Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 14-04-2019, 00:59   #421
Registered User
 
Reefmagnet's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: puɐןsuǝǝnb 'ʎɐʞɔɐɯ
Boat: Nantucket Island 33
Posts: 3,994
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

Quote:
Originally Posted by SailOar View Post
Same niche?

Walrus:
Dives to 80m in shallow water
Eats mostly clams, but also shrimp, crabs, tube worms, soft corals, tunicates, sea cucumbers.

Elephant Seals:
Dives to 1,550m in deep waters
Eats skates, rays, squid, octopuses, eels, small sharks and large fish.

Niche, not clone. Like in the largest of the seals.
__________________

Reefmagnet is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 01:28   #422
Registered User
 
SailOar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 616
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exile View Post
The problem with socialism or socialistic policies has not proven to be undesirable or unacceptable goals in the abstract, but rather the means to obtain them. Namely the damage to economies that inevitably occurs when, through corruption and/or running out of other peoples' money, economies are damaged. Venezuela is of course the most recent example, but probably a better one is the Scandinavian countries retreating back to a more balanced form of regulated capitalism after decades of unsuccessful dabbling in socialist policies.

So to answer your question more concisely, I'd say what's unacceptable about the GND's 1-10 is the absence of #11, i.e. a specific estimate of costs and a plan for paying for all of it. There is now a 100 years of history we can and should consider that show calamitous examples of systems that start off with a bunch of golden eggs that inevitably result in killing off the geese that laid them. Whether it's socio-economic policies or climate change remedies, why is the Left so averse to cost-benefit analyses?
It's really rich hearing you lecture us about cost-benefit analyses. Over the last few years I've posted a number of analyses on this forum about how economically advantageous it is to tackle AGW hard and early, rather than kick the ball down the road for the next generation(s) to deal with. In your many denier posts I don't recall your doing a cost-benefit analyses for your slothful inaction.

Furthermore, the so-called "fiscally conservative" Republican Party is anything but. The last time the US government had a balanced budget was in the late 1990s under President Clinton (D). The next president, "Dubya" (R), gave us tax rebates, a fiscal deficit, an unnecessary 3-trillion dollar war, and the Great Recession. The next president, Obama (D), spent his eight years in office getting the economy back on its feet (in spite of Republican opposition to anything and everything he did), plus brought us closer to the affordable universal health care that most developed countries enjoy. Now we have another Republican president, Dump tRump, whose crowning economic achievement has been to give "yuge" tax breaks to his wealthy cronies, is doing everything in his power to destroy "Obamacare", is trying to withdraw from the admittedly insufficient Paris Agreement, and is reversing many environmental rules and regulations.

Thank you Conservative Republican voters.
__________________

__________________
The greatest deception men suffer is their own opinions.
- Leonardo da Vinci -
SailOar is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 01:43   #423
Registered User
 
SailOar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 616
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

These Countries Have Prices on Carbon. Are They Working?
Quote:


More than 40 governments worldwide have now adopted some sort of price on carbon, either through direct taxes on fossil fuels or through cap-and-trade programs. In Britain, coal use plummeted after the introduction of a carbon tax in 2013. In the Northeastern United States, nine states have set a cap on emissions from the power sector and require companies to buy tradable pollution permits.

Economists have long suggested that raising the cost of burning coal, oil and gas can be a cost-effective way to curb emissions. But, in practice, most countries have found it politically difficult to set prices that are high enough to spur truly deep reductions. Many carbon pricing programs today are fairly modest....
__________________
The greatest deception men suffer is their own opinions.
- Leonardo da Vinci -
SailOar is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 01:51   #424
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Slidell, La.
Boat: Morgan Classic 33
Posts: 2,082
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc1 View Post
Ha ha, Jim and Co, that was a grand tirade of replies.
Predictable in content and vitriol ... but still great.

Allow me to let you in a little secret.
Unless you have a large amount of shares, or you own one or several factories in China that produce solar panels or wind turbines, you are doing the dirty work for someone else.

A select group of billionaires has realised way before you started to get all worked up, that there is a large number of people who are very enthusiastic about the environment and at the same time have lefty tendencies.

I heard people call others watermelons, that is green on the outside and red on the inside, but that is a bit disrespectful and I try to avoid that label. However it describes a lot of environmentalist to a T, even when there is no relation between socialism in it's different formats and an interest for the environment. Unfortunately the green movement has been hijacked by the leftover of the communist party who has lost all credibility and so we get the current mix.

But back to how this new religion works. We have the prominent figures doing the agitating, from ex politicians to actors and other cry babies with easy access to good media coverage, denouncing human kind and their sins, like breathing and passing wind for example, eating meat and driving cars, and generally existing. The more courageous state that we should be only 2 billions but mercifully pass on telling us how to kill the other 4 billions.

Then we have the army of millions of generally unsatisfied foot soldiers who would like things to be different. For example that everyone had a small car (or no car at all) or a small boat or a small house, no aircon etc. Yes, just a general mediocre view of the world with no grand works that disturb nature like agriculture, animal husbandry and similar atrocities.

What best way to encite all this millions of unsatisfied people and achieve the goal of selling useless expensive contraptions that would otherwise be unsellable?

Giving them one more reason to hate their fellow man who happens to have worked toward prosperity and generally abundance and wellbeing? Tell them that those bad "rich" people are destroying our habitat with this terrible pollutant that is CO2. Remember to fit in your speech appeals to the emotions, like animal being killed and statements that contain the words like "your children", "the future" and similar appeals.

Threaten university teachers with the sack if they dare to contradict this new religious dogma, stop publication of any article that is not global warming compliant, and lobby politicians to promote alternatives sources of energy, hiding their highly polluting potential in the production stage, installation stage, generating stages and disposal stages, and promise to harvest the green vote if they comply.

I must say that this strategy is not new, having been used very effectively in the middle ages by the prominent religion of the time that turned into a political force so powerful that no kingdom could exist without it's alliance.

Funny how we have not changed since Emperor Constantino in the year 300 realised that a unified religion was the way to go.
And the fact that we have information at the tip of our fingers seems to make no difference.

The reality is that humans believe what they want to believe. A bit like we make our own reality.

Oh well. I am only partially interested in all this circus and am more in the contemplative side of things, watching all the excitement like one watches a movie. The actors are mostly mediocre, but it is what it is.

Nature, if we can personalise it for illustrative purposes only, continues it's course despite us and certainly despite all the so called green initiatives. This era will go down in history as the era of stupidity when a large size of humanity fell for a rather clever fraud ... yet again.

Eppur si muove
In reverse order...

Apocryphal Galilean stories notwithstanding (remember, the facts support you being on the side of the 'infallible' Church, not the scientists, unless of course you are either a conspiracist or are unable to successfully differentiate fact from fiction {which seems obvious}).

And, 'yet again', those who are able to differentiate between fact and fiction realize exactly where the fraud is bring perpetuated from, and, if in the near future the 'history' is 'revised' (to which I give roughly even chances) the archaeological record will show precisely where, when and possibly even how that fraud was perpetuated. That you appear unable to comprehend this testifies to either the depth of your self-delusion or the (proven) success of Bernaysian manipulation.

Whilst, according to some, mediocrity has its' merits, in the real world those merits are rarely game-changing; they're typically more along the lines Crusoe's father gave him regarding the 'ideal' position in life...So your rather mediocre insult, intentional or not, is belied (as is your claim to 'contemplativeness') by the nature of your past and current posts.

If you want to get into a discussion on the nature of reality, great...it is rather telling though, that you use that philosophical point to disguise what it appears that either you believe or how you think everyone else carries out their lives.

I'm not so lucky, I can only tell you how I try to carry out my life, and that is to 'believe' what I have to believe, certainly not what I want to. (Can't resist) Who do you think I am, the Trumpster?

What's really funny is that you seem to think that 'Emperor Constantino' was the first to realize that 'unified religion' was 'the way to go' (whatever that means), when there is actual archaeological proof of 'unified religion' going back at least 12,000 years. What you seem to be conflating are changing conceptions, or levels, of 'globalism'.

As for 'the fact that we have information at the tip of our fingers seems to make no difference', you do realize that you're only describing a fundamental tenant of life? And thus, how utterly non-special 'humanity' is?

Your attraction and predisposition towards the 'middle ages' in relation to current times is almost as curious as your provincial assumptions that whatever opinions you've formed are in any way accurate in representing either the middle ages or contemporary times. On what basis do you think that 'the prominent religion of the time that turned into a political force so powerful that no kingdom could exist without it's alliance' has any validity, especially so with no qualifications? That you continue to make such unqualified statements only reinforces that you should not be taken seriously.

You continue to portray this litany of 'slights' (i feel sure in your mind that they're 'crimes') yet you fail to provide any verifiable evidence to support these actions. Please show just one example of each of the 8 that you list.

Perhaps you should think about what you say before you say it. I see precious little 'hate' from the 'green side' towards true prosperity and well being. I see plenty of fear, resentment and anger from them towards those who try to dictate what they (the 'greenies') should accept as prosperity and well being, while I see even more fear from the rich, the wanna-be rich, and the wanna-be-but-never-will (who've been manipulated into that position by the unscrupulous, if not truly evil, machinations of those of the financially truly 'rich'). Perhaps oddly, the line between them (the greenies and wanna-bes of both grades) in much less distinct than is portrayed in the media circus...

That you misconstrue and conflate is no longer worth mentioning. That you misunderstand what constitutes true satisfaction seems obvious, if you think, as it seems by your statement, that 'satisfaction' is derived from having a 'big' car, boat, house or air conditioner.

It is likely that your perception of 'grand works' is similarly limited in scope, but since you fail to list any, I'll, perhaps thankfully, refrain from speculation.

I doubt seriously that anyone has anything against either agriculture or animal husbandry (except vegans, who bear many striking resemblances to AGW deniers), though certainly industrial agriculture and animal husbandry (which in the current state is an oxymoron) have huge negative impacts. Oddly, a return to true agriculture and animal husbandry would have orders of magnitude more efficacy in alleviating 'dis-satisfaction' with the modern world than any number of new 'jew-jaws' or 'societal tweaks'. Meaningful work is the great satisfier...

As for cry-babies, who here is crying loudest? Certainly appears to be you and others like you.

Meanwhile, those whom you have problems with continue to make fact-based statements designed to illustrate, call attention to, and hopefully influence policy decisions on the very real problems facing the planet as a result of unrestricted human growth and consumption. Whether you like or believe it, the planet is finite in size, and humans cannot live here alone; it is a biological impossibility. For much the same reason, there is almost zero possibility of establishing a self-sustaining human population anywhere else, be it spaceship, planet, asteroid or comet. It therefore is of utmost importance that the past and current disregard of the ecosystem as a whole be discontinued and a new system be gradually implemented that strives to balance (within evolutionary reason) the forces within that system. Unrestrained market forces have proven again and again to have serious long term problems. (though from an evolutionary standpoint they are invaluable [which may which goes a long way to explaining what might well turn out to be 'human kinds' somewhat 'short run']).

Regarding your perception of what the 'gilded greenies' think are 'sins', you're again giving away the sources of your opinion.

If you were actually serious about understanding any of those 'sins', you wouldn't just repeat what you've heard and want to believe. For instance, there is a valid rough number, based on body mass and ecosystem size and dynamics, for the population of a given species. If memory serves the number for humans on earth is either 700,000 or 7,000.000, so whomever you're relying on for your misinformation is off by several orders of magnitude.

But of course it doesn't matter, because it's only in the minds of the deniers and conspiracists that anyone wants to "kill the other 4 billions".

Oddly though, the 'business as usual' policies advocated by those same deniers and conspiracists may well have that effect, and in a particularly ugly way.

Funny how you don't want to 'disrespect' anyone by calling them a watermelon, and then you describe how they are, in effect, a watermelon.
The rest of the paragraph is indecipherable, so I won't try.

The unsupported (and as far as I can tell, unsupportable) statement about crafty 'select billionaires' with secret, ulterior motives manipulating innocent but well meaning 'lefties',yet again illustrates who is providing you with an opinion. Can I say it any clearer, "Do some real research. Learn to think for yourself."

Let me tell you a little secret. There are concrete, discernible truths in the world. It is not new that there are people, and groups of people, who have vested interests in trying to change those truths to fit their interests.

Galileo and Bruno are demonstrably on the side of those truths, even when they were personally wrong, because the evidence corrected them. Climate science is on the same side for the same reasons. It is not, and cannot be certain, but it is certainly close enough for policy decisions to be made, and most responsible governments are trying to make at least some.

This is rather old news but Google 'Shell blueprint or scramble"
jimbunyard is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 02:57   #425
Registered User
 
Marc1's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney Australia
Boat: 2004 Steber 2200 Persuader
Posts: 203
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

Nice try but no cigar.
You keep on repeating that CO2 is baaaaad and that you are on the high moral ground and we are the dirty peasants.
And don't forget to mention the children and the future.
Marc1 is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 03:19   #426
Registered User
 
Exile's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Land of Disenchantment
Boat: Bristol 47.7
Posts: 4,792
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

Quote:
Originally Posted by SailOar View Post
It's really rich hearing you lecture us about cost-benefit analyses. Over the last few years I've posted a number of analyses on this forum about how economically advantageous it is to tackle AGW hard and early, rather than kick the ball down the road for the next generation(s) to deal with. In your many denier posts I don't recall your doing a cost-benefit analyses for your slothful inaction.

Now, now. No need to make things personal. It's not my slothful inaction, after all, that is apparently so disappointing for you. But nice deflection in any event, especially since my post referenced 100 years of socialist failures.

The one-sided analyses you've repeatedly posted only cover the purported BENEFITS of taking various actions now vs. later, assuming there's a problem, further assuming it's a problem that's actually alarming and, finally, assuming there's anything we can do about it. I've read precious little from you over the years about the COSTS, especially on middle & lower income people who have little or no discretion in how much fossil fuels they consume to work & survive. The NYT's piece you just cited talks about how unpopular and divisive a carbon tax is, in for example Australia, and I assume you're aware of the violent "yellow vest" protests in France.


Furthermore, the so-called "fiscally conservative" Republican Party is anything but.

Agreed!

The last time the US government had a balanced budget was in the late 1990s under President Clinton (D).

Correct!

The next president, "Dubya" (R), gave us tax rebates, a fiscal deficit, an unnecessary 3-trillion dollar war, and the Great Recession.

Partially correct. (Let's not go there. )

The next president, Obama (D), spent his eight years in office getting the economy back on its feet (in spite of Republican opposition to anything and everything he did), plus brought us closer to the affordable universal health care that most developed countries enjoy.

Well . . . lots of problems with this . . . unless it's prefaced or followed with "in my opinion" which most of it clearly is.

Now we have another Republican president, Dump tRump, whose crowning economic achievement has been to give "yuge" tax breaks to his wealthy cronies, is doing everything in his power to destroy "Obamacare", is trying to withdraw from the admittedly insufficient Paris Agreement, and is reversing many environmental rules and regulations.

Errrr . . . never mind.

Thank you Conservative Republican voters.
There always has to be someone else to blame . . . .
Exile is offline  
Old 14-04-2019, 14:13   #427
Moderator
 
Pete7's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Solent, England
Boat: Moody 31
Posts: 13,660
Images: 14
Re: The Great Barrier Reef- resistant coral

A number of members have suggested this thread has run its course and morphed into discussions about US politics which doesn't affect quite a few on here.

Thread closed.

Pet
__________________

Pete7 is online now  
Closed Thread

Tags
coral, Great Barrier Reef

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Crew Wanted: Whitsunday Islands along Great Barrier Reef then to Coral Sea Nations micky Crew Archives 1 22-02-2014 20:04
Crew Wanted: Coral Sea and Great Barrier Reef micky Crew Archives 0 02-03-2013 22:28
The Great Barrier Reef - Australia SurferShane Pacific & South China Sea 17 25-11-2009 19:51
Coral Spawn and Water Visibility - Great Barrier Reef SurferShane Pacific & South China Sea 1 24-11-2009 08:34
Wanted - Great Barrier Reef and Pacific Islands Cruise graeme_caesar Crew Archives 0 21-09-2004 04:08

Advertise Here


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 16:14.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.