Ocean News

Well, it's odd that you bring up such a man made disaster to bolster your position of anti-environmentalism, but maybe you're coming around! The people who published the first report are dedicated to
"It has lobbied policymakers to do more to address the challenge of climate change, which they say will have a significant impact on the sportsmen community[2] and has teamed with the National Wildlife Federation and Trout Unlimited to form "Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development," which works to preserve natural resources and forests.[3]"

"Without investments of oil spill penalties and funds from state-federal partnership programs, some islands would be little more than subsurface sandbars today."

That kind of deflates your argument though, unless you think that more disasters are better or that two steps back and one step forward are a positive thing. But yeah! Keep getting your information from reliable sources!

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Theodore+Roosevelt+Conservation+Partnership

Your second site is mostly a puff piece of some people spending a few billion dollars of someone else's money, but I'm sure they have done some good. Still...there's just so much evidence saying it isn't so.

Continuing impacts of Deepwater Horizon oil spill: Findings reveal that restoration of marsh vegetation is key to overall recovery https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190419165528.htm
Ten years later, BP oil spill continues to harm wildlife—especially dolphins https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/2020/04/how-is-wildlife-doing-now--ten-years-after-the-deepwater-horizon/
BP paid a steep price for the Gulf oil spill but for the US a decade later, it's business as usual https://theconversation.com/bp-paid-a-steep-price-for-the-gulf-oil-spill-but-for-the-us-a-decade-later-its-business-as-usual-136905

Meanwhile, another oil well has been leaking 100 barrels a day for 14 years.

This Oil Spill Has Been Leaking Into The Gulf For 14 Years https://www.npr.org/2019/04/10/711085901/this-oil-spill-has-been-leaking-into-the-gulf-for-14-years

Also meanwhile, in the time since you tried to derail the discussion with your lock and dam post and declaring that "It's under control.", 5 more football field size pieces of the Louisiana coast have eroded away.

 

if we discounted everything from a biased source ALL your AGW propaganda sites would be suppressed.

Freedom of speech means sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

SAMSAM THINKS "Also meanwhile, in the time since you tried to derail the discussion with your lock and dam post and declaring that "It's under control.", 5 more football field size pieces of the Louisiana coast have eroded away."

Prove it. Your spouting it carries no weight.
https://magicseaweed.com/Louisiana-Mississippi-and-Alabama-Surfing/297/
The most telling factoid for the lack of surf is a glance at pilot charts, which indicate a water depth of less than 35ft (11m) extending for miles offshore. This reflects eons of silting from the vast heartland drainage system that feeds into the Mississippi River, which has choked the muddied waters for miles around the river's delta.

Losing or building coast?

Don't post anything from a corrupted consensus site!

 

Natural Oil 'Spills': Surprising Amount Seeps into the Sea | Live Science https://www.livescience.com/5422-natural-oil-spills-surprising-amount-seeps-sea.html

Natural Oil 'Spills': Surprising Amount Seeps into the Sea

"Nature does an amazing job acting on this oil but somehow the microbes stopped eating, leaving a small fraction of the compounds in the sediments," said study co-author Chris Reddy, a marine chemist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Falmouth, Mass. "Why this happens is still a mystery, but we are getting closer."

This above article is about one seep off coast of California.


Natural Oil Seeps : Oil in the Ocean https://www.whoi.edu/oilinocean/page.do?pid=51880
As much as one half of the oil that enters the coastal environment comes from natural seeps of oil and natural gas. These geologic features are known to occur in clusters around the world, such as off the southern coast of California and in the Gulf of Mexico, but are still relatively unstudied

 

Samsam now doesn't like I posted from a climate change site.
"The people who published the first report are dedicated to
"It has lobbied policymakers to do more to address the challenge of climate change,"

It doesn't matter where a good point originates. But neither am I required to endorse ALL views of some source I agree at least partially with. Frankly I don't know what their climate views are.
And Climate change is in no way synonymous with Anthropogenic climate change
Lots of people believe climate changes without believing humans cause it! A distinction you appear to be confused over!

I am able to make the distinction.

 

Arctic 'shorefast' sea ice threatened by climate change

A study, published in Nature Climate Change, found that by 2100, communities across Northern Canada and Western Greenland could see shorefast ice seasons reduced by anywhere from five to 44 days, with the coldest communities in the study seeing the largest reductions.

For example, the northern Canadian communities of Clyde River and Taloyoak, which are particularly dependent upon shorefast ice for subsistence hunting and fishing, will see some of the most substantial declines in sea ice. On average, these two communities can expect ice to break up 23 to 44 days earlier, respectively by 2100. That could mean "economically and culturally significant activities on the ice will be harder to maintain in the future," the researchers write.

"Shorefast ice is something that's most important from the standpoint of the people who use it," Cooley said. "It has some implications in terms of global climate, but those are fairly small. This is really all about how it affects the people who actually live in the Arctic, and that's why we're studying it."

 

Sam and Yob, keep up the good work, Duty Calls !

 

Your reading comprehension is baffling...

"Well, it's odd that you bring up such a man made disaster to bolster your position of anti-environmentalism, but maybe you're coming around!"
"But yeah! Keep getting your information from reliable sources!"

 

I was wondering something. Yobarnacle is gone for years, supposedly because in this day and age he couldn't afford a computer, which is understandable depending on circumstances. Meanwhile, you disappear also. Yobarnacle recently comes back and about a month later here you are, with a blanked out profile page, under a completely different user name, with an explanation that you, such an accomplished internet information slueth (I mean that, you are good), lost your password to this site and can't find it.?

My conclusion is that while Yobarnacle has gained an ally in his baseless assertions, I don't believe he is capable of successfully hijacking the "Angelique" account. I could be wrong, he does think of himself as almost a genius, and stable geniuses can be shifty and clever in a certain way. Maybe a friend of his has hijacked the account, I don't know. But seeing as how the new A II "personality" is a 180 degree turnaround from the Angelique of past, and since A II's sole aim here seems to be to continually change the topic and shift the discussion of AGW, climate change and their effect on the ocean into endless inanities, my belief is that you are not who you say you are and have appropriated the Angelique account.

So, I plan to ignore you AND Yobarnacle as much as possible, as to me, you two are just trolls for the vast disinformation business infecting the world now.

Meanwhile, climate change and AGW slowly rolls on quickly closing the window of opportunity while humanity dithers away it's chance, naval gazing at it's bank account, abandoning it's children to their fate in the future much the same way as their children are naval gazing at their missed paychecks and abandoning their elders to their fate over the current pandemic.

There’s pink snow in the Alps that looks stunning, but it’s a very bad sign
As humans have gradually warmed the planet, places like the Alps have seen more and more snow melting and not enough new snow to make up for it. Glaciers are dying, and pink snow-covered in tiny algae isn’t as white as fresh snow, meaning it soaks up more and more heat.

You can see where this is going, right?

The more heat the miscolored snow absorbs, the more the snow melts. The more snow that melts, the warmer things get, and more algae blooms. It’s a vicious cycle that inevitably results in huge snow and ice losses, revealing the ground below (which also soaks up far more heat than the snow that was above it), and the planet continually warms. Combined with less new snow than historical trends suggest is “normal,” and you’ve got a recipe for disaster.

There’s pink snow in the Alps that looks stunning, but it’s a very bad sign https://bgr.com/2020/07/08/pink-snow-alps-climate-change/

The biogeography of red snow microbiomes and their role in melting arctic glaciers

The Arctic is melting at an unprecedented rate and key drivers are changes in snow and ice albedo. Here we show that red snow, a common algal habitat blooming after the onset of melting, plays a crucial role in decreasing albedo.

We estimated that the overall decrease in snow albedo by red pigmented snow algal blooms over the course of one melt season can be 13%. This will invariably result in higher melt rates.

The biogeography of red snow microbiomes and their role in melting arctic glaciers | Nature Communications https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms11968

 

I think we live in an age of climate getting warmer, partly due to AGW, and partly due to natural causes, and that humanity in a big effort will find a way out for itself*, while the partly natural causes are out of our reach, but nevertheless also their consequences have to be dealt with, and that much will be lost along the way, and that maybe also something will be gained. (* Just like for example the coastal Louisiana Swamp Rabbits in post #3663, of whom many will have to relocate themselves from the marshes to the inland swamps to survive.)

As for my credibility, I don't care what people think of that, I just post what I for myself thinks to be right, and try to learn from other posters.

 

​

 

Are there any scientific articles you could direct my attention to that would help me understand the natural causes of climate warming?
Thanks

 

Up and down going climate warming and cooling never has been different in the history of the earth, you're smart enough to look up scientific articles about that yourself.

 

Below is a chart showing Earth's temperature for the last 450K years. Sure enough, temperatures go up and temperatures go down.



Looking at the profiles of the high temperatures for the previous five or so cycles in just this chart and then looking at the profile of our current high, if you were to take a WAG, what direction do you think temperatures might be headed in the near future?

Now here is a chart showing temperatures variation for the last 12K years. Note on the right hand axis the most recent temperature variation given, which was for 2016.




Looking at the temperature change shown in the second chart and noting how it has spiked in the last few hundred years:

• What direction did temperatures seem to be headed for the last 8,000 years?
• Why has there been a sudden change in direction?
• And what natural causes do you suppose are contributing to the current temperature spike we're in?

PS
I'd really prefer that you would look up for me those scientific articles on natural causes for global warming. Call me lazy. Call me an ignoramus. Call me less competent of an Internet sleuth than you. Call me curious why you think what you think?

 

anti-environmentalism?
You can't possibly conclude anti-environmentalism from my anti AGW position.
It is wrong and damaging for alarmists to accuse humans of causing climate change.
Humans do cause enough other problems, but they also try to fix those other problems, like polution.
Humans don't cause climate change and there is nothing they can do to alter climate change.
Insisting upon trying to alter climate by human intervention, detracts from and diverts funds , resources, research urgently needed elsewhere.
The most dangerous driving desire, agenda of AGWers, is World Marxism.
Nope! No thanks! Hell NO!

 

Re post #3681: Thanks for looking it up IN, that's why I think climate is now getting warmer more rapidly then before is partly due to AGW and partly due to natural causes, as there was no AGW till recently and it still was going up and down all the time, but at a slower rate than now.