Ocean News

No thanks, now I only have to quote myself to tell you why I was adding to the quotes yourselves brought up on this thread about Ocean News . .

 

You must be lonely ha ha ha ha to worry about nothing

 

Now I have to agree, if I worry about what you post here then it's just about nothing . .

 

Since this thread is about Ocean News, veganism is off topic! Take it to a vegan forum, Myark.

 

That's great now you can move on, Bye

 

Your Bible banging, paranoid politics and delusions are off topic, eating no fish will help restore fish in ocean

 

Angelique is doing GREAT. Understandable why you wish she'd go away. You aren't doing very well.

 

Good for her as I am not a nitpicker

 

That ain't true, I'll stay for the posts of others, and if I choose to I'll have the option to wash your ears about untruths you post here . .

 

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you make me laugh

 

Having fun is an important thing in life, so I'm glad to have improved your quality of live here . .

 

"eating no fish will help restore fish in ocean"
Fish are used in many products, including livestock feed, paint, cosmetics, ect.
So eliminating fish as a food source probably would only mean species currently more valuable sold as sea food, would just become fishmeal.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/08/this-is-your-brain-on-fish/375638/
"If you eat fish just once a week, your hippocampus—the big memory and learning center—is 14 percent larger than in people who don't eat fish that frequently. 14 percent. That has implications for reducing Alzheimer's risk," Raji said. "If you have a stronger hippocampus, your risk of Alzheimer's is going to go down."

"In the orbital frontal cortex, which controls executive function, it's a solid 4 percent," Raji said. "I don't know of any drug or supplement that's been shown to do that."

"Something about fish consumption, whatever it is, is strengthening to the brain," Raji said. "It's also possible that we're capturing a general lifestyle effect—that there's something else out there we're not measuring that's accounting for this."

For example, people who ate fish might also eat more tartar sauce, and it might actually be that tartar sauce was responsible here. Though that's unlikely. The researchers did control for obesity, physical activity, education, age, gender, race, and every other variable they could think of, and fish-eating itself remained a strong predictor of gray matter volume. "


Maybe you should try some?
Maybe there would be less picking on the nitwit!

 

Quote
The blizzard of 2016 was influenced by manmade global warming
http://mashable.com/2016/01/26/blizzard-2016-global-warming/

The blizzard of 2016 was an exceptional storm that broke all-time snowfall records in multiple locations. Yet for many people it hit, this storm was not a complete shock; a string of severe winter storms have slammed the East Coast in recent years.

This could be random chance, since the atmosphere does tend to unleash more major winter storms during some decades compared to others. Or it could be due to another factor: Manmade global warming could be tilting the scale in favor of exceptional snowfall outcomes. Many scientists are beginning to suspect that this is the case.

East Coast snowstorms are more common even as the world warms

Studies have shown that there's a trend in the Northeast toward more frequent heavy snowstorms, even as average winter temperatures are increasing, in keeping with global warming.

Severe snowstorms are about twice as likely to occur in the Northeast and Southeast during El Niño winters compared to years when there is no El Niño or La Niña present in the Pacific Ocean, Lawrimore said.

"It is to be determined the role that factors such as ocean surface temperatures, the influence of El Niño, conditions in the Arctic, and other factors have had on the severity of this week’s snowstorm," he said.
Gulf Stream slowdown?

A more novel idea of what's behind the increase in blockbuster East Coast snowstorms is the slowing down of the Gulf Stream current, which is formally known as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC). Studies show that the Gulf Stream may be slowing down due in part to glacier melt runoff from Greenland.

This freshwater is less dense than the salty waters of the North Atlantic, and it tends to sit on the surface of the sea, rather than sinking to deeper depths as denser, saltier waters do in this area.

The AMOC involves the northward movement of warm, salty water in the upper layers of the Atlantic, as well as the southward return flow of cold, dense water in the deep Atlantic. It is sometimes known as the "Global Conveyor Belt."

This conveyor belt can weaken if enough freshwater is added in just the right place, since it would reduce the return flow of dense water, like a person slowing down the turning of a hand crank.

"The warm sea surface temperatures are not just some short-term anomaly but are part of a long-term observed warming trend, in which ocean temperatures off the U.S. East Coast are warming faster than global average temperatures," Rahmstorf wrote.

Rahmstorf is a co-author of a 2014 paper in the journal Nature Climate Change that found evidence of a significant slowdown in the Gulf Stream. A study published earlier this year found that high-resolution climate models project that — in large part because of the slowing Gulf Stream — the waters off the East Coast could warm nearly three times faster than the global average during the next several decades.

 

"turning of a hand crank"

Ah! A CRANK hypothesis!
Where I live, we call it BS.

How much warming in the ocean? Argos 3000 thermometers measured 5/thousandths of a degree warming annually, when that is also the error in the instruments.
And that slows the gulf stream and causes blizzards. !

 

Who says it's actually ash, as in the remains of something burnt? It looks like powdery soil, it also looks like natural geological formations, not temples and such. What proof do you offer that it is actually ash?

Maybe that's why archaeologists are not excavating the site, it's just rock and there are no indications of human inhabitation. Maybe they ultimately rejected the notion that it was a city of buildings that had been turned to ash.

Again, your whole argument is based on this being ash. Can you offer some proof?

Isn't this your territory, attributing all things you don't understand to an apocryphal creator?

Is it acceptable to use the bible as bona-fide proof of such things?