Climate deniers don't deny climate change any more

I know more than you, anyway. In fact, I studied planetary physics, including atmospheric physics, at an internationally respected university.

Corals can bleach for many reasons, and there is no credible empirical evidence -- none -- that rapid warming caused by human activity -- which is not occurring anyway -- is the most likely cause. There is likewise no credible empirical evidence -- none -- that ice caps and glaciers in general are melting any faster now than they did in previous natural millennium-scale warming episodes like the Medieval Warm Period, nor is there any credible empirical evidence that the increase in atmospheric CO2 could have any such effect. The CO2 climate narrative is utter nonscience from start to finish, and so is all the ancillary nonscience about corals, polar bears, ocean acidification, etc., etc.

 

Google "spontaneous combustion" and start reading. Do you also claim a nuclear power plant is absorbing energy from somewhere else?

 

Not interested in strawman arguments. I’ve provided evidence nitrates are bleaching the GBR. You can deny the science but it won’t make it go away.

 

Absolutely. All nuclear reactions require energy input to start. Good lord. You are way out there dude. Come back to earth.

Already posted. Here it is again.

Spontaneous combustion occurs when a combustible material is heated to its ignition temperature by a chemical reaction involving the oxygen in the air (oxidation). The oxidation of the combustible material creates heat.

You are completely destroying your credibility.

 

The use of that term disqualifies you from serious discussion.

Which isn't happening.

It might or might not get worse because it is caused primarily by the sun, and we cannot yet predict solar activity.

Not nothing whatsoever. Just very little.

 

Wrong.

Wrong. Fission initiates a release of energy without absorbing any energy from elsewhere. You are objectively wrong.

So not, repeat, NOT by absorbing energy.

 

Holy cow.

Fission occurs when a neutron slams into a larger atom, forcing it to excite and split into two smaller atoms—also known as fission products.

Just when you think you’ve seen the wildest claim on PF…..Bam. Someone claims fission doesn’t require input of energy to begin. Unbelievable.

 

Where did I say anything about coal in Kansas or Wyoming, or are still just grasping at straws?

Burning coal in Kansas increases atmospheric CO2 and global warming of oceans and causes coral bleaching at Cooktown.
In contrast, nitrate levels at Cooktown doesn't, because there wasn't any increase in nitrate levels this summer, and there was no coral bleaching during winter either.

 

IOW deforestation in Kansas and Wyoming increases atmospheric CO2 levels which increases global temperatures and coral bleaching at Cooktown and Thursday Island.

 

Where did I say anything about Cooktown?

Oh. So you accept studies on CO2 but reject studies on nitrates and bleaching. Cool.

LOL. Can’t be coal from Wyoming causing bleaching. Hasn’t been an increase in extraction. It’s decreased. So much for your logic.

 

Deforestation in Queensland. Cooktown and Mackay are municipalities. More strawman.

 

But we can reduce the burning of fossil fuels, and more directly use the energy from the sun instead, to slow down the increase in atmospheric CO2.

 

IOW you have no evidence to support your claim that coral bleaching isn't caused by increasing ocean temperatures from global warming.

 

IOW you have no evidence that nitrates are bleaching corals on Thursday Island and Cooktown and that increasing ocean temperatures doesn't cause coral bleaching.

 

Exactly. The same with the limestone beds around Miami today. Eventually those are all going to be underwater yet again, and the coral will regrow on the remains of coral reefs from the last ice age. The same way that there are now dead coral reefs under deeper waters. When it got too deep, the corals died. But when the next ice age is going good and the ocean levels have dropped again they will start to grow once again.

These are cyclical, and the reefs we have today are mostly built upon the skeletons of reefs going back millions of years. Always dying when the water goes away or becomes too deep, returning when the water depths are just right.

 

Yes, and?

Has CO2 levels ever risen in the past that was not caused by humans?

This is my entire problem with many of these claims, it is the cart chasing the horse, or trying to chase the data.

Tell me, has CO2 levels risen in the past, yes or no? We know CO2 levels were at a low point during the ice age, then they started to rise as it ended. Did humans cause that? We know that a hell of a lot of times in the past CO2 levels were significantly higher than they are now, before there were even humans on the planet.

 

Oh hell, there are many.

Volcanology, ocean outgassing, decomposing organic material, I can go on and on.

Want to know one source that has been increasing for over 10 ky? The decomposition of all the plant matter that was trapped in permafrost and tundra. Much of that has been there for over 60ky, and is only now decomposing because the permafrost is gone and it is allowed to decompose.

At one time, much of the Great Plains of the central US was permafrost. Not unlike much of the area of Siberia, Alaska and Canada today. And that is what it would have been when humans first arrived. But when the glaciers retreated that permafrost finally melted, they went through a couple of thousand years of thawing, drying out and decomposing, and are now native grasslands. Just as given enough time the permafrost of Central Alaska will thaw, decompose, and become grasslands yet again.

And to give an idea, that permafrost extends as much as 2,000 feet below the surface. That is a hell of a lot of biomass just waiting for the conditions to warm enough to allow it to finally decompose and finally become soil. Also there is a hell of a lot of CO2 trapped in the water. There is believed to be far more CO2 in the oceans than there is in our atmosphere. Hell, it even exists in freshwater. And there have been a lot of deaths simply from CO2 being released from freshwater lakes.



If you think it is all caused by humans, you really need to start educating yourself.

 

No warming in Antarctica in the last 200 years. CO2 increased from 280 to 420 ppm. Models predict warming. The enhanced CO2 effect hypothesis is disproven.

 

There are over 6000 types of coral thriving in warm tropical waters and cold deep water. They live and die cyclically.

 

Ummm. I’ve repeatedly shown evidence coral bleaching IS caused by global warming.

 

I’ve presented evidence nitrates cause bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef.

I’ve presented evidence ocean temperatures cause coral bleaching.

Evidence produced through application of the scientific method shows both nitrate and temperature cause bleaching. The combination of the two is especially bad for precipitating bleaching events.

The point is we can reduce nitrates and sediments and pesticides immediately. We can’t cool the ocean anytime in this century, possibly never.

Unfortunately there are science deniers that don’t want to address nitrates and sediments and pesticides. It’s sad.

 

So how do you reduce the nitrate levels immediately at Cooktown and Thursday Island?

 

So why is the Antarctic Peninsula rapidly greening? https://www.abc.net.au/news/science...ic-peninsula-drive--by-climate-change/8534368

 

I'm well aware of that, but human activity is still an important reason for the increased atmospheric CO2 and rapid climate change in recent years, and why global warming will increase when the methane is released as the permafrost melts.