Marine Food Chain Affected by Global Warming

If you've been around this issue for a decade or more,
you will remember that Carbon industry lobbyists
promised us that CO2 would 'fertilize' the sea. We
were going to feed the world with the bountiful catch
from un-baited hooks. The industry would even trot out
'scientists' who would assure us of this. The lobbyists
and their shill scientists are gone now that their lie
is exposed, just like rats into the sewer.

-.-. --.- Roger

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Marine food chain link being affected by global warming
By Michael Drake, 21 November 2005

Irish Sea plankton, a major link in the marine food chain, is being
affected by global warming, according to a new WWF report.

It is also claimed certain fish, including John Dorys, usually found in
waters off the south west coast of the UK, are now being caught in
Northern Irish waters.

Fish are increasingly threatened by the effects of climate change as
temperatures rise in rivers, lakes and oceans, the report adds.

It says hotter water means less food, less offspring and even less
oxygen for marine and freshwater fish populations.

"As climate change increases the pressure on fish populations, already
strained to the limit by overfishing, pollution and habitat loss, the
outlook is pretty grim for our fish species," said Malachy Campbell,
Policy Officer, WWF Northern Ireland.

"We must act urgently on both climate emissions and fishing to protect
fish populations as they are one of the world's most valuable
biological, nutritional and economic assets."

The rest:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/ne...p?story=670262

We all have a right to question the truth of global warming and climate
change, as we should question everything which is pushed at us as these are.
It's a perfectly good theory, but not really proven. Widespread acceptance
is not proof. Furthermore there are other more likely causes for damage or
change in the environment, such as contamination of the air and water.

One does not prove a physical theory, one proves a mathematical
theorem. Theories are about demonstrable evidence. It's called
empiricism. Anthropogenic global warming and climate change have so far
passed all the tests. Yes, the air and water are polluted too.

http://cosmic.lifeform.org.

"We all have a right to question the truth
of global warming and climate change,"

You have the right to strip naked and dance
by the light of the full moon, too. Neither
your questioning, nor your naked dancing, will
change the physical fact that anthropogenic
greenhouse gas emissions are now warming our
planet.



"Furthermore there are other more likely causes
for damage or change in the environment, such
as contamination of the air and water."

CO2 and CH4 when they are currently at 600,000-year
record levels, and rising at record levels too, are
contaminants.

In article ,
"Dave" wrote:

We all have a right to question the truth of global warming and climate
change, as we should question everything which is pushed at us as these are.

Yeah, like evolution, and that billions of years age for the earth. And
atoms!

It's a perfectly good theory, but not really proven.

1. You can never prove a theory.
2. A theory is an accepted explanation.
3. It is accepted by science that GW is occurring and that humans are causing
it.

Widespread acceptance
is not proof. Furthermore there are other more likely causes for damage or
change in the environment, such as contamination of the air and water.


How does that explain warming?

Dave wrote:
We all have a right to question the truth of global warming and
climate change,

You have the right to question the law of gravity as well. However, there
are more useful things to do with your time than complaining about facts.

as we should question everything which is pushed at
us as these are.

You have problems with reality, do you? Reality pushes at you only because
you reject it. Relax and enjoy.

It's a perfectly good theory, but not really proven.

Ignorance of the term 'theory' shows that you do not have a background to
critise science. Theory is factual ( proven ). Hypothesis is speculative.

Widespread acceptance is not proof.

When the widespread acceptance includes the professional scientists who are
directly studying the problem, yes it does. No other criteria for proof
other than widespread acceptance by those with the background and education
to understand the data has ever been proposed as 'proof' in science.

Furthermore there are other more
likely causes for damage or change in the environment, such as
contamination of the air and water.

Irrelevant to the issue. One truth does not drive out another. Please get a
clue. The fact that you are trying 'diversion' speaks to your lack of facts
or serious logic.

"We all have a right to question the truth
of global warming and climate change,"

You have the right to strip naked and dance
by the light of the full moon, too. Neither
your questioning, nor your naked dancing, will
change the physical fact that anthropogenic
greenhouse gas emissions are now warming our
planet.

"Furthermore there are other more likely causes
for damage or change in the environment, such
as contamination of the air and water."

CO2 and CH4, when they are currently at 600,000-year
record levels, and rising at record levels too, are
contaminants.

Dave is correct, we do, and should, question the theory of global
warming. And their are many scientist who question global warming. Many
of the climate models show warming due to so called greenhouse gasses,
while other models show the climate cooling. We have proof of
evolution, and of atomic particals, that's why they are accepted by
most people. I suspect the problem with the Irish Sea has more to do
with over fishing, something the EU knows about, but has chosen to
ignore. Over fishing by EU members is widespread, but they would much
rather blame their problems on the US. They like to make us "the bad
guy" because their's no shortage of people gullable enought to beleave
them. If they blame the problem on someone else, and people buy into
it, they don't have to do anything, until the fish run out.

"Capt John" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dave is correct, we do, and should, question the theory of global
warming. And their are many scientist who question global warming. Many
of the climate models show warming due to so called greenhouse gasses,
while other models show the climate cooling.

I believe this is incorrect. Can you please provide a reference to a GCM
(global climate model) that predicts cooling with elevated CO2?

--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")

"Many of the climate models show warming
due to so called greenhouse gasses,
while other models show the climate cooling."

-- Capt. John

[Change to upper case mode to correct a BIG lie.]
FACT: THERE IS NO PEER-REVIEWED PUBLISHED
CLIMATE MODEL THAT SHOWS COOLING IN RESPONSE
TO INCREASING GREENHOUSE GAS LEVELS, NONE
WHATSOEVER. There is no model that indicates stasis.
ALL, YES EVERY. PEER-REVIEWED PUBLISHED
CLIMATE MODELS SHOW WARMING IN RESPONSE
TO INCREASING GREENHOUSE GAS LEVELS.

IF YOU, CAPT. JOHN, HAVE A COUNTER EXAMPLE
YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO PUBLISH IT HERE.