Oceans in distress foreshadow mass extinction

[WIP]

Global warming discussions usually focus on greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere, how much sea levels will rise in the future, the impacts of extreme weather events, but a report that came out of an international conference of ocean scientists reported by AFP says that what's happening under water to the world's oceans is much more crucial for our future than what's happening on land:

Pollution and global warming are pushing the world's oceans to the brink of a mass extinction of marine life unseen for tens of millions of years, a consortium of scientists warned Monday.

Dying coral reefs, biodiversity ravaged by invasive species, expanding open-water "dead zones," toxic algae blooms, the massive depletion of big fish stocks -- all are accelerating, they said in a report compiled during an April meeting in Oxford of 27 of the world's top ocean experts.

Sponsored by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO), the review of recent science found that ocean health has declined further and faster than dire forecasts only a few years ago.

These symptoms, moreover, could be the harbinger of wider disruptions in the interlocking web of biological and chemical interactions that scientists now call the Earth system.

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

"The results are shocking," said Alex Rogers, an Oxford professor who heads IPSO and co-authored the report. "We are looking at consequences for humankind that will impact in our lifetime."

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming, acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as hypoxia.

A couple of years ago, I read a book by paleontologist - Peter Ward (Under A Green Sky) about how these factors caused the great Permian/Triassic Extinction 250 million years ago, and connected the present trends with the likelihood of a human-caused repeat.

more.....

"We have underestimated the overall risks, and that the whole of marine degradation is greater than the sum of its parts," Rogers said. "That degradation is now happening at a faster rate than predicted."

Indeed, the pace of change is tracking or has surpassed the worst-case scenarios laid out by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its landmark 2007 report, according to the new assessment.

The chain reaction leading to increased acidification of the oceans begins with a massive influx of carbon into Earth's climate system.

Oceans act as a massive sponge, soaking up more than a quarter of the CO2 humans pump into the atmosphere.

But when the sponge becomes too saturated, it can disrupt the delicately balanced ecosystems on which marine life -- and ultimately all life on Earth -- depends.................

"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation," said Daniel Laffoley, head of the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas, and co-author of the report. "And we are also probably the last generation that has enough time to deal with the problems," he told AFP by phone.

I'd like to be more optimistic about the odds of acting in time to stop the poisoning of the world's oceans but other news doesn't point to a rosy scenario: UN talks must save Kyoto or 'collapse': AOSIS

[Shady]

*Yawn*

Yet another hyperbolic prediction. If we've learned anything from the last several years, it's that these sorts of end of times predictions aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

[WIP]

Most outstander poster needs to actually read something besides filtered rightwing propaganda sites.

[Moonlight Graham]

Humans are idiots. Destroying the planet isn't much affecting me now, so why care, right?

[Shady]

Most outstander poster needs to actually read something besides filtered rightwing propaganda sites.

Nope, just reality. Is this new prediction anything like the one predicted in 2000 by the climate research unit of EAU? You know, the one that stated "in a few years, children just aren't going to know what snow is."

Edited June 20, 2011 by Shady

[Michael Hardner]

Nope, just reality. Is this new prediction anything like the one predicted in 2000 by the climate research unit of EAU? You know, the one that stated "in a few years, children just aren't going to know what snow is."

You are basically correct. That scientist made that prediction a little earlier than 2000, but yes that was an irresponsible statement that he's been called on. Sadly, his statement has tarnished an entire body of work and given opponents of AGW license to compare that work to completely unsupported theories that are not supported by research at all.

There are, I'm sure, more statements by legitimate climate scientists against extreme claims by environmentalists than statements of hyperbole.

In any case: Science does make mistakes, but science builds on itself. It can be adjusted but it still needs to be built on research, and be responsible in its claims.

[Wild Bill]

All five mass extinctions of life on the planet, reaching back more than 500 million years, were preceded by many of the same conditions now afflicted the ocean environment, they said.

Three main drivers are sickening the global marine environment, and all are a direct consequence of humans activity: global warming, acidification and a dwindling level oxygen, a condition known as hypoxia.

Well, it's been obvious all along that the cardinal premise in the eco-warriors' catechism has been that it is all Man's fault.

However, if it's happened 5 times over more than 500 million years, do we have to reset the clock of evolution to show that man has been around far longer than any evidence has shown?

Did we lose an advanced human civilization at the time of each extinction? Has Man been repeatedly making the same mistakes?

500 million years, eh? Geez, perhaps one or more of those civilizations survived by living down that Antarctic hole that leads to the Centre of the Earth! You know, the one that Rebus Kenebus was going to jump with his motorcycle...

[BubberMiley]

Yet another hyperbolic prediction. If we've learned anything from the last several years, it's that these sorts of end of times predictions aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

If we've learned anything, it's that conservatives will always refuse to believe that humans can do any harm to the planet whatsoever.

Ignore the meltdown behind the curtain in Japan.

Do not ask what's going on in the Gulf of Mexico.

Keep consuming the plastic.

Only hypocrites care about the planet.

[Bonam]

There's plenty of other planets where this one came from...

[eyeball]

*Yawn*

Yet another hyperbolic prediction. If we've learned anything from the last several years, it's that these sorts of end of times predictions aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

Notwithstanding the dire predictions we're constantly bombarded with regarding the threat the left poses. Nope, those predictions are inscribed on gold leaf.

There's plenty of other planets where this one came from...

Besides which God has a new one waiting for us up in Heaven. At least that's what scribes with no more sense than a Cornucopian tell us.

Better start praying for that technological singularity, it looks like we might be cutting it awfully close.

[Bonam]

Besides which God has a new one waiting for us up in Heaven.

Er.. if you think so... sure. I was referring to real planets.

Better start praying for that technological singularity, it looks like we might be cutting it awfully close.

Achieving the technological singularity is not a matter of prayer.

[Topaz]

What you say I believe and its been happening down the Gulf of Mexico for several years now with the flood waters coming out of the Mississippi River its making it bigger and this is no tinfoil or whatever you non believers think. http://ecocentric.blogs.time.com/2011/06/14/scientists-predict-record-gulf-of-mexico-dead-zone-due-to-mississippi-flooding/

[eyeball]

Er.. if you think so... sure. I was referring to real planets.

I know, and I was referring to other people. You really didn't get that?

Achieving the technological singularity is not a matter of prayer.

And little more than many similar articles of faith.

[WIP]

Nope, just reality. Is this new prediction anything like the one predicted in 2000 by the climate research unit of EAU? You know, the one that stated "in a few years, children just aren't going to know what snow is."

So, according to #1 poster logic: someone at East Anglia made a comment that deniers interpreted as a prediction (assuming that your story is based on fact), therefore all predictions by climatologists....and in this case - oceanographers are wrong or misleading....did I miss anything? And can I apply this same logic to rightwing conservative and libertarian predictions that have done a face-plant when applied to the real world in the last 30 years?

[BubberMiley]

And can I apply this same logic to rightwing conservative and libertarian predictions that have done a face-plant when applied to the real world in the last 30 years?

You won't get an answer to that question.

[WIP]

You are basically correct.

No, he is basically making a false analogy, since he is declaring that one wrong prediction on future climate effects negates all other research; and you are basically playing your usual bullshit game of looking for the middle ground, which in this case is a subject where middling responses and solutions serve no one.

That scientist made that prediction a little earlier than 2000, but yes that was an irresponsible statement that he's been called on. Sadly, his statement has tarnished an entire body of work and given opponents of AGW license to compare that work to completely unsupported theories that are not supported by research at all.

There are, I'm sure, more statements by legitimate climate scientists against extreme claims by environmentalists than statements of hyperbole.

So What! People who want to live in denial because it interferes with a. their political ideology b. their religious notions about having dominion over the world and c. they don't want to make any personal sacrifices for the common good, are going to continue looking for any and every reason to believe the same bullshit they've been following since global warming became acknowledged as a problem to deal with 20 years ago.

Scientists are asked for statements all the time, and what have you got to say about the predictions that are off because CO2 rates are rising faster than expected, and in this case, that damage to the world's oceans is happening more rapidly than expected even 10 or 20 years ago? Which shows that your charge of "extreme claims by environmentalists" is the typical liberal retreat from making hard choices!

[Michael Hardner]

No, he is basically making a false analogy, since he is declaring that one wrong prediction on future climate effects negates all other research; and you are basically playing your usual bullshit game of looking for the middle ground, which in this case is a subject where middling responses and solutions serve no one.

You have to take your licks when you have to: he is correct in that a legitimate scientist made a wild claim. People have to be careful what they say, even scientists.

Scientists are asked for statements all the time, and what have you got to say about the predictions that are off because CO2 rates are rising faster than expected, and in this case, that damage to the world's oceans is happening more rapidly than expected even 10 or 20 years ago? Which shows that your charge of "extreme claims by environmentalists" is the typical liberal retreat from making hard choices!

Scientists have indeed issued rebukes to environmentalist who make extreme claims. Certainly you must acknowledge that such extreme claims are made by some.

[WIP]

Well, it's been obvious all along that the cardinal premise in the eco-warriors' catechism has been that it is all Man's fault.

However, if it's happened 5 times over more than 500 million years, do we have to reset the clock of evolution to show that man has been around far longer than any evidence has shown?

Did we lose an advanced human civilization at the time of each extinction? Has Man been repeatedly making the same mistakes?

500 million years, eh? Geez, perhaps one or more of those civilizations survived by living down that Antarctic hole that leads to the Centre of the Earth! You know, the one that Rebus Kenebus was going to jump with his motorcycle...

There were no humans living on Earth when these 5 extinctions occurred. Even less catastrophic extinctions often mentioned by deniers, such as the PETM of 55 million years ago, occurred long before we were around. A climatic change caused by a supervolcano in Indonesia approx. 70,000 years ago, is believed to be responsible for a collapse in the early human population down to as few as 2000 survivors, according to evidence taken from our DNA genetic record. Paleontologists have long been mystified by a gap in human fossil discoveries until about 50,000 years ago; now it appears that the reason for the disappearance of fossils was a result of a near extinction for the human race.

So, even less extreme changes to climate can be catastrophic; and what's really troubling today is that a short period of the Planet's history called the Holocene, is a time of unusually stable and consistent weather over the last 10,000 years. By the end of this year, Earth will be supporting a population of 7 billion people. Our agriculture...especially Green Revolution hybrids that are widely used around the world, are dependent on what were assumed to be "normal" weather conditions.

Even right now, around the world, record floods and droughts are having devastating effects on crop yields, and are expected to drive food prices up two to three fold over the next decade. Keeping this in perspective, what are the odds that there will be enough survivors to maintain breeding populations in the more distant future, if we push greenhouse gas levels to numbers last seen when those mass extinctions occurred?

[WIP]

You have to take your licks when you have to: he is correct in that a legitimate scientist made a wild claim. People have to be careful what they say, even scientists.

Scientists have indeed issued rebukes to environmentalist who make extreme claims. Certainly you must acknowledge that such extreme claims are made by some.

Someone, somewhere is going to say something that can be hoisted up the flag pole by energy company-funded deniers. Considering that this #1 poster featured a misleadingly edited comment from Phil Jones for months here, why should I give this one any more credence? Regardless, I get sick of trying to point out time after time that the only thing misleading on comprehensive reports like the IPCC reports is that by the time they are released, they are out of date, and the predictions have underestimated increases in greenhouse gas levels and other changes. And the liberal, CNN type of response of looking for the truth somewhere in the middle is worse than being an outright denier. If your car is heading over a cliff, the liberal solution of making a slight turn to the steering wheel does nothing except create the illusion of trying to actually address the problem!

[Michael Hardner]

Someone, somewhere is going to say something that can be hoisted up the flag pole by energy company-funded deniers. Considering that this #1 poster featured a misleadingly edited comment from Phil Jones for months here, why should I give this one any more credence? Regardless, I get sick of trying to point out time after time that the only thing misleading on comprehensive reports like the IPCC reports is that by the time they are released, they are out of date, and the predictions have underestimated increases in greenhouse gas levels and other changes. And the liberal, CNN type of response of looking for the truth somewhere in the middle is worse than being an outright denier. If your car is heading over a cliff, the liberal solution of making a slight turn to the steering wheel does nothing except create the illusion of trying to actually address the problem!

So, you can deny that an error was made - as you appear to be doing - in order to serve the greater truth, I suppose. I like pointing out mistakes, it makes me more real than somebody who tries to deny them.

[GostHacked]

Even right now, around the world, record floods and droughts are having devastating effects on crop yields, and are expected to drive food prices up two to three fold over the next decade.

This will be the largest threat to the current way of modern civilized society, as I see it. Record floods in China, USA Canada, other environmental catastrophes like quakes, volcanoes ect. All that puts a strain on our food supply , which to some is stretched to the point of breaking real soon.

Flooding already has delayed many crops from being planted, if they are planted at all. In China for example, the drought was followed by huge flooding. 2 million Chinese have already been displaced by the drought and concurrent flooding of those area.

[Sir Bandelot]

Yep, nothing to see here folks. Move along... move along...

[TimG]

Record floods in China, USA Canada, other environmental catastrophes like quakes, volcanoes ect. All that puts a strain on our food supply , which to some is stretched to the point of breaking real soon.

Floods, equakequates and other clamities have always existed and always will exist. There is no evidence that they are "worse" than previous. The only thing that has changed is the number of people affected by these disasters is higher than ever before because our population is higher than ever before.

Flooding already has delayed many crops from being planted, if they are planted at all. In China for example, the drought was followed by huge flooding. 2 million Chinese have already been displaced by the drought and concurrent flooding of those area.

One of the gifts of modern transportation is the ability to move food around the world at relatively little cost. As late as 1800 it was still cheaper to move people to where the food was than to move food to the people. Thanks to the wonders of fossil fuels almost no Chinese will dies of starvation as a result of a failed crop. This is a huge improvement over the past.

[Sir Bandelot]

One of the gifts of modern transportation is the ability to move food around the world at relatively little cost. As late as 1800 it was still cheaper to move people to where the food was than to move food to the people. Thanks to the wonders of fossil fuels almost no Chinese will dies of starvation as a result of a failed crop. This is a huge improvement over the past.

Yes of course. And we saw how well that worked out for Haiti.

[TimG]

Yes of course. And we saw how well that worked out for Haiti.

Haiti was a basket case before the quake. It is still a basket case after the quake. Haiti is a example of why a modern industrial economy is an essential defence when it comes to dealing with natural disasters. The contrast between Japan and Haiti could not be more stark.