Global Warming Alarmism

[K]

Ocean "acidification".

:roll:

Ocean "neutralization" would be the correct term, it just doesn't sound scary enough.

[K]

I for one welcome a warmer, wetter global climate, whether human induced or not. :cheers:

[East_Stone_Ya]

i had to look it up :coleman:

[QUOTE]Ocean acidification is the name given to the ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth's oceans, caused by the uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. About 30

[K]

i had to look it up :coleman:

Perversion of basic science.

Look, when going from alkaline towards more neutral it's called "neutralization". It's not "acidification" until it actually goes from neutral into acidic.

They could've just called it what it actually is, but, like I said, it doesn't sound scary enough.

[Nick Young]

[QUOTE=K

[K]

its all nothing but a marketing tool, and a way to control the masses.

Also, with this new Carbon tax bullshit Obama was trying to pass,its another thing the government can tax you for.


Nothing gets you spending like the end of the world!
"If you dont buy this expensive electric car, the world will end. If you don't pay your carbon tax, the world will end and the polar bears will die."


No one will admit this, and they will get angry and call me stupid, but this is no different from what the Popes used to do to the peasantry back in the middle ages. They'd make up some doomsday theory and tell everyone that God would destroy their world if the people didn't pay a tax to the Pope. Or he'd sell passes to heaven. Sure enough, the idiots payed, just like they're paying now.

What we need to do is adapt to warmer climate, if it comes, and take full advantage of it instead of wasting resources.

[K]

You're f*cking stupid.

Hey, man, no need to get your panties in a bunch just because I want to take the alarmism out of the equation and have people adopt proper terminology.

[K]

Just to clarify, I'm not denying climate change or the fact that humans have influence on it, I'm just not buying into the doom alarmism.

[gigantes]

[QUOTE=K

[East_Stone_Ya]

[QUOTE=K

[nightprowler10]

Neutralization implies once the pH is neutral everything stops. Acidification implies that the shit is getting more acidic and will continue to do so. Currently it is both getting nearer to neutral, and becoming more acidic; but a neutral pH is not the baseline at which the acidification will stop.

They're using a proper term.
This. That is the way we would use these terms in the manufacturing world working with formulations.

[I<3NBA]

[QUOTE=K

[DeuceWallaces]

The technical term is acidification. It's used in limnology, oceanography, soil science, pretty much any basic field. No one says neutralization you dipshit. Furthermore, it's a pretty significant problem that's disrupting life cycles of several organisms and the systems that depend on them. Mainly because certain "life cycle cues" are dependent on previous levels of acidity and now they're not happening in more acidic environments; especially those that have more acute symptoms beyond the mild levels of acidity stated in an earlier post.

[eriX]

OP getting destroyed with actual chemistry facts :applause:

probably doesn't even know that the ocean and its life form is pH sensitive

[K]

Neutralization implies once the pH is neutral everything stops. Acidification implies that the shit is getting more acidic and will continue to do so. Currently it is both getting nearer to neutral, and becoming more acidic; but a neutral pH is not the baseline at which the acidification will stop.

They're using a proper term.

Sigh, it's not acidic so how would it become "more acidic". You've been duped. Neutralization is the correct term when going towards neutral. It's not acidification until it actually starts moving from the neutral towards the acidic. For example, soil is usually a little bit acidic so when it goes further down the scale you can call it "soil acidification".

Also, even if you were correct, it's still complete nonsense because the ocean is basic and lies on top of a shitload of minerals. No amount of CO2 humans could possibly emit will ever turn the ocean acidic. So, even with your wrong notion of the terms, ocean "acidification" is still nothing but scaremongering and should be called "neutralization" regardless.

[DeuceWallaces]

[QUOTE=K

[K]

The technical term is acidification. It's used in limnology, oceanography, soil science, pretty much any basic field. No one says neutralization you dipshit. Furthermore, it's a pretty significant problem that's disrupting life cycles of several organisms and the systems that depend on them. Mainly because certain "life cycle cues" are dependent on previous levels of acidity and now they're not happening in more acidic environments; especially those that have more acute symptoms beyond the mild levels of acidity stated in an earlier post.

When soil goes from neutral or a little acidic to more acidic it's obviously called soil acidification. The same goes for fresh water which has a normal rage of about 6.0 - 7.0 pH. It if goes lower than that it's correctly called acidification.

Adding CO2 to the ocean creates carbonic acid which then reacts with the calcium carbonate and you get carbonate salts. That's neutralization not acidification. You just make the base more neutral. You clearly have a complete lack of education.

[K]

You're wrong. Acidification is process of becoming more acidic irrespective of being above or below ph neutrality.

:facepalm

[shlver]

No, acidification is the formation of hydrogen ions. Acidification is, by definition, the increase in proton concentration. They are using correct terminology, you are not.

[DeuceWallaces]

[QUOTE=K

[gigantes]

"protons are alpha as phuck"

-the ISH translation. :rockon:

[K]

[QUOTE=K

[shlver]

[QUOTE=K

[K]

Okay, you geniuses, before going any further with this debate, please find me some examples in science where where neutralizing a base is referred to as acidification other than in ocean "acidification".

Know what, let's just scrap the term "neutralization" from all science literature since evidently whenever something moves down in pH it's "acidification", at least according to you geniuses.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[nightprowler10]

[QUOTE=K

[K]

See this is where you're making the mistake. Imagine if you have a tank holding 10 liters of water that can hold 1000 liters. Now imagine that there's a tap right above the tank that is broken and leaking into the tank. When you have no way of fixing the tap or draining the tank, what's the best way to communicate the state of the tank? Is the tank getting fuller or getting half full?

You misunderstood why I put "more acidic" in apostrophes. Also, that tank of water analogy does not work at all. Acidification and neutralization exist as separate terms for a reason.

[DeuceWallaces]

Hey little baby:

[QUOTE=K

[K]

Hey little baby:



Go cry some more. You were owned through and through in this thread. You have no idea what you're talking about. Get educated on the situation then come back and try again.

:sleeping Let me know when you can muster an actual response instead of empty, content less, cheerleading, nonresponse like this which you've been reduced to with rather ease. Better yet, find me some examples in science where neutralizing a base is referred to as "acidification" rather than "neutralization" other than in ocean "acifidication". Tick, tock, tick, tock, dipshit. You're such a dipshit you actually thought referring to soil or freshwater was any kind of counter to the point I was making. You know no logic, you know no science, you're just a cheerleader dipshit. What kind of a dipshit brings up soil and freshwater which are usually in a neutral-acidic range to begin with and thinks it's somehow an argument against the point that was being made? :roll: Try some logic, dipshit. You decided to get all cocky in your first response with insults, so you've only brought this upon yourself.

[K]

OTOH, I do regret naming this thread "Global Warming Alarmism". I should've just called it Ocean Acidification/Neutralization.

Maybe the resident cheerleader wouldn't have felt it necessary to insult and get quite as cocky as in his first reply. (Not to mention the multiple neg reps with insults I got. Mostly knee jerking, I guess.)

Gigantes, the response to your post is coming tomorrow.

[K]

FYI, carbon taxes are actually not bad because the incidence of that tax falls quite a bit on natural resource owners i.e. is passed on for them to bear (the less money they get the better). I have a big problem though with cap and trade. IMO, it's nothing but rent seeking where past polluters get to close shop and leech billions from the economy. So, if you have to address CO2, do so with carbon taxes.

[TheReturn]

Just like on overpopulation, you are completely wrong. You just called someone out for being uneducated but I seriously wonder where you're coming up with this stuff..

[DeuceWallaces]

Several people, including myself, told you exactly why you're wrong; in a technical capacity. Two of whom are practicing scientists. Just because you choose to ignore it, doesn't make your opinion right. You're just being a lame troll.

[gigantes]

http://img.izismile.com/img/img6/20131025/1000/friday_gifdump_484_12.gif

[niko]

[QUOTE=K

[Dresta]

Didn't the planet cool last year?

Contrary to just about every prediction made by global warming doomsayers?

I'm not saying that there isn't any validity to their argument, but that the certainty and self-righteous arrogance with which they certify what they can't really know for sure is more than a little annoying.

[gigantes]

Didn't the planet cool last year?

Contrary to just about every prediction made by global warming doomsayers?

I'm not saying that there isn't any validity to their argument, but that the certainty and self-righteous arrogance with which they certify what they can't really know for sure is more than a little annoying.
just ignore the whole issue. too late to do anything about it, anyway, except for solution Z and such.

anyway, the thread was originally labelled about ocean acidification and still didn't even turn to a real discussion on ocean acidification. then some idiot came along, renamed it generically, and now you're bringing up GCC.


just look at it this way-- it happened on ISH, so it's probably safe to ignore. :cheers: