Is the ocean broken?

Warming waters reducing food supply was responsible for the Right Whales fleeing the Gulf of Mexico in 2010? Not a very knowledgeable conclusion considering a much more likely cause.
Search Results
Featured snippet from the web
On April 20, 2010, the oil drilling rig Deepwater Horizon, operating in the Macondo Prospect in the Gulf of Mexico, exploded and sank.

The oil spill was massive and catastrophic. AGWers are obsessed with their nonsense narrative ignoring rational thinking or incapable of it.. No credibility.

 

??

Are we still having trouble with our reading skills?

 

Gulf of Maine not Gulf of Mexico. Mind trick. My screen is very small.

 

Economists Are Vastly Underestimating the Economic Impact of Climate Change

• The effects of Climate Change will continue for decades, possibly centuries, to come with dramatic increases in extreme weather events, such as heat waves, forest fires, hurricanes, flooding, ice melts and sea level rises
  
• However, economists say that the impact of all this climate change is likely to be minimal, with damages as low as 2.1 percent of global economic production for a 3◦C rise in global average surface temperature, and 7.9 percent for a 6◦C rise
  
• A new team of economists has examined the approach that economists have taken in the past and say it is riddled with misconceptions and lacking in a basic understanding of climate science
  
• For example, past economists have not taken into account the existence of tipping points in which climate subsystems switch from one state to another, often in ways that cannot easily be reversed
• Another mistaken assumption is that climate change will influence just a small part of the economy
  
• A third mistaken assumption is that when some regions become agriculturally less productive, an equal area will become more productive

The study can be read here.

 

The question and controversy is are humans causing climate change. Opinions and convictions, even sincere belief are not proof. Humans are innocent of causing climate change until proved guilty. Remember, do unto others as you want to be treated. What goes around, inevitably comes around to bite your arse.

 

Are you familiar with the Communist Control Act of 1054? Still on the books, still federal law,, just needs enforcing.

 

You are mistaken if you think that the question is subject to the legal principle of "innocent until proven guilty.". Mother Nature has no such concept. All she cares about are the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology.

 

You're pretty desperate to be coughing up that hairball...

Communist Control Act of 1954
Controversy
There was much controversy surrounding the Act. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and its Director, J. Edgar Hoover, opposed the bill on the count that it would have forced the Communist movement underground.[2] In addition, the Michigan Law Review argued that the politically charged Act was plagued by a number of constitutional problems which would have undermined its effectiveness.[4] The Yale Law Journal lauded the Act as the "most direct statutory attack on internal communism yet undertaken [by 1955] by Congress,"[5] but stressed the "haste and confusion of the Act’s passage" which led to many "vague and ambiguous provisions."[5] The incongruity of its provisions, a grave constitutional defect, was in part attributed to obscure language. For example, the nature of the "rights, privileges, and immunities" to be terminated by the Act was never explicitly stated as relating to state or federal jurisdiction. Also, the Yale Law Journal underlined a number of instances during which a literal interpretation of key passages would have caused entire sections to fall because of the use of comprehensive, unspecific language.[5] McAuliffe notes that, because of these complications, the Act was never "used as a major weapon in the legislative arsenal against Communism," apart from two minor cases in the states of New York and New Jersey.[2]

 

climate change is not evidence humans cause it because existence of a murder victim doesn't imply you killed them.

You're justified to worry the CCA might well be applied to the blatant, flagrant, propagandizing Marxists infesting our country, colleges, and government.. You remark the CCA WOULD have done this or that thing or violated whatever. Would? It passed, it's law.

Whatever is law, IS, not would have been. But! Like so many other laws, immigration laws are an example, the government personnel refuses to enforce or follow laws they don't like and they set a horrible example for the citizens to likewise ignore any laws we personally disagree with. That's why the system is broken, because the officials are unlawful, laws unto themselves and won't do what they are hired for and sworn to do.

Why would you administer a holy oath, calling on God to witness, hand on the Bible, to someone who scoffs at the existence of God? You know they are lying.and their oath means nothing to them. Their word has no value even to them. Just a meaningless formality.

Better, have them swear by their gonads, forfeit if they break their oath. Nah! That won't work for half or more of citizens.

Swear by their eyes and tongues, forfeit if oath is broken. That might generate some integrity if enforced and televised! Nah, the media would ignore it or cover it up.

Only solution is, well, it's obvious. Remove self-serving, control-freak temptations from public service. Minimalist government with people of integrity elected in a few essential but restricted power impossible to power grab, term limited positions. Bad actors won't want those non-career temporary menial public servant jobs. Won't attract good people either? You think government service attracts the best and brightest now?

Let the States run the states as designed in the Constitution. Feds run the wars and defend the borders. Florida is bigger than Itally, Texas larger than France. Big enough, rich enough, diverse enough, to run themselves and already better managed than the feds manage much smaller totally ****** up D.C...

 

A few posts back you were lamenting the lack of freshwater and I meant to post this article but was distracted by other incendiary remarks.

Solar still for saline water desalination for low-income coastal areas - Applied Water Science https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13201-019-0986-9

A solar solution we may soon need to use in Florida because of saltwater intrusion into the water table/

 

The blue-staters fleeing to Florida will only increase the demand for fresh water, which will lead to more salt water intrusion and land subsidence. Maybe we'll pick up more seats in Congress.

 

How much of the world’s oil needs to stay in the ground?

• To give us a 50% chance of keeping global heating below 1.5C, 90% of coal and 60% of oil and gas reserves can not be extracted
  
• Oil, gas and coal production must peak immediately and decline at 3% a year from now
  
• This implies that trillions of dollars of fossil fuel assets could become worthless
  
• The US, Russia and the former Soviet states have half of global coal reserves but will need to keep 97% in the ground, while the figure for Australia is 95%. China and India have about a quarter of global coal reserves, and will need to keep 76% in the ground
• Middle Eastern states have more than half the world oil reserves but will need to keep almost two-thirds in the ground, while 83% of Canada’s oil from tar sands must not be extracted
• Virtually all unconventional oil or gas, such as from fracking, must remain in the ground and no fossil fuels at all can be extracted from the Arctic

The study was published in Nature

 

Bull. The oil was put there for us to use and whether we use it or not, it will eventually be consumed by fire. Oil burned long before the first oil well was drilled.

 

The world’s biggest plant to capture CO2 from the air just opened in Iceland

• Climeworks has opened a plant in Icelandic that sucks up to 4,000 tons of CO2 out of the air per year
• That's the equivalent of the annual emissions from about 780 cars
• The isolated carbon is then mixed with water and pumped deep underground, where it slowly turns into rock
• Costs are high: about $600 to $800 per metric ton of carbon dioxide, far from the $100 to $150 per ton that are necessary to turn a profit
• By 2030 they expect costs to be around $200 to $300 per ton, and by late 2030s half that
• The state of California subsidizes electric cars around $450 to $500 per ton of carbon emissions saved over the course of a vehicle’s expected life

 

Do you ever promote a "solution" to a real or imaginary problem that isn't designed to squander our wealth and bankrupt us?