Ocean acidifcation .

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That's nice. That is the data.

Would now be a bad time to point out that your data shows nothing extraordinary or remarkable either?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Would now be a bad time to point out that your data shows nothing extraordinary or remarkable either?

It shows an upward trend, which is counter to Exile's and Fitzhenry's claim.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

It shows an upward trend, which is counter to Exile's and Fitzhenry's claim.

and sea level will go down in about 6 months again.

No trend nothing specific just a fact it will go down in 6 months .
We all know why .

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

It also opens the door to the possibility that there may be other factors not considered as part of the overall issue. For example, termites, as you may or may not know, chow down on dead wood. Would it disturb you to know that termites release between two to ten times more CO2 to the environment (depending on what source you read) than humans emit? And this is inclusive of that produced by our technology like coal fired power stations and 2020 plated V8 muscle cars.

You may or may not know that wood is "short-term" carbon. Trees pull CO2 out of air, 0 to 100 years later, that same carbon returns to the air as rot, fire, or termite farts. Closed system. Net change in CO2 of this cycle is essentially 0, give or take the relative rates of reforestation and consumption.

Fossil fuels are "long-term" carbon, taking millions of years to compress organic matter into coal, oil, etc. Several million years later, that carbon-dense fuel is dug up and burnt. The current rate of burning fossil fuels is a few orders of magnitude more rapid than that of its formation. NOT closed cycle, or natural. Net change - ALL the carbon from the fossil fuel you just burnt has been added to the atmosphere.

So, unless you can demonstrate how in the last 200 years, termites have figured out how to output more carbon than they consume, or show some other recent anomaly in their population or consumption, you can pretty much exclude termites as a source of extra CO2.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

and sea level will go down in about 6 months again.

No trend nothing specific just a fact it will go down in 6 months .
We all know why .

Nope.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by jackdale

It shows an upward trend, which is counter to Exile's and Fitzhenry's claim.

My understanding was the entire argument was no discernible rate of change in respect to sea level. I'll take a wild stab and suggest that Exile and your average hydrologist would be aware that the sea level has been increasing since the end of the last glaciation. In fact Fitzhenry's principle argument was that it hasn't exceeded the 15 cm (or was it 20?) normal cyclic variation in the past century and shows no sign of acceleration in recent decades.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Nope.

yes it will jack
Its called northern hemisphere winter snow pack . It does affect the sea level.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

You may or may not know that wood is "short-term" carbon Trees pull CO2 out of air, ) 0 to 100 years later, that same carbon returns to the air as rot, fire, or termite farts. Closed system. Net change in CO2 of this cycle is essentially 0, give or take the relative rates of reforestation and consumption.

Fossil fuels are "long-term" carbon, taking millions of years to compress organic matter into coal oil etc. Several million years later, that carbon-dense fuel is dug up and burnt. The current rate of burning fossil fuels is a few orders of magnitude more rapid than that of its formation. NOT closed cycle, or natural. Net change - ALL the carbon from the fossil fuel you just burnt has been added to the atmosphere.

So, unless you can demonstrate how in the last 200 years, termites have figured out how to output more carbon than they consume, or show some other recent anomaly in their population or consumption, you can pretty much exclude termites as the source of extra CO2.

I'm just saying if we killed the vast majority of them good for nothing critters, problem solved. Has anyone costed this? Even if it costs trillions we won't have to return to the stone age as part of the payment plan.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

In fact Fitzhenry's principle argument was that it hasn't exceeded the 15 cm (or was it 20?) normal cyclic variation in the past century and shows no sign of acceleration in recent decades.

Fitzhenry uses a cherry picked 1914 start date to show a 0.6 mm decline.

https://saltbushclub.com/2019/07/14/...vels/#more-724

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

I'm just saying if we killed the vast majority of them good for nothing critters, problem solved. Has anyone costed this? Even if it costs trillions we won't have to return to the stone age as part of the payment plan.

You could always eat them.

You also need to take the wood they are no longer eating and store it somewhere airtight. Not a problem, right?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

yes it will jack
Its called northern hemisphere winter snow pack . It does affect the sea level.

That is a seasonal difference, that is followed by a sea level increase.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Fitzhenry uses a cherry picked 1914 start date to show a 0.6 mm decline.

https://saltbushclub.com/2019/07/14/...vels/#more-724

not like cherry picking 1979 as the start of arctic sea ice levels .
And don't say beginning of satellite measurements . ( nimbus)

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That is a seasonal difference, that is followed by a sea level increase.

I didn't say it wasn't or didn't in fact you ought to actually read what I posted originally.

Here ya go

sea level will go down in about 6 months again.

No trend nothing specific just a fact it will go down in 6 months .
We all know why .

Really read it .

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

not like cherry picking 1979 as the start of arctic sea ice levels .
And don't say beginning of satellite measurements . ( nimbus)

OK



https://neven1.typepad.com/blog/2016...1935-2014.html




https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_ice.html

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

I didn't say it wasn't or didn't in fact you ought to actually read what I posted originally.

Here ya go

sea level will go down in about 6 months again.

No trend nothing specific just a fact it will go down in 6 months .
We all know why .

Really read it .

Axial tilt.