Comments on: Ocean acidification causes US$1trn of damage a year – study

By: chuberry

chuberry — Sat, 18 Apr 2015 15:51:00 +0000

So, if you’re going to throw numbers at us such as acidity has increased by 26% since pre-industrial times give us the hard numbers. What was the acidity level 200 years ago? What is it now?

AND while you’re at it, how on earth do you know what the acidity was of the oceans 200 years ago? Did you derive the precise measurement by making a bunch of theoretical guesses and then back tracking to what it ‘must’ have been? I’d like to see your exact methodology to determine the pre-industrial acidity level of oceans.

I’m thinking that NOBODY can determine this.

And of course, I question the statement that 400,000,000 people depend on the coral reefs for their livelihood.

And…. it’s costing the world $1T a year? How do they get THAT number?

I’m thinking this is a total BS article.

By: Rich Balance

Rich Balance — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 20:25:00 +0000

The oceans are perfectly fine, however, I can’t say as much for anyone who would write such a silly article.

By: GuyBB

GuyBB — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:32:00 +0000

Oh, did my argument, that the real problem are the liberal idiots spending at a rate that made Bloomberg’s prediction of 100 billion dollars/year in economic impact look minuscule, make you rethink the entire scale of the problem? I pointed out, heck at the rate the Obama administration is spending, we could write a check, and barely notice.

Still, if the models failed to predict the heat would go into that huge heat sink, that covers 70% of the earth’s surface, that has 10,000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere, it totally invalidates the models doesn’t it? I think a motivated group of sophomores could do a better job. In a weekend. If the beer is free.

If you want anyone to take your “science” seriously, show us the funding statistics. If 97% of the Federal grants have been in support of AGW? Is it any wonder that a high percentage of the published articles support it? If, in three decades of trying, this is the best they can do with 100 billion dollars worth of funding, maybe we need a whole new group to look at the “problem”.