Is the ocean broken?

It can happen today, or over 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 years or more, humanity still hasn't a beginning of a clue of what the earth does.

 

No, not at all.

You seem skeptical that ocean warming is what's harming corals. Instead, you suggest that it is the heat from volcanoes that is over-heating corals, and offer as an example the Hawaiian Islands. I noted that it's not (only?) reefs near active volcanoes that are bleaching, but rather those reefs on the long-dead volcanic islands of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands that are hundreds or thousand miles away from the active volcanoes on the island of Hawaii. This suggests to me that it is not heat from volcanoes that is causing Hawaiian coral bleaching, but rather something more widespread.

No, most coral does appear to be temperature sensitive. It's only corals found in the Red Sea that seem to be unusually tolerant of high temperatures.

 

Humanity is even fooled by Moose about it, as I've linked on a now forbidden thread in post #136, now people think they've figured those Moose out, not a start of a clue, but yet it's all we have.

 

If Krakatoa can't break the ocean, we can't either. The Yucatan asteroid didn't break it either, but it bent it pretty badly.

 

I'm afraid I have miscommunicated my meaning. I was finding your original post about coral studies in the Red Sea to make sense and was using the proximity of coral reefs to volcanic activity as an example of healthy coral systems that DON'T appear to be temperature sensitive. I was trying to suggest that because coral can flourish in areas that have undergone local temperature rise due to volcanic activity, we can look for other explanations for failing coral health.
Sorry for the lack of clarity.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

Oh, the humanatee!

Boaters broke the record for killing manatees in 2019

Boaters broke the record for killing manatees in 2019 https://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/2019/12/28/boaters-broke-the-record-for-killing-manatees-in-2019/

 

Don't get me started.

 

I quoted your words sans the art work. Displayed twice in sequential posts unnecessary.

 

Thank you for your patience in explaining your ideas.

If it were commonplace for corals to continue to be healthy in unusually warm water then there would be no need to do a study and write papers about the atypical corals found in the Red Sea. Nor would they go to the trouble of trying to transplant those corals to other locations to see if they would grow there. However, if you think your idea has merit it should be relatively easy to find out what the exact water temperatures are at various coral reefs worldwide. I'm sure temperature is one of the important variables that are recorded wherever scientists study coral reefs.

The geological record implies that corals have existed in much warmer waters than we are now experiencing. Also, corals have existed in much more acidic (or less basic) waters than occur now. The difference between now and then is that the rate of change was much slower back then, which gave organisms time to evolve and adapt. The changes that are happening now are much too fast for many life forms to adapt.

 

Right Yob, correct quoted and no action needed there, my additional post was just meant to notify you about the two text enlargements in my previous post #56 after you quoted it.

The added bottom line beneath the painting is about Munch named the painting as a scream of nature, after the phenomenon that he saw and displayed. By the common shortening of the title by so called art connoisseurs the shortened title is now often wrongly interpret as the painting being about a scream of the central figure, while Munch himself explicitly named it as a scream of the displayed nature.

The central figure in the painting was impressed by the seen natural phenomenon and was possibly inspired by a Peruvian mummy on the 1889 Exposition Universelle World's Fair in Paris, of which an anatomical wax model is displayed at the La Specola museum of zoology and natural history in Florence, Italy.

​

Note also the square riggers in the background of the painting, I would like to know which ships they are, but art connoisseurs can't tell me.

 

that japanese tanker that has run aground at Mauritius is going to destroy a lot of the ocean environment around their coastline. 4000 tons of crude leaking out through cracks in hull. how in 2020 are tankers still running aground. the crews must be idiots with all the technology they have to avoid these disasters.

 

Sometimes I think I am in the midst of 1d10ts. At other times I realize it isn't just sometimes.

 

i just don't see how these accidents keep happening with all the technology available. only 4000 tons of oil sounds like a freighter with ruptured fuel tanks not a tanker as reported in the news.

 

MV Wakashio ran aground on a coral reef off the Indian Ocean island on 25 July and its crew was evacuated.

But the large bulk carrier has since begun leaking tons of fuel into the surrounding waters.

France has pledged support and the ship's owner said it was working to combat the spill.

Mauritius Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth declared the state of emergency late on Friday.

He said the nation did not have "the skills and expertise to refloat stranded ships" as he appealed to France for help.

The French island of Reunion lies near Mauritius in the Indian Ocean. Mauritius is home to world-renowned coral reefs, and tourism is a crucial part of the nation's economy.

In a statement, the ship's owner, Nagashiki Shipping, said that "due to the bad weather and constant pounding over the past few days, the starboard side bunker tank of the vessel has been breached and an amount of fuel oil has escaped into the sea".

"Oil prevention measures are in place and an oil boom has been deployed around the vessel," it said.


Mauritius declares emergency as ship leaks oil https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53702877

 

Canada's last fully intact Arctic ice shelf collapses