Global Warming Alarmism

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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? 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.