change. I am saying this because I have met with people claiming scientist say there is global warming to get grants, so that they can get rich.

Of course companies like Exon do "pseudoscience" under their so called R&D departments, but can we honestly trust a oil company to make unbiased research on climate change? When you look at scientific data on climate change, look at the number of articles that comes from academic sources. How many academic sources claim climate change is not real?

And what I dont understand is why do we need a spokesman. Science is based on facts, not beliefs. Would anyone disagree with gravity if there is a great spokesman against gravity and would that make gravity unreal. Like Neil deGrasse Tyson said “The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”

Btw, southern hemisphere and Antarctica are also getting warmer. If you average out whole southern hemisphere, it is clearly getting warmer. Southern hemisphere is much more ocean and much less land, so climate there is less prone to extremes. This makes the climate there to appear more stable. Coastal Antarctica is getting warmer, it is not having the same amount of sea-ice around the continent in Antarctic winter. It is true that the interior Antarctica is getting colder but that is mainly because of the shifts in ocean currents and dominant winds due to ocean heating.
First of all I need to apologize, I should of led off with how long have you been studying Global warming, what have you found in your studies, and what are your thoughts on trying to fix/curtail the problem. If you you still feel offended by my statements once again I apologize. Sometimes I get carried away


alton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/22/2017, 10:37 AM   #32
marfuerte
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: LA/Chicago
Posts: 703
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.


marfuerte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/29/2017, 07:36 PM   #33
jubei2006
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Newton, nc
Posts: 41
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


jubei2006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07/31/2017, 12:22 PM   #34
alton
Registered Member
 
alton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by jubei2006 View Post
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
Yesterday we broke a record high for the date of 103 set back in 1946 with a high of 104. And it only took 1,000,000 more people to do it. Looking at records in 1946 San Antonio had 400,000 people, today 1,400,000. The state of Texas had 7,000,000, today Houston and the surrounding area of Houston alone has 7,000,000. As we continue to over populate our pollution, lack of agriculture, and water resources will cause havoc. The highway system between San Antonio and Houston has not changed in 50 years, it is still two lanes in each direction. Thanks Ex-Governor Rick Perry for inviting Millions to come to Texas, while at the same time not doing anything about expanding our roads and protecting our natural resources.


alton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/07/2017, 08:22 PM   #35
sh4rkbyt3
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 109
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.


sh4rkbyt3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/08/2017, 11:25 PM   #36
Punchanello
Registered Member
 
Punchanello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 110
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.
Punchanello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/08/2017, 11:52 PM   #37
Slarti
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThRoewer View Post
Sure, if someone with a cult following makes it a politically divisive issue and tell his his fanatical followers that it's a made-up scheme by their opponents or people they deem inferior...

One actual example of exactly that would be the "Arian Physics" (or "Deutsche Physik") of the Nazis that called among other things Einstein's general relativity a "Jewish hoax" despite the fact that it had already been proven that gravity is acceleration and that a strong enough gravity well can bend light.

And with the right assembly of blind followers you can repeat equally or even more ridiculous things any day of the week...

Just take carbon dating of fossils - you will easily find plenty of people who are dead certain that that is a hoax...

If it fits their world view people are willing to believe everything and wilfully ignore the facts - until they finally hit them in the face.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
You mean like the very active flat earth society?

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.


Slarti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/09/2017, 12:42 AM   #38
Punchanello
Registered Member
 
Punchanello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slarti View Post
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.
That depends on your definition of "empirical evidence" because to my knowledge that is not even a scientific measure. If you use the definition applied by elected Australian senator and resident conspiracy theorist and kook Malcolm Roberts, empirical evidence is a single world changing cosmic "gotcha moment" that that doesn't need any scientific interpretation and can make someone loose control of their bowels.

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.
Punchanello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 03:23 AM   #39
ThRoewer
Registered Member
 
ThRoewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 7,768
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 +...
ThRoewer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 05:30 AM   #40
alton
Registered Member
 
alton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 3,771
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.


alton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 07:23 AM   #41
Punchanello
Registered Member
 
Punchanello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by alton View Post
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.
Controlling our beef and dairy consumption would probably do more good than population control. Cow farts and burps should be next on the hit list after the digging up, transporting and burning fossil fuels much to my Argentine asado loving dismay.

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.
Punchanello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 09:37 AM   #42
alton
Registered Member
 
alton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Zuehl, Texas
Posts: 3,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Punchanello View Post
Controlling our beef and dairy consumption would probably do more good than population control. Cow farts and burps should be next on the hit list after the digging up, transporting and burning fossil fuels much to my Argentine asado loving dismay.

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.
And what do you suggest we eat more vegi's? Oh yea the equipment that plants and harvest vegi's runs on diesel or do you suggest farmers go back to using mules? Oh darn that would produce more methane.


alton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 02:45 PM   #43
Fredfish
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by alton View Post
And what do you suggest we eat more vegi's? Oh yea the equipment that plants and harvest vegi's runs on diesel or do you suggest farmers go back to using mules? Oh darn that would produce more methane.
Beans, which are a good alternative source of proteins, use considerably less resources per calorie produced than any meat product.

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.
Fredfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 03:06 PM   #44
JZinCO
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: northern CO
Posts: 377
edit



Last edited by JZinCO; 08/10/2017 at 04:56 PM.
JZinCO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/10/2017, 07:48 PM   #45
Punchanello
Registered Member
 
Punchanello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by alton View Post
And what do you suggest we eat more vegi's? Oh yea the equipment that plants and harvest vegi's runs on diesel or do you suggest farmers go back to using mules? Oh darn that would produce more methane.
I don't see it as a case of go back to the dark ages vs climate apocalypse. We know that cows for example produce an inordinate amount of methane. Much more than say, the equivalent weight in chickens. There are alternatives which will make a difference that won't turn us in to vegan cave-men. Ihope at least because I loves me darn meat.

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
Punchanello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/15/2017, 10:17 PM   #46
sh4rkbyt3
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Elkton, MD
Posts: 109
Wow, a decade later on here and not much has changed despite the evidence. Luckily their number has shrunk.


sh4rkbyt3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08/16/2017, 11:20 AM   #47
Tripod1404
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 744
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThRoewer View Post
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

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.


Tripod1404 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:21 AM.


TapaTalk Enabled

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2017 Axivo Inc.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef CentralTM Reef Central, LLC. Copyright ©1999-2014