Ocean News

A favorite slogan.
"I am certain you believe you understand what I said (or posted), but I am unsure if you are aware, that what you heard, (or read) ,is NOT what I meant!"

 

I understand statistics and how they can be looked at in different ways, often misleading, like words.

Like when yobarnacle says "The silly notion that the less than five percent of atmospheric CO2 contributed by humans, somehow, overides all the other climate factors and is solely responsible for Climate Change, is STUPID!"

He avoids the fact natural CO2 inputs and outputs are (were) balanced, and the extra 5% per year anthropological outputs are in addition to the balanced natural cycle. They have nowhere to go but the air and water, so they accumulate. As we burn more and more fossil fuels and eliminate more and more carbon sinks such as forests etc, we go from 280 PPM CO2 in the air to 416 PPM. The atmosphere warms up. The oceans absorb a large amount of the excess CO2 and become more acidic. They also absorb heat from the air and become warmer.

So his statistics are wonky, his words are wonky, but still, he calls others STUPID!

Going back to this quote of his (actually he's paraphrasing what you said, which I'm sure you appreciate)

"Simple. Regulations and politics adversely affect fish production.
It's not a lack of fish, but an over abundance of interference."

I take that to mean, (coming from him) is that regulations are bad for fisheries (and fish stocks), and that there are plenty of fish, the problem is interference in fisheries by politicians. What's needed is Freedom! and Liberty! for fish and fisherman.

From you, I see where you rejected the second part, but agreed Exactly! with the first part. If the sentence was amended to "Regulations and politics adversely affect fish production statistics", would that be closer to what you meant?

 

I do try and not respond to you, but I'm not all that successful. What I mean to say is I don't pay much attention to the stuff you post as facts, because they aren't.

But, it's not my thread to ask you to go off somewhere else, I don't think it works like that here anyways. But yeah, keep posting your garbage, Popeye, you'll manage to get the thread closed down like you want, since it's the only way for you to "win".

Meanwhile, maybe you could make a nice donation to Greta's 'Kid's Rights' foundation which she set up a few years ago from another monetary award she passed onward.

2019 - Greta Thunberg (16), Sweden - KidsRights Foundation https://kidsrights.org/advocacy/international-childrens-peace-prize/winners/greta-thunberg/

 

Illuminating dark fishing fleets in North Korea

Abstract
Illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing threatens resource sustainability and equity. A major challenge with such activity is that most fishing vessels do not broadcast their positions and are “dark” in public monitoring systems. Combining four satellite technologies, we identify widespread illegal fishing by dark fleets in the waters between the Koreas, Japan, and Russia. We find >900 vessels of Chinese origin in 2017 and >700 in 2018 fished illegally in North Korean waters, catching an estimated amount of Todarodes pacificus approximating that of Japan and South Korea combined (>164,000 metric tons worth >$440 million). We further find ~3000 small-scale North Korean vessels fished, mostly illegally, in Russian waters. These results can inform independent oversight of transboundary fisheries and foreshadow a new era in satellite monitoring of fisheries.

INTRODUCTION
In October 2018, world leaders pledged more than $10 billion to protect the world’s oceans (1). A major objective of this initiative is to reduce illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing, which results in the loss of billions of dollars, threatens fish stocks and marine ecosystems, and jeopardizes the livelihoods and food security of legitimate fishers and communities (2). IUU fishing, however, is often conducted by “dark fleets”—vessels that do not appear in public monitoring systems (3, 4)—and is therefore difficult to monitor and enforce (5). Although many dark vessels operate legally and broadcast their positions on country-mandated vessel monitoring systems, these data are often tightly guarded, limiting usability for third-party oversight or transboundary management. Revealing the activities of dark vessels could address this information gap, improving transparency and accountability.
........

Illuminating dark fishing fleets in North Korea https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/30/eabb1197

 

Jesus, pretty convoluted. You have a slogan, I have a motto, "Make yourself useful."

 

I make myself useful in many ways. One of, is posting the truth on this thread so you AGW alarmist types don't confuse people.

 

The 95% natural and the 5% human contibutiion are the same stuff. If any CO2 is being retained, only 5% is contributed by humsns. 95% of whatever is being retained is natural CO2.
You cannot separate the CO2 humans produce and say it does something the other 95% doesn't.
That idea is fantastically stupid.

 

Study: 900 Chinese Vessels Violate Sanctions to Fish off North Korea

Study: 900 Chinese Vessels Violate Sanctions to Fish off North Korea https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/study-chinese-vessels-violate-sanctions-to-fish-in-north-korea

 

North Korea also used to rent out slaves* to work in shipyards in Eastern Europe, don't know if that really has stopped by now.

(* their extended families at home are held hostage by the regime, so they usually don't run and don't talk.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The New York Times - Dec. 31, 2017

- Even in Poland, Workers’ Wages Flow to North Korea

‘‘ A shipyard (pic) in Police, Poland, where North Koreans have worked. The Polish government has pledged to phase out work permits for North Koreans, but the practice continues. . . . . . . . . . ’’

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Deutsche Welle - Feb. 14, 2019

- Dutch shipbuilder in dock over North Korean's Polish slave claims

‘‘ A North Korean man is suing a Dutch shipbuilder he accuses of profiting from slave labor when he was employed in a Polish shipyard. The first case of its kind, his lawyers hope it will open up more such cases. . . . . . . . . . ’’





- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

NK (North Korea) News - Dec. 26, 2019 - - (about NK News)

- As sanctions kick in, Poland says its North Korean workers have all gone home

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Arirang News - Dec. 11, 2019 - - (Arirang News — about)

 

Not quite. I reject the assertion that there's no lack of fish, of course. You are correct about that. The part that seems to be confusing is about the roll of regulations in statistics.

What I'm trying to say is that, if it were the 1950s and regulations were minimal, a fishing fleet would want to maximize its catch, so it would use the most productive method of catching fish that it could. In yobarnacle's example, it was the gill net. By the 1970s, let's say, the gill net has been banned. Along with that restriction, other restrictions have also been added. These might include: limiting vessel tonnage, where they are allowed to fish, season and size limits may also have been imposed. The fleet, of course, must comply to remain legal.

Then along comes some census takers who count the catch being brought in. They want to know what the annual fleet production is.

These census takes then go back to their offices and crunch the numbers. They find that fleet production is drastically down from its heyday in the 1950s. What's wrong? Why aren't they catching as many fish as they once were? Is it that fisheries are depleted or is there more to it than that?

The fleet is basically not allowed to catch as many fish as they could because of the regulations, not because the fish aren't there.

"Fish production" doesn't refer to the growth of the fishery, it refers to the amount of fish the fleet is catching, their production.

To be clear, I believe fisheries are down, but the reason we see lower production from our fishing fleets is because they are not allowed to fish with abandon. I make no judgement here about whether that is good or bad, just that it is misleading to use fleet production numbers as a gauge of the health of our fisheries. It's bad science.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

Are you sure it's the science that's bad, or the reporting of the science that's bad?

 

Phytoplankton Blooms in the Southern Ocean Can Potentially Impact Climate Change

Phytoplankton is the microscopic single-celled photosynthetic organism that drifts and blooms in the top layer of the world’s oceans forming a key part of the world ocean ecosystem. These phytoplankton can be rightly called as the lung of our planet because of their ability to remove almost half of the carbon dioxide produced in the world due to various human activities like burning of fossil fuels that gets dissolved from atmosphere to the oceans.

There are unprecedented phytoplankton blooms in the Maud Rise polynya, Southern Ocean, with high concentration of ‘chlorophyll a’ during 2017. The bloom appeared for the first time in the satellite record available since 1978.

For the past 50 years, the loss of ice shelves and glacier retreat around the Antarctic Peninsula have increased. However, at the same time this resulted in the occurrence of open water surrounded by ice in Arctic and Antarctic, which are called as ice holes or polynyas. These polynyas can enhance the ‘chlorophyll a’ concentration due to the increase in surface area of new open waters during the growth season of the phytoplankton in Southern Ocean.

During the study, NCPOR scientists observed that due to maximum supply of nutrients into the upper ocean through Ekman upwelling (driven by wind stress curl and cyclonic ocean eddies) and due to improved light conditions in austral spring (October– November 2017), conditions became favourable for the phytoplankton photosynthesis and their growth. With similar conditions prevailing in the Southern Ocean polynya system, with access to sunlight and nutrients, phytoplankton can bloom in numbers of millions of cells per litre of seawater. The study suggests that the occurrence of phytoplankton bloom in Maud Rise polynya may turn it into a potential sink of atmospheric carbon dioxide through biological pumping and convert it into carbon and energy for the essential base of the marine food web. A portion of this would again circulate back to the surface because of ocean currents fueling another phytoplankton bloom cycle.

This study has been published in The Cryosphere Journal.

 

This part is bad science. Whomever it was who used fleet production trends to make health statements about world fisheries is practicing bad science.

It seems likely this was actually put together by lobbyists and not actual scientists, but I only know that the conclusion, as presented by the reporter, is bad science.

However, to use historical data to found generalized statements upon, there are no shortage of examples where intelligent and dedicated first class scientists came to conclusions based on misleading statistics. My smoking Alzheimer's patients is one such example.

Somewhat along these lines, I found this article interesting: Scientific American article: “How to Misinterpret Climate Change Research” https://www.google.com/amp/s/climateaudit.org/2015/04/24/scientific-american-article-how-to-misinterpret-climate-change-research/amp/

Apparently, Scientific America and other science reporting media, misinterpreted/misunderstood or distorted some of the science around climate. They corrected their mistake and appended this note at the end of their reprint:
"“Correction: A previous version of this story did not accurately reflect Lewis’ work. Lewis used Stevens’ study in an analysis that was used by some media outlets to throw doubt on global warming.“

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

I appreciate that reputable scientists, reputable scientific journals, and reputable news organizations make honest attempts to communicate clearly and accurately. I also appreciate that when the inevitable mistake occurs they are also willing to correct their error. These are characteristics that I wish were more widely adopted.

 

If you don't want to setup double standards, then you have to apply this to yourself AND to the very corrupt foundation of human made CO2 is responsible for climate change. The IPCC.

UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level
Written by Alex Newman

STOCKHOLM, Sweden — The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) is misleading humanity about climate change and sea levels, a leading expert on sea levels who served on the UN IPCC told The New American. In fact, it is more likely that sea levels will decline, not rise, explained Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, the retired head of the paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University. A new solar-driven cooling period is not far off, he said. But when Mörner tried to warn the UN IPCC that it was publishing false information that would inevitably be discredited, they simply ignored him. And so, dismayed, he resigned in disgust and decided to blow the whistle.

Asked if coastal cities such as Miami would be flooding due to sea-level rise caused by alleged man-made global warming, Mörner was unequivocal: “Absolutely not.” “There is no rapid sea-level rise going on today, and there will not be,” he said, citing observable data. “On the contrary, if anything happens, the sea will go down a little.” The widely respected scientist, who has been tracking sea levels in various parts of the globe for some 50 years, blasted those who use incorrect “correction factors” in their data to make it appear that seas are rising worldwide. That is just wrong, he said.

Indeed, even speaking of something called “global sea level” is highly misleading, the expert explained. “It is different in different parts of the world,” Mörner said, noting that sea levels can rise in one part of the world and decline in another depending on a variety of factors. For instance, the interview took place right next to an 18th-century Baltic sea-level marker in Saltsjöbaden near Stockholm that showed the Baltic sea level at the time it was made. Because the ground is rising, the marking is now higher up from sea level than it was when it was made. Mörner has personally been measuring and tracking sea levels in equatorial regions of the world — Bangladesh, the Maldives, Southern India, New Caledonia, Fiji, and beyond.

Mörner's conclusion is that solar activity and its effects on the globe have been the “dominant factor” in what happens to both the climate and the seas. Meanwhile, the UN claims the current changes in climate and sea level are attributable to human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). Man’s emissions of this essential gas, required by plants and exhaled by people, makes up a fraction of one percent of all so-called greenhouse gases present naturally in the atmosphere. “Absolutely not,” Mörner said about the CO2 argument, noting there was “something basically sick” in the blame-CO2 hypothesis. “CO2, if it has any effect, it is minute — it does not matter. What has a big effect is the sun.”

Obviously, while he was serving on the UN IPCC, Mörner tried to warn his colleagues on the UN body that the politically backed hypothesis about CO2 driving temperature changes, and the subsequent claims regarding dangerous sea-level rise, were totally incorrect. “They just ignored what I was saying,” he recounted. “If they were clever — if they had facts on their hands — they could show that, 'no, you're wrong.' But that is not the case. They just will not discuss it. I will try to discuss it. I will show with their own data that they are wrong. Because in science, we discuss. We don't forbid or neglect.”

When asked about the frequently repeated (and easily debunked) claims of an alleged 97-percent consensus supporting the man-made global-warming hypothesis, Mörner said it was simply not true — and even if it were, it would be irrelevant. “Why does anybody say something when it is not correct?” he asked. “They say it because they have applied excellent lobbyists. They are working with lobbyists in their hand; 'say this, do that.' We don't do that.” In the field of physics, Mörner estimated that 80 to 90 percent of physicists know the hypothesis is wrong. And among geologists and astronomers, he said probably 80 percent know it is wrong.

“They claim that there are 97 percent who are for it,” Mörner said. “I claim that it is 97 percent of scientific facts against them.”

Quoting Galileo, the 80-year-old Swedish scientist also slammed the shady tactics used by climate alarmists and the lobbyists they work with to suppress the real facts and demonize those who contradict their alarmist narrative. “If you write an excellent paper in a peer-reviewed journal, but they don't like it, they write to the journal and tell them they cannot write things like that, it's against the general consensus,” said Mörner, who has published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on a wide range of scientific subjects. “They even put those journals on a black list. This is a shady thing going on. We don't work like that in real science.”

Instead of science, Mörner suspects that the behind-the-scenes promoters of the man-made warming hypothesis have dark, ulterior motives. “I think the ultimate thing is that they want a government for the whole globe, and that is a weird idea,” Mörner said, criticizing the Rockefeller dynasty and global efforts to keep developing countries from developing under the guise of saving the climate. “This is the hope of controlling everything. It is autocracy. It is really bad. Nobody should rule like that. But everybody has had these strange dreams — small countries of being larger, and empires wanting to be super-empires, and then they collapse. We have a whole history full of that. This globalism is a dangerous thing.”

By putting so much emphasis on climate alarmism and the alleged dangers of CO2, meanwhile, Mörner said the UN has diverted resources and attention away from “all the real problems” of the world that really do exist. “This is a terrible thing, this is the terrible thing,” he said. It is especially sad because “the world is full of real problems” such as hunger, starvation, killings, natural disasters, diseases, and so much more, he said. Yet because of the incessant focus on demonizing CO2 and trying to control “climate,” those very real problems get ignored.

Speaking of the UN's “climate” process, Mörner was pleased with Trump's actions so far, which include announcing that the U.S. government would be withdrawing from the highly controversial UN Paris Agreement. He urged the Trump administration to “forget about” the whole UN climate agenda “because that is nonsense, and you have very carefully and cleverly understood that.” However, he also urged Trump to be empathetic and willing to discuss the climate issue. “It is very simple for us to discuss it, because we really have the facts, they have their models,” Mörner said. “And facts are better than models.”

Dr. William Happer, a world-renown physicist from Princeton University who has advised President Trump on climate issues, also denounced warming alarmism and the demonization of CO2. In an interview with The New American at a climate-skeptic summit put together by Freedom Force International, Professor Happer said there was nothing to worry about from alleged man-made global warming or human emissions of the gas of life. “CO2 will be good for the Earth,” Happer said, adding that CO2 levels were unusually and extremely low by historical standards. “More would be a very good thing.”

Mörner, meanwhile, cautioned promoters of the man-made warming hypothesis that they were going to ultimately be exposed, with catastrophic consequences for the scientific community. “This is so unscientific,” he said, condemning climatologists for ignoring facts that contradict their climate models. “And that is a terrible thing, this unscientific part of it. Because one day, it will all be revealed as nonsense. And then we lose our trustworthiness.” The data will not change, he said. And it is clear. If nothing else, when the next cooling phase begins — “everything points to that we are going into a new so-called grand solar minimum and that is in the middle of this century, maybe even as early as 2030” — then everybody will realize how wrong the warmists have been. That is when the “rats will leave the sinking ship,” he said.

But Mörner still expressed sympathy with those who have been duped into believing they are saving the planet by fighting CO2. “Of course, everybody wants to believe in something,” he said. “All those people who don't know what they are talking about, but they believe that they are saving the world. We don't save the world, the world will keep on going.”

It is even worse than that, though. “This is the most dangerous and frightening part of it: How such a lobbyist group has been able to fool the whole world,” he concluded, comparing it to how National Socialists in Germany and communists in both Russia and China were able to deceive the populations and seize power. Blasting the “autocratic process,” he said these organized and deceitful forces were “so dangerous.” He also expressed shock that the UN and governments would parade children around at UN climate summits. “What do they know? They are very nice, all of them, but they should be out playing, not talking at the United Nations,” he said, criticizing as “a little evil” that children would be used as propaganda props. “That is an insult to science.”

Despite the warnings of Mörner and numerous other highly respected scientists around the world, including others who have served on the UN IPCC, the UN IPCC and the broader UN continue to sound the alarm over allegedly looming temperature increases and sea-level rises that will flood coastal cities around the world. Now they say there are just 12 years left to save the planet. They typically refuse to debate, too. The New American reached out to the IPCC for comment repeatedly during the recent UN COP24 “climate” summit in Katowice, Poland. However, the organization did not respond to e-mails, phone calls, or visits to the IPCC booth at the climate summit seeking comment.

UN IPCC Scientist Blows Whistle on Lies About Climate, Sea Level https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/31472-un-ipcc-scientist-blows-whistle-on-un-climate-lies