Nonsense and Stuff on ocean ‘acidification’
The volcano’s shallow vents produce acidic water with a very acidic pH — as low as 6.8 pH compared to standard sea water at 8.1 pH — and water temperatures up to 1 °C higher than seawater in the area. In other words, the vents create seawater conditions with pH, temperature and chemistry values as predicted for beyond the year 2100.
“It’s similar to what we might expect if we continue down the, frankly, disastrous trajectory of producing as much CO2 as we want, however we want,” Smith said.
What rubbish, I thought, so I went to the original paper, and it says no such thing. It references earlier work that suggests surface seawater pH levels could fall to 7.98 by 2100.
In the proximity of the vents (i.e., V1, V2 and V3), pCO2 levels were high, ranging between 484 and 10,015 µatm, and calculated seawater pHT values were constantly lower than 7.98, which are projected average global sea surface pH values for the year 2100 and beyond (e.g., Caldeira and Wickett 2003; Gattuso and Lavigne 2009).
Is this the sort of scientific misinformation we want to challenge RNZ and Stuff over?
[NOTE: A pH of 7 is neutral, neither alkaline (basic) nor acid. Below 7 is actual acid, rather than the vague “more acidic”, which is what the alarmists tell us is happening to the ocean. But it’s acid only in the immediate proximity of volcanic vents, while average pH everywhere else is 8.1 — firmly alkaline. – RT]
Views: 10
Stuff have gone full retard on globull warming aka climate change and facts don’t matter only the message.
The Stuff editorial coalition announced late last year that it was their duty and intention to push the climate scare story that rising CO2 levels will cause CAGW.
Their coverage has been extremely one sided and unbalanced and their cartoons have been straight out offensive.
They like to quote James Renwick and they never get a alternate view as they believe the science is settled and that he is the high priest.
Stuff have become an anti free enterprise commie rag pushing propaganda to their urban readers.
Every weather event they blame on CO2 and the Australian bush fires according to them was all caused by rising CO2.
I would expect that if you write a letter to Stuff pointing out their errors it will not be published .
I have not been able to get any skeptical views published in the Waikato Times .
Graham Anderson
Interesting re Renwick. After he gained his $100,000 grant as climate advisor I wrote to him to get some overview of where this Geographer was heading. He came down heavily in support of Mann saying he not only supported Mann’s (discredited) data he was very much part of the Mann team. The exact Q and A in my correspondence was:
My statement: Michael Mann’s hockey stick predictions are the result of bias and can be replicated with any set of similar data as the experimenter effect is easily demonstrated in this case.
Renwick response: Mann’s reconstruction has been replicated many times by many different groups, hence we now have a “hockey team” rather than a “hockey stick.” The proxy data show recent warming to be beyond anything seen in the last millennium, for the Northern Hemisphere.
Nice work, Gerry, and thanks for telling us. This is exactly the kind of straightforward question and answer that shows us all — including the huge number of onlookers — where the truth lies. Renwick’s avoidance of your criticism of Mann is blatantly obvious. His credibility among those who can reason has reached rock-bottom.
You are correct Graham! i have written numerous letters to the Editor of the Waikato times over the years, challenging their bias, but of course none were ever published especially if they dared to challenge climate change. So i emailed the Times marketing manager & asked why my letters were not being published & his answer was a categorical “the science is settled & we will not be publishing letters that challenge that thinking.” I asked why we couldn’t at least publicly debate the topic – no answer! I cancelled my subscription to the Times!
Stuff recently appointed one Eloise Gibson, as the new Climate Change Editor for Stuff; i wrote to her challenging her article https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/122141550/new-zealands-paris-target-too-weak-for-15c–official-advice-to-govt – all i got as a reply was “thanks for your comments.”
Maybe if more of us write to her, she may get the message about their bias – so given her email address was in a public article i see no reason why i cant write it here. eloise.gibson@stuff.co.nz
This could be an opportunity to bombard her with emails demanding Stuff produce actual evidence of anthropologically caused climate change?!
Andrew
Here’s a good layman’s account of some of the nonsense written about Ocean “acidification”.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/01/31/the-solution-to-dissolution/
I believe Michael Mann has been discredited enough times but especially when Climatologist, Dr Tim Ball won his court case because Mann could not or would not produce the data that made up the ‘hockey stick’ graph. Tim Ball’s quote that Mann belong in the state pen sums it up!
“A smiling Tim Ball then says, he naturally linked the fact Mann was at Penn State and flippantly used word play to create his now famous quip that Mann ‘belongs in the state pen, not Penn State.’
https://www.climatedepot.com/2019/10/01/climatologist-dr-tim-ball-gives-first-interview-after-on-victory-over-michael-mann/