An exercise in logic

[Saturn]

Imagine the following scenario:

Mankind starts disposing of 1 million pounds of salt daily into the ocean (salt is a byproduct of many industrial processes). As economies grow the amount of salt dumped into the ocean doubles roughly every decade. Lo and behold, 100 years later it becomes clear that the salinity of ocean water has gone up by 30%. As a result, a third of ocean species have gone extinct and another 50% are projected to go extinct by the end of the century. The fishing and related industries are in turmoil. In addition, the salt threatens to make it into the fresh water supply, thus endangering the world's food supply, peace and many other industries (in addition to farming and fishing). Some argue that the disposal of salt into the ocean must be halted, others argue that disposing of salt in more environmentally friendly ways would be too expensive. Who do you support?

A. The majority of the world's scientists who argue that the salinity of the oceans will continue to rise as a result of human activity and if the problem in not adequately addressed, it has the potential to spiral out of control devastating much of the world's economy.

B. The salt dumping industries and a small contingent of scientists who claim that the salinity of ocean water is going up entirely due to natural causes and that disposing of salt in other manners would be too costly and will far outweigh any future costs of not addressing the problem.

If you answered A, read here and here.

If you answered B, read here and here.

If after reading you still would answer B read here.

[MightyAC]

A very clever post, two thumbs up...way up.

[White Doors]

How clever.

Equating salinity levels of the oceans with GHG's. That's neat how the global climate can be explained so easily when environment Canada can't even tell me when it's supposed to snow.

Simplistic and ignorant.

how typical.

[MightyAC]

Whether or not you agree with the content you have to admit that the format of the post was creative and clever. The post actually makes the reader want to follow the links which is rare in an environment where most don't read entire posts let alone the cited articles. In this case a simple example gets readers to at least glance at 4 sites that enforce Saturn's point of view...and has a humorous finish.

[August1991]

A very clever post, two thumbs up...way up.

It's not clever at all.

If someone has a point to make, they should make it and not try to be cute.

The comparison between salt in the ocean and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is entirely wrong. Carbon dioxide is inert and poses no danger to anyone. It is not toxic (as salt would be if we increased the ocean's salinity by 30%).

Saturn does raise an interesting point however. The damage we are doing to the world's oceans is in many ways far more serious and threatening than our CO2 emissions.

For some reason, too many people have gotten onto this Kyoto/global warming bandwagon, they believe the world is about to be incinerated, they blame Americans/the right wing for this state of affairs and they ignoring many other problems as a result.

IOW, it's the same old left wing hysteria.

PS. I really dislike thread titles that do not provide any indication about the thread's contents.

[White Doors]

Saturn does raise an interesting point however. The damage we are doing to the world's oceans is in many ways far more serious and threatening than our CO2 emissions.

Exactly and it's too bad really. Our Oceans need some attention

[fellowtraveller]

IOW, it's the same old left wing hysteria.

I would describe it as more than that, perhaps The New Evangelism is more apt.

There are strong parallels between environmentalism and fundamentalist religions, the most striking of which is the basic requirement to have faith in 'truths' that are difficult to prove or disprove. It is something that is less than science, but more than blind faith.

[mikedavid00]

PS. I really dislike thread titles that do not provide any indication about the thread's contents.

As soon as a read about salt in ocean I knew instantaly it was a wacky left wing agenda oriented post so I didn't even bother reading the rest. I'm surpised how many people actually took it for real.

The leftist psycie is extrememly easy to recognize and deal with.

Saturn, maybe you can explain the global cooling and next ice age that was going to happen in the 1970's?

Maybe you can explain how acid rain was going to melt through the umbrella and burn our skin?

Maybe you can explain how global warming was causing all these huracains and this year, there was... NONE.

Maybe you can explain how we have had a warming period, then a cooling period, and are in a warming period that is going to last till 2022 or so and this is normal.

Maybe you can explain how if we reduce GHG, it will actually cuase MORE global warming.

Maybe you can explain how the hole through the ozone layer in the 1980's was going to fry us all?

Maybe you can explain how in 1998 there was also a warm winter from the Al Ninio effect and nothing more.

Maybe you can epxlain the reason why we have more GHG per capita is becaue we live in a northern country and need to burn more products resulting in GHG's. Regarless, we are only 2% of the worlds GHG's and do not play a significant role.

Maybe you can explain why recently a research group has accused media of 'Climate Porn' by trying to potray a scare that the world is going to end. link

[Charles Anthony]

PS. I really dislike thread titles that do not provide any indication about the thread's contents.

As soon as a read about salt in ocean I knew instantaly it was a wacky left wing agenda oriented post so I didn't even bother reading the rest. I'm surpised how many people actually took it for real.

The leftist psycie

-- and that is where I stop too.

[mikedavid00]

PS. I really dislike thread titles that do not provide any indication about the thread's contents.

As soon as a read about salt in ocean I knew instantaly it was a wacky left wing agenda oriented post so I didn't even bother reading the rest. I'm surpised how many people actually took it for real.

The leftist psycie

-- and that is where I stop too.

Well it's true. The agenda driven left wing is a dictator minded hypocrite out to promote his agenda. That is who Saturn is. He's a card carying Libearl member with an agenda. Naturally any post of his claiming to play a game wtih everyone as a group is going to undermine people into his passionate agenda.

I'm a non voter with no agenda. I'm a rebel that don't resort to these games.

You? I don't know. You're a typical Canadian.

[kimmy]

Every time I read one of your messages, I'm amazed that nobody has offered you that $55,000 white collar job you think you're entitled to.

-k

[mikedavid00]

Every time I read one of your messages, I'm amazed that nobody has offered you that $55,000 white collar job you think you're entitled to.

-k

I didn't say that I *was* going to get that kind of job, but yes, with the experience I have and credentials I feel I am entitled to it. Those are just my feelings though.

Of course, I know I'm not going to get it. Someone else from another country already has it. I'll just have to become under-employed when I find work and I'll learn to live with it.

[Argus]

Whether or not you agree with the content you have to admit that the format of the post was creative and clever.

Not really. More like simplistic. Salinity in the ocean is more or less predictable. The temperature of the earth has risen and fallen over the years. Thus nobody can say with any degree of assurance that the present spike in temperatures has anything to do with what we are doing. As others have noted, this holier than thou attitude the Left have taken about this has turned off a lot of people, and turned what should be a common sense issue into yet another left-right quarrel.

[Saturn]

The original post was not meant to be interesting, what's interesting is the responses it has received, demonstrating that people will ignore obvious facts (that the concentration of substance X in a system will increase if the amount of X is added to the system exceeds the amount of X that is removed from the system) when those facts contradict their beliefs. Here is a simple experiment for those individuals:

A simple experiment:

1) Take a 3 gallon bucket and fill it with tap water.

2) Add 5 tablespoons of salt and stir until disolved. Taste the water and record how salty it is on a scale from 1 to 10.

3) After 15 minutes, remove 1 gallon of water from the bucket and then add 1 gallon of tap water to the bucket.

Repeat steps 2) and 3) 10 times.

4) Make a conclusion on whether the water is saltier than at the beginning of the experiment, less salty, or salinity doesn't change and why.

5) Compare your conclusion to the following:

A. The water is saltier because you added more salt than you removed at each repeat of the cycle.

B. The water is saltier but your actions had nothing to do with it.

C. Da water is salter cuz da immigrants done it.

D. The water is not saltier. Any claims that it's salter should be attributed to left-wing lunatics.

E. The water is not salter because the invisible hand kept salinity constant.

F. The water is not salter. Don't know why.

If you answered A, you've confirmed the above mentioned fact and you pass the test.

If you answered B, C, D, or E, read the Looney Tunes and then seek professional help because you have much bigger problems on you hands (or in you head) than global warming.

If you answered F, repeat the experiment.

[White Doors]

The original post was not meant to be interesting, what's interesting is the responses it has received, demonstrating that people will ignore obvious facts (that the concentration of substance X in a system will increase if the amount of X is added to the system exceeds the amount of X that is removed from the system) when those facts contradict their beliefs.

but that is simply NOT a fact.

In the past, CO2 in the atmosphere increased AFTER warming trends to suggest a symptom, not a cause.

We don;t know what increasing CO2 before or during the warming trnd will do AT ALL. no one does.

Your assumptions are just that. And they are very simplistic one's.

You are not in kinsergarten anymore.

all you are doing here is displaying the simplistic rationale in your beliefs.

You were an 'easy sell'.

[Saturn]

Now I see that there are no aquarists in the house. If there were any, they would know that one very common way to reduce the pH in your aquariums is to inject CO2 into the tank (equipment for that purpose can be purchased at any aquatic store). CO2 is the cause of very low pH levels in soft drinks for example. Here is a bit of educational material on the effects of increased acidity on fish. What is also interesting is that the oceans are a type of carbon sink - CO2 from the atmosphere is absorbed by the oceans lowering the pH of ocean water. In fact, the pH of pure water left in the open will drop to pH of 5.7 due to CO2 exchange with air.

For those who were earlier concerned about the oceans, here is a bit on how increased CO2 levels are causing acidification of the oceans.

[Saturn]

the concentration of substance X in a system will increase if the amount of X is added to the system exceeds the amount of X that is removed from the system

but that is simply NOT a fact.

Enjoy the Looney Tunes.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Unfortunately for your theory, Saturn, the world's complex environmental system is not a bucket of water involving one variable - the amount of salt.

Although you have been successful in revealing one truth:

The enviro-climate-change crowd certainly would like us all to believe it's just that simple.

It's revealing that our economic and policy decision-making could indeed someday be made by people like you and Al Gore who see something as infinitely complex as the global environment as "a bucket of water".

Aren't these the same people who were ranting and raving about the "hole in the ozone layer"? From what I understand that hole (and the commensurate fanatacism) has been shrinking.

Aren't these the very same "most of the world's scientists" who, in the 1970's, were in general agreement that the earth was cooling down and headed for another ice age?

Certainly temperatures and climate of the globe change and have done so for tens of thousands of years.

Some reports show the change in CO2 being a RESULT of the earth warming up, not a CAUSE. Similar to the idea of relative humidity I suppose (to use a crude explanation).

Whatever the case, I would echo what others on this thread have said: if they can't even predict the weather for next week a relatively EASY task compared to the next century), how much merit should we place on it?

As for your David Suzuki link I offer this retort from PJ O'Rourke:

"People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important."

[mikedavid00]

As for your David Suzuki link I offer this retort from PJ O'Rourke:

Suzuki is a leftist political organization:

Look at this pic off his website. He's sitting for dinner with RONA AMBROSE

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/local_supper/default.asp

[White Doors]

Enjoy the Looney Tunes.

Enjoy your fantasy world. Not one of the things I said you can prove otherwise, yet it's the looney tunes for me eh?

[White Doors]

Note that, although the ocean is acidifying, its pH is still greater than 7 (that of neutral water), so the ocean could also be described as becoming less alkaline.

from Saturn's link.

haha

[fellowtraveller]

The original post was not meant to be interesting, what's interesting is the responses it has received, demonstrating that people will ignore obvious facts (that the concentration of substance X in a system will increase if the amount of X is added to the system exceeds the amount of X that is removed from the system) when those facts contradict their beliefs.

but that is simply NOT a fact.

In the past, CO2 in the atmosphere increased AFTER warming trends to suggest a symptom, not a cause.

We don;t know what increasing CO2 before or during the warming trnd will do AT ALL. no one does.

Your assumptions are just that. And they are very simplistic one's.

You are not in kinsergarten anymore.

all you are doing here is displaying the simplistic rationale in your beliefs.

You were an 'easy sell'.

He has faith.

[White Doors]

Apparently.

[MightyAC]

The post actually makes the reader want to follow the links which is rare in an environment where most don't read entire posts let alone the cited articles.

As soon as a read about salt in ocean I knew instantaly it was a wacky left wing agenda oriented post so I didn't even bother reading the rest. I'm surpised how many people actually took it for real.

Thanks for proving a point mike.

[August1991]

I'm going to come partly to Saturn's defence on this issue.

Aren't these the same people who were ranting and raving about the "hole in the ozone layer"? From what I understand that hole (and the commensurate fanatacism) has been shrinking.

Jerry, it's surprising that you use the ozone layer as an example. The reason we no longer hear about it is because of the Montreal Protocol (signed by Mulroney in 1989) which largely eliminated CFC emissions:

Since the Montreal Protocol came into effect, the atmospheric concentrations of the most important chlorofluorocarbons and related chlorinated hydrocarbons have either leveled off or decreased [2]. Halon concentrations have continued to increase, as the halons presently stored in fire extinguishers are released, but their rate of increase has slowed and their abundances are expected to begin to decline by about 2020.

Wikipedia

Let me state that no one informed doubts the effects of CO2 on global warming and that human activities are increasing CO2 emissions. Where there is legitimate controversy is how serious the problem is and consequently how much human activity is a contributing factor.

Saturn's example of salt in the ocean is misleading to plain wrong. Examples here of meteorologists inability to predict the weather next week are also misleading and wrong. I can predict that most people walking out of a casino have lost money but I can't predict if that's true about Joe Blow in the striped shirt.

The relationship between CO2 and global warming is complex. Saturn offers one reason: the world's oceans. They harbour alot of CO2 and it's not clear how they do this. Here's another reason: various plants absorb CO2 and again it's not clear how this affects CO2 levels. Finally, it is water vapour that is the real green house gas but water vapour is dependent on the earth's temperature.

Incidentally, the world's atmospehere is about 70% nitrogen, about 20% oxygen and a microscopic 0.04% carbon dioxide.