West Coast Salmon Vulnerable to Climate Change, but Some Show Resilience to Shifting Environment
- Thread starter agentaqua
- Start date
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
There is enough evidence out there that shows all the pink hatcherys are having a negative impact.
Ocean warming has fisheries on the move, helping some but hurting more
http://theconversation.com/ocean-wa...the-move-helping-some-but-hurting-more-116248
http://theconversation.com/ocean-wa...the-move-helping-some-but-hurting-more-116248
TO BE CLEAR - movement of the pole is NOT THE CAUSE of global warming. Greenhouse gas emissions are.
However, the melting of the ice caps - esp. in Greenland & the Antarctic could cause a shift in weight/gravity on a global bases - and that could shift geographic poles slightly.
Then the Magnetic pole is moving erratically, as well...
However, the melting of the ice caps - esp. in Greenland & the Antarctic could cause a shift in weight/gravity on a global bases - and that could shift geographic poles slightly.
Then the Magnetic pole is moving erratically, as well...
GLG
Well-Known Member
If you can disprove CO2’s role in the greenhouse effect you’ve got a Nobel prize in your future!LOL, haha.
Can I say I knew you back when?
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
Anything you find on the internet claims co2 lowers the rain pH to about 5.6. That is absolutely false. It is now averaging in the high 5’s. I test the rain pH continuously and although the atmospheric co2 ppm has been rising over the years the pH has risen since an average of 4.5 in the mid 1990’s . Go figure? You all could test this too and see for yourself. Last dump of rain in Port Alberni a week ago was 6.1 pH. So maybe what is continuously solicited on the net or news is not always true???
Yup...there is always a gang that builds the wall before me.
Broaden your views and you might bring some more in.
You obviously do not know me well enough...nor I anyone here. That is not a bad thing. If however anyone is suggesting that I accept the norm or follow the herd, well that will never happen. 12:12 take care.
Well, possibly I have misteterpreted your posts in this thread. I also am rarely with the herd and respect people that question the mainstream. I am a firm believer that we can get more things done if more groups were more collaborative. That being said if we are going to deny generally accepted science I stuggle to find common ground.
Fyi, been on the board since mid 2000s.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
“Only people who don’t understand science take the 97% statistic seriously,” he said. “Survey results depend on who you ask, who answers and how the questions are worded. In any case, science is not a democracy. Even if 100% of scientists believe something, one person with good evidence can still be right.”
Already well known & accepted by the scientific community, ST. That's the fear/risk - some of those cycles that correspond to high CO2 levels cause mass extinctions:
https://phys.org/news/2013-03-link-co2-mass-extinctions-species.html
https://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
https://www.newsweek.com/carbon-emissions-could-spark-mass-extinction-321061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event
https://phys.org/news/2013-03-link-co2-mass-extinctions-species.html
https://theconversation.com/another-link-between-co2-and-mass-extinctions-of-species-12906
https://www.newsweek.com/carbon-emissions-could-spark-mass-extinction-321061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event
GLG
Well-Known Member
This paper works for all sides of the topic. Including yours.
Eventually it will be widely known that our environment is simply cyclical. Of coarse the climate changes.
Thanks that's a very good paper.
Then take to heart what the advice that the PDF you posted is telling us. Trust the experts that have done the hard work or trust the experts that are relaying the message from the ones that have done the hard work. You know the ones with a track record on giving us the science advice that is important in the age of post truth.
It doesn't get much better than this link here from 2014 when all of us should have paid attention.
Description
Climate Change: Evidence and Causes is a jointly produced publication of The US National Academy of Sciences and The Royal Society. Written by a UK-US team of leading climate scientists and reviewed by climate scientists and others, the publication is intended as a brief, readable reference document for decision makers, policy makers, educators, and other individuals seeking authoritative information on the some of the questions that continue to be asked.
Climate Change makes clear what is well-established and where understanding is still developing. It echoes and builds upon the long history of climate-related work from both national academies, as well as on the newest climate-change assessment from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It touches on current areas of active debate and ongoing research, such as the link between ocean heat content and the rate of warming.
https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18730/climate-change-evidence-and-causes
Last edited:
Similar threads
